[MalibuBimmer]

Originally Posted by red-sauerkraut

Not a chance.

EV's are here to stay.

Other than BMW's horrible choice in plug standard, they will do well once there is a fast charging network that covers the ridiculous choice of plug they decided upon.

So, for now sales of the BEV model will suffer accordingly.

Could you expand on the plug standard issue or refer me to other writings (including those you've made) about the plug standard, here on Bimmerpost?

[3toM]

Originally Posted by MalibuBimmer

Could you expand on the plug standard issue or refer me to other writings (including those you've made) about the plug standard, here on Bimmerpost?

BMW, like most Euro and US manufacturers have adopted the J1772 Combo charger, while most of the Asian manufacturers have gone with the CHAdeMO plug.

It is MUCH easier at this time to find a level 3 charging station with the CHAdeMO plug than it is the J1772 Combo plug option. Its going to be like VHS and Betamax all over again, or if you're younger and don't know what I'm talking about, Bluray vs HD DVD.

[-c-]

Here is a good read and explanation on the different plugs used and what perhaps they were thinking.

It looks like a lot of European companies and Chrysler are going with the J1772 and J1772 combo.


Am I reading it right that the J1772 combo gets up to 90KW and the CHAdeMO only can go to 62.5KW? .... If that's true perhaps that's why they went with the higher performer.


But either way, whatever plugin gets chosen over the other I'm sure their will be an adapter just like tesla makes so it doesn't matter to much.

http://www.electriccarpledge.com/ele...ar-plug-types/

[MalibuBimmer]

Thanks to 3toM and -C- for your responses.

Because converters/adapters are available I'm not sure this is a Betamax/VHS issue.

[jadnashuanh]

The power itself isn't a big issue, but the J1772 protocol that was chosen is simpler to implement. The J1772 also means only one charging access point - the ac and control is on the top, and if you have access to DC, the plug gets bigger and plugs also into the bottom. The CHADEmo uses communications over the CANBUS to initialize and control charging...the J1772 protocol does not. Not every car built uses the CANBUS technology. To make a successful conversion, you'd need a small computer to talk one protocol to one side, and convert that to analog signals on the other. IT will not be cheap, IF someone ever decides to make one.

The Japanese EVs (primarily the Leaf) have been out for 3+ years, so they've had a head start. But, it gave the rest of the industry time to evaluate their system and decide on what I think is a more robust, simpler version.

What I think you will see coming, is the addition of a control board in some of the public DC fast chargers and a second cable/port to support the other protocol needed for the vast majority of the other car manufacturers out there.

While the European protocol for charging is the same as J1772, they chose a different plug. Their plug has mechanical shutters that eliminate the possibility (when they work!) of you being able to touch any of the high voltage pins. On the J1772 plugs the USA uses, the EVSE interlock cannot apply high voltage until the plug is installed and the vehicle asks for it.

There are some conversion cables between J1772 US style plug and the Euro version, but neither plug is particularly inexpensive, and cable to be able to carry the high currents involved is not cheap, either.

One thing to keep in mind is that many of the cars being built today cannot utilize the maximum charge rate of the protocol AND there are few to none around that can supply that power, so at least for today, it is a mute point. For example the i3 can handle a max of about 50kw on its DC fast charging circuit, well within the max of the limit for the protocol. About the only vehicle that can use significantly more is the Tesla, and their protocol and plug is different yet again. As of right now, Tesla won't allow it, and there are no conversion cables available so others can use a Tesla Supercharger. Tesla does supply a cable so they can use J1772 level 2 EVSE.

[ORIGIN M.]

Originally Posted by MalibuBimmer

Thanks to 3toM and -C- for your responses.

Because converters/adapters are available I'm not sure this is a Betamax/VHS issue.

They are not cheap from what I have seen so far.

[Diver]

Hydrogen is way off in the future. Fuel cells are more expensive to manufacture than batteries and there is a lot of promising battery research going on. Hydrogen is difficult to store and transport. Lots of energy gets wasted on compression. Because the molecules are small hydrogen leaks easily forming an explosive mixture with air. Besides, it's lots easier to put in charging stations than hydrogen tanks.

[jadnashuanh]

Hydrogen can tend to make things brittle as the molecules are so small, they can fit in between spaces in the structure trying to contain them and change its properties...IOW, it is tricky to keep the stuff in place and keep that material sound.

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

If EVs are going to eclipse internal combustion there really needs to be a convenient solution for people who live in apartments or condominiums and use on-street parking.

[MalibuBimmer]

One day we'll have roadway induction, with the Government (or other provider) charging for the electricity as it is used. All vehicles will be fully electrified.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by MalibuBimmer

One day we'll have roadway induction, with the Government (or other provider) charging for the electricity as it is used. All vehicles will be fully electrified.

That's certainly a viable way to overcome EV's major drawback: keeping them charged.

I wonder, if/when the day you describe arrives whether we humans will still drive the vehicles in which we travel or will we just sit there and let the computer do all the work? I think it's safe to say that if cars are all moving about on a "grid" sort of thing, ceding control of them to the "master controller" would result in a more efficient system of transport, albeit an imminently less fun one for car owners...I suppose folks will find other things to make the trip fun, like watching movies or something seeing as watching the road won't be necessary.

TY for posting something thought inspiring rather than simply nay-saying, problem citing, or advocating for one or the other means of propulsion.

All the best.

[jadnashuanh]

One article this week out of London indicated that BMW's plans call for all of their models from the 3-series up by 2022 will be similar in propulsion to either the i3 or the i8. Now, if, by some miracle, hydrogen becomes readily available, they could swap the ICE to FC. I do not see that infrastructure to be widespread, especially when you consider the world-wide market of BMW vehicles.

[MalibuBimmer]

Originally Posted by tony20009

That's certainly a viable way to overcome EV's major drawback: keeping them charged.

I wonder, if/when the day you describe arrives whether we humans will still drive the vehicles in which we travel or will we just sit there and let the computer do all the work? I think it's safe to say that if cars are all moving about on a "grid" sort of thing, ceding control of them to the "master controller" would result in a more efficient system of transport, albeit an imminently less fun one for car owners...I suppose folks will find other things to make the trip fun, like watching movies or something seeing as watching the road won't be necessary.

TY for posting something thought inspiring rather than simply nay-saying, problem citing, or advocating for one or the other means of propulsion.

All the best.

We're certainly moving to driving autonomy. (The automobile being autonomous!) And it's interesting the way we're getting there -- heavily reliant on GPS, computer memory and in car cameras and sensors and transponders.

When I was a kid reading Popular Mechanics I thought we'd have flying cars by now, motivated by nuclear fusion. We won't be there until we can figure out antigravity and cold fusion but that future is here now and I'm driving it. Little did we realize it would be an electrified future.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by MalibuBimmer

We're certainly moving to driving autonomy. (The automobile being autonomous!) And it's interesting the way we're getting there -- heavily reliant on GPS, computer memory and in car cameras and sensors and transponders.

When I was a kid reading Popular Mechanics I thought we'd have flying cars by now, motivated by nuclear fusion. We won't be there until we can figure out antigravity and cold fusion but that future is here now and I'm driving it. Little did we realize it would be an electrified future.

I don't think I ever imagined that I'd live to see George Jetson's way of life, but I had a sense that I might get to see a time when we are all substantively passengers for the vast majority of car travel events. I have my doubts now that I'll live to see that even come to fruition.

Although the infrastructure more or less exists now to make automobile travel "autonomous" as you described it doable, I doubt the safety/security components required to ensure millions of cars speeding along the roadways with no "nut behind the wheel" don't collide into one another or other objects just isn't there. For example, my Passport Max loses track of the GPS signal from time to time. I don't think that'd be a good thing to have happen if a human isn't actually driving the car and is instead focused on something else going on inside the car at the time it does happen.

If there were one thing impeding advancement in the ease of car operation and the efficiency of travel, it's the crawl at which human nature evolves. I'd have never thought that things like computer viruses would ever have been invented or that folks deliberately ponder ways to destroy or weaponize that which is created to improve one's quality of life. And yet, one must take into account the effect of several "deadly sins" when devising anything such as HFC or "autonomous" cars. Pity.

Sidebar for folks who are focused on the specific example:
The example above is just an example; it's not the theme of the post or thread. I know a lot of members seem to struggle with that concept (and indirectly with reading comprehension) and latch onto a simple example and adopt it as a main theme, taking a discussion down the road of solving the problem posed by such illustrations. I didn't mention it to say it's insurmountable, just that it's the sort of thing, along with many others, that needs to be resolved before we can have autonomous cars in reality.

All the best.