Forums

Join The Community
RegisterLogin

Level 3 Charging Station

I am having a level 3 charging station installed at my business. It is a 480 Volt 63 Amp DC charger. "Blink"

Since the Tesla has chargers on board that convert AC to DC, does it have any effect hooking up a DC charger? Is it even allowed? Are there any advantages or disadvantages to having that much juice entering the vehicle? (other than time) Does a DC charger have any negative effects on the life of the battery?

Thanks in advance for any input.

Eric

With the land and construction and security and maintenance costs, it would be (will be) FAR cheaper to tap the grid.

@Timo;
The FF project is progressing well. If it continues, the whole issue will be moot, as the generated power costs will drop by a factor of 10, making solar even less attractive (=reasonable, economic, sane).

Dilute power sources are retrograde, the exact opposite of everything that has permitted advanced civilization. One EU country after another is running into the Reality brick wall, and slashing subsidies, with suppliers howling, folding, and fleeing en masse.

As usual, it's too late to prevent major damage from renewables projects, as so much is now installed or already in the pipeline. But little or no new build-out will committed.

Etographer,

We were at Elmer's Restaurant this weekend after a day of racing at Portland International Raceway's Rose Cup weekend to dine and toast a good day on the track. It

What is "The FF project"? Final Fantasy? Fast Forward? Google and I don't seem to know what you're referring to... (Apologies to those who've already heard too much about whatever this is.)

Sorry but the whole message didn't make it due to a loss in wireless connectivity... Here's the whole message:

Etographer,

We were at Elmer's Restaurant this weekend after a day of racing at Portland International Raceway's Rose Cup weekend to dine and toast a good day on the track. It’s now a routine rendezvous location for race teams. Elmer’s is the most convenient restaurant near the track and several hotels frequented by teams. While at Elmer’s we were fantasizing about track days or racing Teslas at PIR... or just bringing ours along for the car shows that go on during racing. Meanwhile we wondered which restaurant or hotel would come up with chargers first.

Past Rose Festival events had EV endurance races at PIR after the high octane races were done for the day due to noise limits. Competitors were usually EV hobbyists and schools.

Go for it! We’ll be loyal customers.

EdG, please don't ask. We've had it once too often already.
But of course you are even more curious now, so here we go.

LPPhysics has been mentioned frequently in these forums, and always by Brian H. The last time this came up, another forum member posted a reply that I found rather enlightening:

Ahh, LPPhysics. Let's see what they can do for energy in the future and let's do a little due diligence before investing hope and money in this outfit.

LPPhysics = Lawrenceville Plasma Physics. Lawrenceville is a nice town just down the road from Princeton Univ, Princeton Physics department, and the Princeton Plasma Laboratory. How many of the people at any these institutions are moonlighting at LPP for a little extra cash and stock options? NONE!

Staff of LPP. The President, Eric Lerner has a BA in Physics from Columbia University (commendable, if not impressive.) Lerner did graduate work in Physics; code for "did not get a graduate degree."

The CFO, Aaron Blake, has a BA in Social Work and an MBA from Trident Univirsity International, a for profit on line school; very impressive. Oh, and Blake "proposed the idea of injecting angular momentum into the plasma filaments, which was written into the patent." The others are just as impressive :-)

From the Technical Section at the LPP site: Magnetic Field Effect "The effects of magnetic fields on ion-electron collisions has been studied for some time. It was first pointed out in the 1970s by Oak Ridge researcher J. Rand McNally (does this guy also make maps?) in a non-quantum mechanical form, and more recently astronomers studying neutron stars, which have powerful magnetic fields, noted the quantum mechanical form of the effect, which is much larger. However, Lerner was the first to point out in 2003 that this quantum effect would have a large impact on the plasma focus, where such strong magnetic fields are possible. Experiments have already demonstrated 0.4 giga gauss fields, and DPFs with smaller electrodes and stronger initial magnetic fields can reach as high as 20 giga-gauss, Lerner calculates. This should be achievable in the next round of LPP's experiments. NOTE: (DPF)=The Dense Plasma Focus (DPF)"

So how much is a giga gauss magnetic field? Well, 10,000 gauss = 1 Tesla (magnetic field unit, not car). So, 1 giga gauss = 100,000 Tesla. How much is that? Here is a portion from a recent story in Physorg(dot)com:

"World record: The strongest magnetic fields created
June 28, 2011
On June 22, 2011, the Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf set a new world record for magnetic fields with 91.4 teslas. To reach this record, Sergei Zherlitsyn and his colleagues at the High Magnetic Field Laboratory Dresden (HLD) developed a coil weighing about 200 kilograms in which electric current create the giant magnetic field – for a period of a few milliseconds. The coil survived the experiment unscathed." Also interesting later in the article is: "In order to examine as closely as possible the electric charge in the materials of tomorrow, researchers need higher magnetic fields with, for example, 90 or 100 teslas. "At 100 teslas, though, the Lorentz force inside the copper would generate a pressure which equals 40,000 times the air pressure at sea level," calculates Joachim Wosnitza. These forces would tear copper apart like an explosion."

So, if 100 Tesla is larger than the strongest magnetic field yet produced here on earth (not a Neutron Star) what are the chances of producing 10,000 times that field in the next five or ten years? Not too good! And, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near Lawrenceville or Middlesex NJ when they throw the switch.
http://www.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/cost-mile-drive-s-versus-compara...

@captain

Sorry to have missed you, look forward to meeting you.

Cheers!

If he'd said "LPPhysics" I wouldn't have asked. I probably don't want to know why "The FF project" = LPPhysics.

@Etographer

Perhaps next year it will be The Rose Cup, The Festival Trophy, The Pirelli Cup, The Porsche Cup AND The Elmer's Tesla Cup at PIR?

EdG: "Focus Fusion".

@EdG;
VolkerB quoted a cynical editorializing put-down, of course. Look at the site yourself; much has gone on lately, and papers have recently been published in reviewed plasma and engineering journals.

LPPhysics.com

Sorry it confused you; I was addressing Timo, who is up on the subject, and didn't consider the other readership!

One odd fact to keep in mind: the DPF device, paradoxically, produces more powerful "pinches" the smaller it gets. LPP's is, I believe, the world's most compact, and significantly shrunken ones are planned for the next stages of testing and research. LPP is between one and two orders of magnitude closer to "breakeven" on the Lawson scale/criterion, btw, than any other fusion project on the planet (as far as is known in the open literature).

Its other critical advantage is that it is designed for direct power output without need for steam/heat cycles to spin turbines. Just straight pulsed DC power, easy to control and convert to any desired standard AC votage and frequency.

The discussion/supporter/bulletin-board site is focusfusion.org .

Look at the site yourself (Brian H)

Absolutely. And also use Google Streetview (or any comparable service) to have a look at their "research center". ;-)

It is a very low budget research project done in small place, so obviously it doesn't have any cool facade. The results they have got with the little they have are amazing. LPP does create fusion far more reliably than any other fusion project, all it now needs to do is reach breakeven energies.

The person that you quoted, Volker.Berlin, didn't have a clue about the physics behind that project. The mentioned magnetic field is created in completely different manner in LPP, the max. field is reached outside of the coils in the "pinch" where the plasma is and where fusion happens.

I emphasize that it does create fusion already in reliable manner unlike any tokamak. What is left is to create enough energy from it to reach breakeven point with aneutronic fuels (hydrogen-boron), so dissing it without actually being familiar with the subject is plain stupid. I suspect that your hatred about LPP has roots in your hatred of BrianH (which has roots in who knows where).

I don't quite share BrianH optimism about the cost of the energy though. It is hard to even get to the breakeven, so predicting costs is not something I would like to do. What if the energy produced is so tiny it hardly pays the equipment? It's still aneutronic fusion produced from very abundant resources, so it would be clean and abundant energy, but it too can be expensive like solar. I hope it would not be expensive, but hoping is not knowing.

@BrianH, I didn't say that recharge station would not have connection to grid, quite opposite. Same system as with houses with solar, feed the grid when not in use, use grid when solar alone is not enough.

Timo;
Well, economics, dismal science that it is, will decide. I would suspect that if TM uses solar near/with the chargers it would be "written off" as promo for sister firm SolarCity.

Here's the latest image of the FF "energy budget" in a 'Sankey Diagram':

Timo, I insist that you replace "hatred" with "skepticism". Other than that, you're not too far off. More precisely, I'm skeptic about LPP and I'm skeptic about anything Brian H says, independent of one another. The fact that Brian H keeps bringing up LPP just makes me even more skeptic.

Sorry to interupt...I talked with TM this morning. They confirmed that there was a new store opening here in Oregon at the Washington Square mall. They don't know the exact date, but its coming.

"Sceptic", except to the sloppy English user, is not an adjective, it's a noun, specifically a person. "Sceptical" is correct usage. Do you say, "I am hunger" instead of "I am hungry"??

Fortunately, as noted, LPP has about a 10X to 100X advantage in quality of results vs. any and every other fusion research project in the world. So your scepticism is not evidence-based. Just sour and uniformed.

Typo: uninformed, probably not uniformed.

I think you mean skeptical (unless you're a Brit).

Brian H, I'm so glad that you are fluid in your mother tongue, and that you even get the spelling right most of the time. I, too, know my native language pretty well, plus some secondary languages that I know well enough to make myself understood. Thank you very much.

Citing sources and clearly marking personal opinion, among other basic communication skills, seem so much more important to me than an (occasional) glitch in grammar or spelling. Your priorities are clearly different.

Etographer, I apologize for further continuing this side track in your thread. It seems to have gotten hopelessly off-topic, anyway, so I hope I don't do much harm.

Well, it's kind of on topic still. BrianH note about LPP was related to charging stations, because that LPP reactor is small enough and cheap enough that you can add one of those to each charging station. If it does what it might do (5MW each), then grid connection and solar panels would not be needed and there would be plenty of power to charge any kind of BEV.

I hope LPP success because that would revolutionize energy production in our entire planet. No more oil, coal, solar, wind or any other kind of would be needed. Even ships and trains would use that (it's small enough to easily fit into locomotive). ICE cars of any size would become permanently obsolete with cheap fast charging would be available anywhere. Even hydrogen fuel cell would become green with hydrogen produced from water by electrolysis.

Timo, I appreciate your efforts to get back to some substantial discussion. My take on FF is that I'll deal with it when it's there. Until then we have solar/wind/hydro (and many flavors of each), which aren't comparable to FF in many regards, one of them being that they work today. I'm not going to stop anyone from saving the world by getting FF to work (assuming I could). It's just that I try to focus on solutions that can mitigate the problems we have today, until the better solution is available. In the mean time, we can as well use the opportunity to further improve those majorly flawed but readily available technologies.

Some technologies (wind, tide, solar) are so inherently dilute, variable, and inefficient that "further improving" them is throwing good money after bad. Observe the massive subsidy cutbacks even in countries that Believe: Spain, Germany, UK, France. Meanwhile, Denmark looks desperately for customers to take its demand-unbalanced windpower surges off its hands at fire-sale prices, or even free. Poland no longer permits import of swinging German windpower oversupplies, as it is harder on the grid to accommodate than what the power is worth, even if it were free. Greece is stupidly over-invested in several forms of unusable green power, using "other people's money" (mostly German and Austrian, I hear) which must be but cannot be and will not be repaid (except by rapid prestidigital circulation of Euro-paper with the ink still damp).

Fools and their money are soon parted. The longer it takes, the bigger the extraction.

Brian H, I agree with most of what you said. Problem is, and there our opinions differ, I don't believe that we have any better options. I am not at all convinced that throwing money at FF makes it "good money". In any event, research in all directions, including FF, does happen and will continue to do so. In the mean time, we have to cover our energy consumption somehow. Coal and nuclear are equally unacceptable, albeit for different reasons. What's left? First of all, reducing energy consumption, there's still huge potential there. And for the rest, a decentralized mix of renewables combined with a massive expansion of grid capacity is the best option that we currently have, IMO.

Brian H, I'm sure you're up to snuff with the DBM/Kolibri "magical battery" debacle. If not, read some background about the people and the companies involved. I can't help the impression that LPP is a scam of similar quality, albeit, at a much larger scale. I may be wrong and that would be great.

Fools and their money are soon parted. The longer it takes, the bigger the extraction.

No doubt about that. The art is knowing in advance who turns out to be the fool. Believing certainly helps to fill the void that is created by uncertainty.

A bigger scale? Lerner has been full-bore hands-on with this for close to 20 years now. Every penny of the meagre resources used has been put into very parsimonious hardware and computer modelling and bare-bones staffing. When and if "scientific break-even" is achieved this year, there will be no "fooling" the world about the data: LPP is famous for the openness of its information flows -- it is unparallelled in the field, from the acquisition of a patent with detailed specifications to reactor design and photography to results reporting to milestone projection and reporting to submission of papers on experimental results and hardware design to refereed papers.

If there is a project which acts less like a "scam", I've not heard of it. Or one which is less deserving of superficial cynicism like yours.

Brian H, you said that solar, wind etc. are inefficient and then say that we should not improver them. That is contradicting comment, isn't being inefficient just the reason to improve them?

Solar is a good way to produce energy. Just not for everybody and not everywhere. It's basically free energy, so you just need to make production and installation cheaper. More efficient/m^2 isn't the goal, it is more efficient/$$$.

Just like hydro, you don't need to catch entire kinetic energy of the water to produce energy for free. Same with wind, geothermal and so on. Those are just energy sources, and you should tap to them just as much as is reasonable, not any more.

Solar is most effective when it is distributed widely. Very many small units, not few huge ones. This reduces the energy demand when sun is shining even in part of the area. What Germany and many "projects" do is wrong. What for example SolarCity is doing is right.

For wind, huge wind farms is just wasted land/water area. Something like Urban Green Energy small omnidirectional windmills that anybody could buy is right. Far less noise pollution, less dead birds, less ruined nature.

Zero energy building is another way to improve life. Just plain less wasted energy.

For these recharging stations, if you could get even part of the energy used from Solar, it is worth it. Throw in couple of those Urban Green Energy windmills to get wind and you get the greenest recharging station ever build.

Dilute and remote is dilute and remote. Even if solar panels were free, they wouldn't be worth installing on a mass scale (grid supply size). Too much maintenance, transmission, variability, and real estate cost.
Wind is a con job; windmills are far more variable than even solar, they will not last more than about ¼ as long as claimed, maintenance is simply not feasible on a large scale (manpower willing and able to work at those heights 'without a net' doesn't exist), the output is so ragged and needs so much backup that grids start losing money trying to accommodate it when it much surpasses 10% of total load, etc.
Water power, which is just elaboration of the oldest natural source, water wheels, doesn't actually scale enough. The freshwater flows don't exist in adequate quantity, and sea water eats equipment, or makes it so expensive that ROI is risible. What works in special locations for a year or two won't be functioning in 5 yrs.

So as far as "improving" renewables, the upper limits are very low, very expensive, and do not work together nicely. For Britain, e.g., to meet its legislated windpower goals by 2050 it would have to line the entire coast 5 miles deep with units, plus coat every Scottish and Welsh mountain -- and it would still be periodically becalmed in a blocking high and have to replace the entire supply with purchased power from foreign sources (which do not exist).

The entire concept and project is retrograde and reactionary, against the energy driver of advancing civilization -- which for thousands of years has been to develop more and more compact and concentrated energy sources. There is a reason wind mills, water wheels, and steam engines were seized on eagerly and then displaced and discarded later when better smaller stronger sources were found.

P.S.
In all the history of renewables installations, the number of (e.g.) coal plants which they have replaced is approximately zero. Gas plants can replace coal, but renewables require full back-up conventional power, running at low efficiency levels and ramping up and down crazily to load-match. Dumb, dumber, dumbest.

Not to pour gas on a fire, but I read the LPP home page, http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/ and could not help but immediately think of Drs. Pons and Fleishmann.

New energy sources, cheaper, cleaner, safer, are always worth researching when there is demonstrable evidence in the possibility of success. Cold fusion had incredible potential, in 1989. Hasn't worked out.

I agree with Volker's "work with it when it gets here" approach.

On May 25th, 2012, per LPP's own reports...

"This achieved two out of three conditions—temperature and confinement time—needed not just for fusion energy, but for fusion energy using advanced, aneutronic fuels that have long been considered out of reach. We did all this with an innovative device costing less than one million dollars. If we are able to achieve the third condition, density, we could be on track to commercializing fusion within five years."

So, in 2012, 2 of 3 conditions met... then the qualifiers start, "IF we are able..." then "we COULD BE on track to commercializing fusion within FIVE YEARS."

Thus, if they announce they have met the third condition, then they might be able to get commercialization within 5 years.

So, we can't have magic energy today, or tomorrow, or in 5 years, but maybe in 5 years from when LPP announces success with their third condition.

Of course, we need energy today, and tomorrow, and before LPP can get us magic, so let's work with maximizing what we have.


X Deutschland Site Besuchen