Natural gas not allowed

nibs

Ach you kids, in a fit of mad idiocy I went and bought a logging truck, two transmissions, no synchromesh, eg., to shift from 3 high to 4th low, you had to let go the steering wheel and shift both sticks at once.
I now go to great lengths to avoid driving manual transmissions.

STEVEusaPA

hot_rod said:

Tesla is claiming a 500 mile range wither electric semi tractor.
https://electrek.co/guides/tesla-semi/

...until it bursts into flames. I wonder if DOT and HazMat allow it to pull a petroleum tanker, or what special protection they'll require in the battery compartment.

nibs

@STEVEusaPA
They put a current limiter on them, if the batteries start getting too warm, they reduce the power drain.
Almost all modern battery packs have temperature sensing limiters on them these days.

STEVEusaPA

So no Tesla has caught on fire?
https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/16/18627746/tesla-fire-battery-software-update-model-s-x

ChrisJ

STEVEusaPA said:

So no Tesla has caught on fire?

So no Diesel tractor has ever caught fire?

Jamie Hall

ChrisJ said:

Jamie Hall said:

...
Lockup style torque converters became popular starting in the early 80s. These make the torque converter 1:1 when cruising so I'm not sure how "recent ones are much much better".

As far as I'm aware torque converter efficiency hasn't changed for a long time.

I guess maybe I'm older than you are... the first automatic I had to crive was a 1950 Buick Super, with Dynaflow (just Drive and Reverse -- no shifting). Of course, in those far-off days we didn't worry much about gas mileage...

ChrisJ

Jamie Hall said:

ChrisJ said:

Jamie Hall said:

...
Lockup style torque converters became popular starting in the early 80s. These make the torque converter 1:1 when cruising so I'm not sure how "recent ones are much much better".

As far as I'm aware torque converter efficiency hasn't changed for a long time.

I guess maybe I'm older than you are... the first automatic I had to crive was a 1950 Buick Super, with Dynaflow (just Drive and Reverse -- no shifting). Of course, in those far-off days we didn't worry much about gas mileage...

The Dynaflow had a special torque converter that was actually really interesting.

jumper

ChrisJ said:

Jamie Hall said:

ChrisJ said:

Jamie Hall said:

...
Lockup style torque converters became popular starting in the early 80s. These make the torque converter 1:1 when cruising so I'm not sure how "recent ones are much much better".

As far as I'm aware torque converter efficiency hasn't changed for a long time.

I guess maybe I'm older than you are... the first automatic I had to crive was a 1950 Buick Super, with Dynaflow (just Drive and Reverse -- no shifting). Of course, in those far-off days we didn't worry much about gas mileage...

The Dynaflow had a special torque converter that was actually really interesting.

Two torque converters in series? Roadmaster was smooth and six mpg to boot?

Jamie Hall

No, just one. The Dynaflow torque converter was -- as @ChrisJ said -- really interesting. Had, as I recall, at least four elements in it (stator and flow sensitive vanes in addition to the pump and turbine). Later ones had a fifth, and an even wider range (and better efficiency). And all those Buicks were really smooth -- and fantastic in snow. All straight 8s until 1955 (I think -- '54 maybe? At least my '55 Century had a V8). Mileage? I never added it up in those bygone days!

Solid_Fuel_Man

My 1959 Galaxie has 3 on the column (tree!) over drives for those large V8 side shift manuals are fetching north of a grand for one that can be rebuilt!

Engines can be tuned to have as wide or narrow of a torque range as practical, but it comes at a cost. Gobs of low end torque (like my FE powered Ford) results in poor breathing at the higher end and sacrifices overall efficiency. Modern engines have matched breathing characteristics to their optimal efficiency RPM and loading, which manufactures try and hit at cruising speeds.

We have VVT to keep exhaust in longer and reduce NOx (no more stinking EGR!) And a bajillion gears to keep it all happy.

@nibs I've driven a GM bulk truck with a 4 speed in front of a 3 speed and a 2 speed rear. 366 gas, needless to say it was fun loaded on hills! That's farm country where the trucks of the 1960s still run 500 miles a year.

nibs

@Solid_Fuel_Man ach you beat me by four.
Kids (under 70) today just have no idea.
Probably won't ever own an autonomous car but I sure wish, driving has become a chore.

PolychromeUganda

From longer reporting the city's objective is to force new homeowners to use energy that can be derived from a renewable source. Because the objective is to reduce CO2 emissions the efficiency of the solar panel or windmill used to produce the electricity doesn't matter because there is no CO2 emitted.
If you're a little more sophisticated than the usual accounting, the lifecycle CO2 from each source is what matters. That's the CO2 emitted to produce the raw materials, fabricate, and install the equipment, plus all the CO2 emitted to produce the energy over the plant's entire service life there plus the CO2 emitted to maintain the plant and the CO2 emitted to decommission the equipment and recycle its components.
Since the total cost of materials and fabrication is frequently dominated by the energy cost to produce and transport it, the lifecycle CO2 emissions traceable to wind or solar power remain surprisingly large.
It isn't clear that this ordnance fits within the definition of an essential government interest for a city, or if the city does have an essential interest if it can pursue it in that way.
The city's authority to enforce any ordnance derives from an essential interest, without which the ordnance is unenforceable. It doesn't actually matter if it is or isn't a worthy goal. The question is whether the ordnance fits withing the definition of a law "necessary to promote the general welfare". The meaning of the terms necessary, promote, and general welfare have changed significantly since the 18th century. At the time it was a restrictive clause meaning what we might now express as absolutely necessary to prevent imminent harm to life and property. The judge's viewpoint in re: limited government tends to become the deciding factor. At one time the judiciary tended to hold that intrusive morality laws were an essential government interest and intrusive regulation of home construction was not, except for public safety. At this time in California those positions are typically be reversed.
The city's use of an ordnance that only bars new residential construction from connecting to the gas supply is the part that's on shaky ground, which is a familiar condition in the bay area. The ordnance doesn't prevent municipal and commercial construction from connecting to natural gas. The ordnance doesn't prevent a presently existing building from making a new connection to natural gas. The ordnance doesn't prevent a building being renovated or added to from installing natural gas equipment, even when the renovation is the complete replacement of the structure. Its not difficult to argue that shifting the cost of achieving the city's essential interest on a small class of property owners is in effect an uncompensated taking of some part of the value of the property, and a capricious and arbitrary use its power.
And finally, the efficiency of energy generation was 30% 90 years ago when the typical power plant was a 50-100kW coal fired single stage high pressure stream turbine. The efficiency of natural gas fueled power generating plants is more like 50-60% at this point. The 8-12% transmission loss cited was never accurate, it reflected a worst case combination of lower voltage long distance transmission lines and local grid that were already being replaced in 1970. The T&D loss nationwide has been around 5% for some time.

Jamie Hall

Nice analysis, @PolychromeUganda . But I think perhaps injecting the niceties of the "essential interest" doctrine into a discussion about what happens in the Ninth Circuit is going a bit far in the direction of politics.

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes

Steamhead said:

There you go. If you don't test, you don't know.

This!

ChrisJ

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes said:

Steamhead said:

There you go. If you don't test, you don't know.

This!

Most of us don't have access to calibrated combustion analyzers.

And we all know stoves, BBQ grills etc are not calibrated by the manufacturer. So.......it is what it is.

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes

I'll spark up mine tonight. I think we're making spaghetti.

nibs

What time should we come???

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes

Start driving now.

hot_rod

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes said:

Start driving now.

Excellent home cooking at Alans place, if in fact he is inviting the HH groupies

I had a great evening of wining, whining, barking at the moon and dining there recently.

Steamhead

ChrisJ said:

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes said:

Steamhead said:

There you go. If you don't test, you don't know.

This!

Most of us don't have access to calibrated combustion analyzers.

And we all know stoves, BBQ grills etc are not calibrated by the manufacturer. So.......it is what it is.

That's what qualified professionals with proper equipment are for.

Solid_Fuel_Man

My grill has all 3 burners lit and producing CO2 as we speak... 365 gallon in the tank for lots of outdoor cooking.

ChrisJ

Steamhead said:

ChrisJ said:

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes said:

Steamhead said:

There you go. If you don't test, you don't know.

This!

Most of us don't have access to calibrated combustion analyzers.

And we all know stoves, BBQ grills etc are not calibrated by the manufacturer. So.......it is what it is.

That's what qualified professionals with proper equipment are for.

True.
Unfortunately I'm betting 99% on kitchen stove installation isn't performed by such.

Solid_Fuel_Man said:

My grill has all 3 burners lit and producing CO2 as we speak... 365 gallon in the tank for lots of outdoor cooking.

My grill is connected to NG, so I have a little more fuel on hand than you.

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes

Oven results:
Oxygen - 13.9%
CO - 36 ppm
CO2 - 4.0%

Stove top results:
Oxygen - 18.1 %
CO - 15 ppm

I couldn't get a stove top CO2 reading, because CO2 only starts registering when the Oxygen level drops below 16%.

Oven reading taken when the temperature was stable at 400°.

The GE natural gas range is two years old. Model and serial number available on request. Results replicated and verified by Arthur Anderson, C.P.A., D.O.J.

Steamhead

ChrisJ said:

True.
Unfortunately I'm betting 99% on kitchen stove installation isn't performed by such.

That's about right.

Alan (California Radiant) Forbes said:

Oven results:
Oxygen - 13.9%
CO - 36 ppm
CO2 - 4.0%

Stove top results:
Oxygen - 18.1 %
CO - 15 ppm

I couldn't get a stove top CO2 reading, because CO2 only starts registering when the Oxygen level drops below 16%.

Oven reading taken when the temperature was stable at 400°.

The GE natural gas range is two years old. Model and serial number available on request. Results replicated and verified by Arthur Anderson, C.P.A., D.O.J.

Very good!

Zman

PolychromeUganda said:

And finally, the efficiency of energy generation was 30% 90 years ago when the typical power plant was a 50-100kW coal fired single stage high pressure stream turbine. The efficiency of natural gas fueled power generating plants is more like 50-60% at this point. The 8-12% transmission loss cited was never accurate, it reflected a worst case combination of lower voltage long distance transmission lines and local grid that were already being replaced in 1970. The T&D loss nationwide has been around 5% for some time.

@PolychromeUganda, These are interesting claims, I am not convinced they are true. Do you have data to back them up?
https://www.brighthubengineering.com/power-plants/72369-compare-the-efficiency-of-different-power-plants/

gennady

https://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-images-capture-worst-siberian-wildfires-in-10-000-years

Jean-David Beyer

I would think the new 8 and 10 speed autos would be the better milage option as they keep the engine in the best, most efficient operating condition.

When I first started driving 6 speed manuals I had to remember to hit that 6th gear as much as possible

45 mpg is impressive? At 40 mph? The wind speed at 75- 80, typical on interstates these days really hits the fuel mileage.

My 2017 Toyoto Prius got 76 MPG for about 20 miles once, but that is not typical. Since new, it has averaged a little over 50 mpg. And I can routinely get 60 mpg on the Garden State Parkway and New York State Thruway. Winter really kills the mpg because it has to run the engine to keep the heater running even if it could otherwise be off. Similarly, hot summers kill mpg due to the required energy to run the air conditioner. And I do a lot of 2-mile trips with lots of stoplight stop-and-go.

As far as 8 and 10 speed transmissions are concerned, while technically, this car has a transmission, it does not have shiftable gears. You could say it has a continuously variable gear ratio.

The most shiftable gears I ever had was a 5-speed manual transmission in one of my Alfa-Romeo Spider cars. And my old Lotus 26 had only a 4-speed and it did quite well. Though it weighed only about 1500 pounds and had about a 105 horsepower engine. DOHC and dual Weber carburettors. It got its best gas mileage at somewhat over 55 mph on the highway. It was just awful in New Jersey traffic.

nibs

Can anyone tell us why they build hybrids with direct drive or electric, seems to me it would be much simpler just to run the ICE as a genset and have all elec drives.

Jamie Hall

nibs said:

Can anyone tell us why they build hybrids with direct drive or electric, seems to me it would be much simpler just to run the ICE as a genset and have all elec drives.

Some hybrids are what you are asking for -- it's called "serial" hybrid. Some are parallel. There are engineering advantages to each.

ChrisJ

Jamie Hall said:

nibs said:

Can anyone tell us why they build hybrids with direct drive or electric, seems to me it would be much simpler just to run the ICE as a genset and have all elec drives.

Some hybrids are what you are asking for -- it's called "serial" hybrid. Some are parallel. There are engineering advantages to each.

I have yet to see a hybrid car that works like a diesel electric locomotive. I.E. an engine that drives a generator that drives a motor.

Can you give some examples?

Solid_Fuel_Man

The diesel electric locos of the 1950s were built so that the diesel engine could run at its optimal RPM (typically 600 or so) and the wheels could have 100% torque at 0 RPM all the way up to speed. A direct mechanical link (transmission) between the engine and the wheels would be more efficient, but wouldn't be able to provide the large 2 stroke diesel engine its optimal power range which is/was very narrow. Trains are a much different animal than cars in that they must start a very heavy load from a stop. No torque converter would be able to do this back then.

ChrisJ

Solid_Fuel_Man said:

The diesel electric locos of the 1950s were built so that the diesel engine could run at its optimal RPM (typically 600 or so) and the wheels could have 100% torque at 0 RPM all the way up to speed. A direct mechanical link (transmission) between the engine and the wheels would be more efficient, but wouldn't be able to provide the large 2 stroke diesel engine its optimal power range which is/was very narrow. Trains are a much different animal than cars in that they must start a very heavy load from a stop. No torque converter would be able to do this back then.

A very heavy load that rolls very easy once it's moving.

I see your point, but are you sure an automatic transmission with an engine running at it's less that best rpm is more efficient? Also, a fully electric drive train would allow the use of batteries so you can have a smaller engine and yet plenty of power for acceleration, regenerative stopping etc.

Jamie Hall

The Chevy Volt is a serial hybrid. So is the Honda Insight. Most of the time -- not all of it -- the engine only drives a generator, and the battery and electrics drive the wheels. Both of them -- and so far as I know there are no exceptions -- have provision for direct drive under certain conditions --- specifically when the full power of the electrics and the engine is demanded by the driver.

The Prius is an example of a parallel hybrid, where the system is set up so the engine or the electrics drive, depending on circumstances. There is no sharp line.

Railroad engines are a somewhat different matter. For one thing, although there are some small low powered switching engines which might be called hybrids, and some rapid transit vehicles, no road engines are hybrids; they are diesel electrics. There is no battery involved (a 4,000 hp battery would be an interesting critter!). There were, incidentally, some mechanical drive engines -- the Krauss Maffeis on the Rio Grande and Southern Pacific, for example, and the almost ubiquitous RDC cars both use torque converter drives. The RDCs were relatively small -- but the Krauss Maffeis were 4,000 hp road engines. They were mechanical nightmares...

ethicalpaul

Jamie Hall said:

The Chevy Volt is a serial hybrid. So is the Honda Insight. Most of the time -- not all of it -- the engine only drives a generator, and the battery and electrics drive the wheels. Both of them -- and so far as I know there are no exceptions -- have provision for direct drive under certain conditions --- specifically when the full power of the electrics and the engine is demanded by the driver

That isn't correct for the Insight. On the Insight, the electric motor is strictly an assist to the more typical gas power train. The electric motor is (in) the flywheel and cannot work on its own to drive the car.

The Volt was originally supposed to have the gas engine exclusively be a generator, but I'm sure that was ruled too gutless for American drivers and they quickly switched to whatever they have now.

ChrisJ

ethicalpaul said:

Jamie Hall said:

The Chevy Volt is a serial hybrid. So is the Honda Insight. Most of the time -- not all of it -- the engine only drives a generator, and the battery and electrics drive the wheels. Both of them -- and so far as I know there are no exceptions -- have provision for direct drive under certain conditions --- specifically when the full power of the electrics and the engine is demanded by the driver

That isn't correct for the Insight. On the Insight, the electric motor is strictly an assist to the more typical gas power train. The electric motor is (in) the flywheel and cannot work on its own to drive the car.

The Volt was originally supposed to have the gas engine exclusively be a generator, but I'm sure that was ruled too gutless for American drivers and they quickly switched to whatever they have now.

AH HA!
I knew I didn't imagine it.
The problem is, the last time I looked I couldn't find any evidence of this. Someone told me there never was a plan for the Volt to be set up in such a manner and yet I swear I saw it somewhere early on.

@Jamie Hall Pretty much what Paul said, neither of those are what you think they are.

nibs

One of the biggest problems for ICE's is that they have to operate under wildly different conditions and give up efficiency to do it.
A genset can be optimized to run at its peak efficiency using less fuel and causing less pollution.
Electric cars can accellerate at astonishing rates and by putting motors in each wheel become AWD with a minimum of mechanical linkages.

ChrisJ

nibs said:

One of the biggest problems for ICE's is that they have to operate under wildly different conditions and give up efficiency to do it.
A genset can be optimized to run at its peak efficiency using less fuel and causing less pollution.
Electric cars can accellerate at astonishing rates and by putting motors in each wheel become AWD with a minimum of mechanical linkages.

So,
What would happen if you combined a portable generator with a Tesla?

Jamie Hall

I was simply referring to the commonly accepted understanding of serial and parallel -- as has been noted (correctly) neither one is "pure". There is no one best way to arrange the drive -- it is an engineering and cost compromise.

Putting the electric motors in the wheels is actually done -- for heavy construction equipment (and has been done for decades, by the way). The problem for cars is unsprung weight, but motors are getting lighter and it is a good possibility, with some very real advantages.

And it is quite true that electric vehicles -- with enough battery power -- can accelerate at "ludicrous" rates. So, I might point out, can ICE vehicles -- if in doubt, go down to your local drag strip some Saturday night. The advantage for the electric is that if things are properly designed, the motors can take terrific overloads for a short period of time (which is how the Tesla in ludicrous mode can be so fast).

But for me, unhappily I understand that the C8 is sold out for the near future...

ChrisJ

Jamie Hall said:

I was simply referring to the commonly accepted understanding of serial and parallel -- as has been noted (correctly) neither one is "pure". There is no one best way to arrange the drive -- it is an engineering and cost compromise.

Putting the electric motors in the wheels is actually done -- for heavy construction equipment (and has been done for decades, by the way). The problem for cars is unsprung weight, but motors are getting lighter and it is a good possibility, with some very real advantages.

And it is quite true that electric vehicles -- with enough battery power -- can accelerate at "ludicrous" rates. So, I might point out, can ICE vehicles -- if in doubt, go down to your local drag strip some Saturday night. The advantage for the electric is that if things are properly designed, the motors can take terrific overloads for a short period of time (which is how the Tesla in ludicrous mode can be so fast).

But for me, unhappily I understand that the C8 is sold out for the near future...

Maybe time for you to work on converting that C10 into an electric "Farm Truck"? Might need to go a little Doc Brown and use something "with a little more kick" though.........

nibs

A VW electric car just broke the Goodwood speed record, previously held by a McClaren F1.