The EV fact thread

[Bobby Dazzler]

It's a known fact. Are you disputing that using heating in an EV reduces its range?

Of course it is, although the actual impact in range is relatively small in practice. I suspect people who haven’t experienced it might believe it to be a bigger issue than it really is.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

This has been covered previously. Many external factors which are not connected to the engine contribute to this. Diesels it seems are affected by a change of fuel formation in winter. Petrol and LPG fuelled are not affected by this.
My point though - somewhat tongue in cheek - was that heat in winter from ICE is an additional (necessary) output with no other impact whereas the EV for cabin heating has to mine its energy resource intended for propulsion.

Of course there are many other factors, and the same is true for EVs too. The actual impact of the heating an EV in winter gets lost in a number of other variables in much the same way.

You know as well as I do that the heat from ICE is actually waste and so unnecessarily carries that inefficiency all year round, and only becomes helpful in cold weather. An EV being the opposite.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

True - but a consequence is the need to choose a car with a larger battery than would otherwise be required - the knock on effects of which carry costs.

In reality the increase in consumption due to heating alone is small, and that in isolation wouldn’t really be the reason for choosing a car with a larger battery. Insecurity about range might, but not the real world impact of heating on a consumption.

 

[ALFAitalia]

.....and have to heat the car from energy that could have turned the wheels.

Except it was never going to turn the wheel s...it was just going to be wasted to the atmosphere as heat.... which is one of the main reason petrol cars are only typically about 21 percent efficient. The only difference is that the heat was going to be lost through a radiator under the bonnet rather than a smaller one in the car.

 

[Bellow]

Of course it is, although the actual impact in range is relatively small in practice. I suspect people who haven’t experienced it might believe it to be a bigger issue than it really is.

The loss to heating is on top of already reduced battery output due to the cold weather so compounds an unfavourable situation.
Autocar's figure of 19% of energy at 70mph for heating is significant. That's as if a 50l fuel tank became a 40l tank - just because the cabin needs heat. The guy with the EV I have mentioned before disagrees with the perception of the scale of the issue. No perception required. He sees it for real in his reduced range.

 

[Bellow]

Except it was never going to turn the wheel s...it was just going to be wasted to the atmosphere as heat.... which is one of the main reason petrol cars are only typically about 21 percent efficient. The only difference is that the heat was going to be lost through a radiator under the bonnet rather than a smaller one in the car.

I was referring to EVs.

 

[markjay]

No. But I don't see range depletion when I turn up the heating.

True, but that's not a good thing.

That's because with ICE, you're generating heat and dissipating it into the air all the time. That's extremely wasteful.

Equally, if you had a tap in your garden running all year long, then you could argue that when you connect a hose and water your garden, you're watering the garden 'for free', when compared to your neighbour who only runs the tap when actually watering the garden. It's obviously a fallacy, because not having a marginal cost is not the same as not having a cost at all.

The fact that you are not 'paying' with range miles when heating the cabin in an ICE car, is because you're burning fuel and heating up the air outside the car non-stop.

EVs are much more efficient than ICE, and they do not do that. They will only use-up energy to heat the cabin when it's needed, rather than waste energy and produce heat all the time.

ICE cars may be more convenient for a whole range of reasons (pun intended), but ultimately ICE is a very inefficient and wasteful form of propulsion, when looking at how the energy is used.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

If it isn't working, safe to say it won't impact range.

Of course it doesn’t consume energy whilst it’s broken, but they don’t complain about the impact of heating when it’s working and other EV drivers in other marques don’t either.

Mentioning the heaters breaking was - tongue in cheek remark because that’s the only moan I hear about heating but that’s a Jaguar iPace thing, not an EV thing.

This issue though raises again the disparity between those who charge at home and can have a toasty warm car courtesy of the grid and those who cannot and have to heat the car from energy that could have turned the wheels. However incremental, this impacts on charging facilities.

The heat from ICE is wasted energy, and ironically had water heat not been a side effect of burning fossil fuels, then that energy could also have been used to turn the wheels.

Personally speaking, the inner incompetent engineer in me cannot celebrate waste and inefficiency, but I’m pleased that at times of the year we find a use for some of the waste.

Where the energy comes from to heat a car - whether ICE or EV - is neither right nor wrong, it’s just different, and simply a function of the completely different powertrains.

 

[Bellow]

True, but that's not a good thing.

That's because with ICE, you're generating heat and dissipating it into the air all the time. That's extremely wasteful.

Equally, if you had a tap in your garden running all year long, then you could argue that when you connect a hose and water your garden, you're watering the garden 'for free'. It's obviously a fallacy, because not having a marginal cost is not the same as not having a cost at all.

The fact that you are not 'paying' with range miles when heating the cabin in an ICE car, is because you're burning fuel and heating up the air outside the car non-stop.

EVs are much more efficient than ICE, and they do not do that. They will only use-up energy to heat the cabin when it's needed, rather than waste energy and produce heat all the time.

ICE cars may be more convenient for a whole range of reasons (pun intended), but ultimately ICE is a very inefficient and wasteful form of propulsion, when looking at how the energy is used.

My point though - somewhat tongue in cheek -

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

The loss to heating is on top of already reduced battery output due to the cold weather so compounds an unfavourable situation.
Autocar's figure of 19% of energy at 70mph for heating is significant. That's as if a 50l fuel tank became a 40l tank - just because the cabin needs heat. The guy with the EV I have mentioned before disagrees with the perception of the scale of the issue. No perception required. He sees it for real in his reduced range.

Ask him to turn the heater off and measure how much of a difference it makes. In my limited experience it’s difficult to measure the impact upon consumption when driving with the heater on at a normal comfortable versus driving with off.

It definitely makes a difference - it must do - as creating heat requires energy, but in practice it’s difficult to measure because the difference in consumption varies by more between each journeys than it does because the heating was on.

In an ICE imagine trying to measure the impact of on fuel consumption of opening the sunroof on tilt. It disrupts airflow and must create additional drag but measuring it is tricky. The umpteen small variables conspire against accurate measurement.

 

[markjay]

The loss to heating is on top of already reduced battery output due to the cold weather so compounds an unfavourable situation.
Autocar's figure of 19% of energy at 70mph for heating is significant. That's as if a 50l fuel tank became a 40l tank - just because the cabin needs heat. The guy with the EV I have mentioned before disagrees with the perception of the scale of the issue. No perception required. He sees it for real in his reduced range.

Sorry, but this is just turning things on their head.

The high energy use for heating the cabin in an EV only highlights the shortcomings of ICE.

Every bit of energy that an ICE car does not need to produce specifically for heating the cabin, is a bit of energy that the ICE car is wasting when cabin heating is not required.

19% for an EV is bad enough, and the higher this figure is, the worse it is for ICE cars. For example, if it turned out that an EV uses-up 50% of the energy to heat up the cabin in winter, then I would say that driving an ICE car in summer is a criminal waste of energy

 

[Bellow]

Of course it doesn’t consume energy whilst it’s broken, but they don’t complain about the impact of heating when it’s working and other EV drivers in other marques don’t either.

Mentioning the heaters breaking was - tongue in cheek remark because that’s the only moan I hear about heating but that’s a Jaguar iPace thing, not an EV thing.

As was my comment - tongue in cheek.

The heat from ICE is wasted energy, and ironically had water heat not been a side effect of burning fossil fuels, then that energy could also have been used to turn the wheels.

Absolutely.

Personally speaking, the inner incompetent engineer in me cannot celebrate waste and inefficiency, but I’m pleased that at times of the year we find a use for some of the waste.

But if the fuel used was carbon neutral, then it wouldn't matter one jot. And, we'd avoid the waste of perfectly capable fuel distribution systems in every known country being decommissioned and the enormous carbon footprint of the current hurried electrification process.

Where the energy comes from to heat a car - whether ICE or EV - is neither right nor wrong, it’s just different, and simply a function of the completely different powertrains.

It once again points to the compromises. Motion or heat in the case of the EV. We all know that in the extreme case of an EV running with a very low SOC trying to get to a charging point its driver will turn off the heating to aid that aim. The driver of an ICE vehicle in need of fuel doesn't have to even think about doing that.

 

[Bellow]

Ask him to turn the heater off and measure how much of a difference it makes. In my limited experience it’s difficult to measure the impact upon consumption when driving with the heater on at a normal comfortable versus driving with off.

Ask him to get into a freezing van, omit heating it, drive 10 miles or so to his work where he will then be in and out of freezing cold process rooms? I try not to piss off my customers.

It definitely makes a difference - it must do - as creating heat requires energy, but in practice it’s difficult to measure because the difference in consumption varies by more between each journeys than it does because the heating was on.

In an ICE imagine trying to measure the impact of on fuel consumption of opening the sunroof on tilt. It disrupts airflow and must create additional drag but measuring it is tricky. The umpteen small variables conspire against accurate measurement.

It is a known fact. The difficulty in measuring it is immaterial - it exists. Autocar it seems were able to put a number on it though. It's just that that number has been poorly received.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

But if the fuel used was carbon neutral, then it wouldn't matter one jot. And, we'd avoid the waste of perfectly capable fuel distribution systems in every known country being decommissioned and the enormous carbon footprint of the current hurried electrification process.

Same is true for heating and propelling an EV if the electricity is generated using renewably. I’d love carbon neutral fuel to be widespread and if it’s commercial viable then it will be. Let’s see.

It is indeed sad to see what was once great infrastructure and machinery be decommissioned. Buildings, roads, railways, power stations, trains, planes, ships, hospitals, the list goes on.

Unfortunately that’s progress.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

It once again points to the compromises. Motion or heat in the case of the EV. We all know that in the extreme case of an EV running with a very low SOC trying to get to a charging point its driver will turn off the heating to aid that aim. The driver of an ICE vehicle in need of fuel doesn't have to even think about doing that.

Whether in an EV or ICE the driver will probably make the same adjustments to how they drive the car when they’re about to run out of fuel. They’ll probably slow down, brake less, accelerate more gently, close the windows, close the sunroof, etc.

I’m not sure turning off the heater makes a significant additional compromise over and above the rest of that list. If it’s -20 deg C and you’re hours away from the charging station then you have a compelling point,

Possible, but not likely for most in the UK.

Most of the time it’s not cold, it’s for a matter of minutes in order to drive a few miles. It can’t be cold because many drivers say the UK is not cold enough to justify for winter tyres.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Ask him to get into a freezing van, omit heating it, drive 10 miles or so to his work where he will then be in and out of freezing cold process rooms? I try not to piss off my customers.

Given what you say then I wouldn’t ask him to either, especially as he’ll have to do it many times to discover that it’s not really possible to detect a significant change in consumption due to the heater.

 

[Bellow]

Sorry, but this is just turning things on their head.

The high energy use for heating the cabin in an EV only highlights the shortcomings of ICE.

Every bit of energy that an ICE car does not need to produce specifically for heating the cabin, is a bit of energy that the ICE car is wasting when cabin heating is not required.

19% for an EV is bad enough, and the higher this figure is, the worse it is for ICE cars. For example, if it turned out that an EV uses-up 50% of the energy to heat up the cabin in winter, then I would say that driving and ICE car in summer is a criminal waste of energy

As I said earlier, my adding 5.7% efficiency to ICE was tongue in cheek. You on the other hand appear hell bent on using ICE inefficiency to excuse a potential 19% depletion in EV range during cold weather. And as I have said repeatedly, the obsession with ICE efficiency is only relevant when fossil fuels are used. Other options are/were available. And we don't as yet know the environmental impact of electrification. For all the EVs that have replaced ICE, the CO2 in the atmosphere is still rising year on year.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

It is a known fact. The difficulty in measuring it is immaterial - it exists. Autocar it seems were able to put a number on it though. It's just that that number has been poorly received.

The difficulty in measuring it is absolutely material. If you can’t measure it, then how can you conclude that it’s materially affecting range?

Personally, I can conclude that it must be consuming energy and therefore must be affecting consumption and in turn range.

However I can also conclude that for most journeys the impact is so slight that it in the real world it doesn’t change the way I drive or comfort whilst doing so.

 

[Bellow]

Same is true for heating and propelling an EV if the electricity is generated using renewably. I’d love carbon neutral fuel to be widespread and if it’s commercial viable then it will be. Let’s see.

It is indeed sad to see what was once great infrastructure and machinery be decommissioned. Buildings, roads, railways, power stations, trains, planes, ships, hospitals, the list goes on.

Unfortunately that’s progress.

One man's progress is another man's needless compromises.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

As I said earlier, my adding 5.7% efficiency to ICE was tongue in cheek. You on the other hand appear hell bent on using ICE inefficiency to excuse a potential 19% depletion in EV range during cold weather. And as I have said repeatedly, the obsession with ICE efficiency is only relevant when fossil fuels are used. Other options are/were available. And we don't as yet know the environmental impact of electrification. For all the EVs that have replaced ICE, the CO2 in the atmosphere is still rising year on year.

I’m not sure that @markjay is hell bent. He drives I E too. It’s just pointing out that when a negative comment is made about an EV there’s often an equivalent or similar negative about ICE. A yang to the yin.

Neither ICE or EV is perfect, one is better at some things the other is better at other things. Which is right for an individual depends upon their requirements and beliefs.

Relevance using fossil fuels for ICE is true for EV too. If waste is irrelevant using carbon neutral fuels then surely consumption is irrelevant using renewable energy?