Formula E

[Tommy Cookers]

Due to the overall higher well to wheel efficiency (and better options to capture pollutants in centralized elec. generation), even if the grid is mostly fossil, there will still be benefits.

governments in effect chose eg car catalysts etc as a way to give safe public air by capture etc of pollutants

and ...
isn't the big thing how best to use our existing and upcoming electricity sources to reduce global warming emissions

so - is EV use better than heating by heat pumps as a means of reducing said emissions ?

if not then the FE and EV thing may be counterproductive
heating being a much bigger energy user than is road transport ... and in competition for electricity

[Andres125sx]

There are several countries that have legislation stating "only electric".
... in some cases a top-down decision to focus on a single tech may be the most pragmatic option.

a boost to fanatics everywhere ?

most countries won't replace all fossil-fuel electricity with nominally carbon-free electricity by eg '2030-40'
or the forseeable
until then using such electricity to de-fossilise cars just means using more fossil fuel somewhere else
after then using such electricity to de-fossilise cars just means using more fossil fuel somewhere else

Demagogy Tommy, EV don´t need to replace all fossil fuel electricity to reduce emissions. I´m sure you know most countries in the world use some renewable energy, wich means EVs are producing less emissions than ICEs. Only in countries like India using most electricity from coal plants EVs pollute similar, but you don´t live in India and I´m sure you know this because I´ve repeated it and posted links ad nauseam

In any country from Europe, America or most in Asia and Oceania, any EVs reduce emissions from day 1

[Andres125sx]

Due to the overall higher well to wheel efficiency (and better options to capture pollutants in centralized elec. generation), even if the grid is mostly fossil, there will still be benefits.

governments in effect chose eg car catalysts etc as a way to give safe public air by capture etc of pollutants

and ...
isn't the big thing how best to use our existing and upcoming electricity sources to reduce global warming emissions

so - is EV use better than heating by heat pumps as a means of reducing said emissions ?

if not then the FE and EV thing may be counterproductive
heating being a much bigger energy user than is road transport ... and in competition for electricity

Agree with this, but there´s an even better alternative to heat pumps, aerothermal energy wich reduces not only fossil fuels emissions but also electrical consumption significantly

Also, the way to reduce emissions from heating is not a switch to electric, but a huge improvement in thermal insulation.A switch to electric heating is also needed, heat pumps or aerothermal, but that´s only an aid, the way to go is reducing energy demands and that is done improving insulation. That is what is being done, at least in Europe

[mzso]

There are several countries that have legislation stating "only electric".

For the record, I am conceptually opposed to that because there are alternatives (yes, these include synfuel), and the challenge is picking the right option for the right niche. In a fully fair and rational market that should boil down to "picking the most economical option" (throwing away 85% energy when there is a more efficient alternatives for road cars would be economically prohibitive, and so would dragging tons of batteries into the air be).

But the market is not perfect; politics, emotions, and a lack of accountability for externalities come into play, anf there are infrastructure considerations that may make focus on a limited set of options desirable. Hence, in some cases a top-down decision to focus on a single tech may be the most pragmatic option.

Synfuel is more like a subset, than an alternative. Burning the hard produced fuel in 20-40% engines is not reasonable compared to a 70-90% fuel cell.

most countries won't replace all fossil-fuel electricity with nominally carbon-free electricity by eg '2030-40'
or the forseeable
until then using such electricity to de-fossilise cars just means using more fossil fuel somewhere else

"Somewhere else" is already a lot better than "straight into the air you breathe". Not just for health and environmental (filtering) reasons but also powerplants are a lot more efficient than cars.

so - is EV use better than heating by heat pumps as a means of reducing said emissions ?

Why on earth wouldn't you do both if you can. If you can save at one place doesn't mean you shouldn't elsewhere. It's the opposite, you shouldn't waste anywhere.

if not then the FE and EV thing may be counterproductive
heating being a much bigger energy user than is road transport ... and in competition for electricity

There's no competition. You produce as much electricity as you need.
But heating with electricity never made much sense, and there's no reason to start now.
Best way is to plainly insulate houses so they don't require heating ("passive house" standards and such). Instead or in parallel to that you can use solar thermal panels for heating. If you don't have those either than the fuel is best used to drive a heat pump as well as using it's heat for heating. ("waste" heat in case of fuel+fuel cell+heat pump)

[mzso]

Agree with this, but there´s an even better alternative to heat pumps, aerothermal energy wich reduces not only fossil fuels emissions but also electrical consumption significantly

Ummm.... Did a quick search. And by the looks of it "aerothermal" is just a heat pump. An air-source heat pump.

[Andres125sx]

Agree with this, but there´s an even better alternative to heat pumps, aerothermal energy wich reduces not only fossil fuels emissions but also electrical consumption significantly

Ummm.... Did a quick search. And by the looks of it "aerothermal" is just a heat pump. An air-source heat pump.

More or less, I´d define it as a reversible AA you can use both to heat up or cool down

[mzso]

More or less, I´d define it as a reversible AA you can use both to heat up or cool down

Sure but you said it's a better alternative to heat pumps, but it IS a heat pump. A tad nonsensical, but no matter, moving on...

[Andres125sx]

More or less, I´d define it as a reversible AA you can use both to heat up or cool down

Sure but you said it's a better alternative to heat pumps, but it IS a heat pump. A tad nonsensical, but no matter, moving on...

Technically yes, but the discussion was about saving energy, and aerothermal energy saves a lot compared to traditional heat pumps

[jjn9128]

Hmmmmmmm not sure I like this. I know they're just a renders shrouded in darkness
https://www.fiaformulae.com/en/news/202 ... troduction

[MtthsMlw]

The specs sound good
- 250kW front and 350kW rear regen
- 350kW motor (rear)
- no rear brakes
- smaller and lighter than Gen2

[jjn9128]

The specs sound good
- 250kW front and 350kW rear regen
- 350kW motor (rear)
- no rear brakes
- smaller and lighter than Gen2

Not that any of the tracks they go to will a vmax of 200mph be possible. Also (embarrassingly) lighter than the 2022 F1 car.

[MattWellsyWells]

The specs sound good
- 250kW front and 350kW rear regen
- 350kW motor (rear)
- no rear brakes
- smaller and lighter than Gen2

So is the front powertrain only used for regen and not drive?

[jjn9128]

So is the front powertrain only used for regen and not drive?

Yes, no idea why.

[NL_Fer]

Otherwise with 4wd is would be more WR-E Rally on roadcourse, than a formula race.

[Andres125sx]

The specs sound good
- 250kW front and 350kW rear regen
- 350kW motor (rear)
- no rear brakes
- smaller and lighter than Gen2

Not that any of the tracks they go to will a vmax of 200mph be possible. Also (embarrassingly) lighter than the 2022 F1 car.

Where´s the weight? Can´t find it