[HN Gopher] Daimler is setting up a $650M charging network for c...
___________________________________________________________________
Daimler is setting up a $650M charging network for commercial EVs
Author : mfiguiere
Score : 69 points
Date : 2023-04-28 16:06 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
| ourmandave wrote:
| Is any of that coming from the US Dept of Transportation's
| Federal Infrastructure fund?
|
| https://www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit/ev-infrastru...
| disrupthq wrote:
| This is a much-needed move for the commercial EV sector. With
| Greenlane focusing on medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, long-haul
| electric trucking could finally become a reality. It's
| interesting that they plan to add hydrogen fuel cell
| infrastructure and eventually chargers for passenger EVs, making
| it a more comprehensive network. Exciting times ahead for the
| decarbonization of the trucking industry!
| sofixa wrote:
| > long-haul electric trucking
|
| I wonder, does it even make sense? Long-haul (electric of
| course) rail + short to medium haul trucking make more sense -
| it would be much more efficient.
|
| Do long haul electric truck even make sense? Don't the
| batteries needed weigh too much?
| bombcar wrote:
| Long haul could "work" but the effort needed is immense,
| compared to replacing delivery/short-haul trucking (which is
| doable with equipment we have today).
|
| For long-haul the best may be something like
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3P_S7pL7Yg
|
| (Trains have advantages and disadvantages compared to long-
| haul trucks)
| oblio wrote:
| So, trolley-trucks.
| Robotbeat wrote:
| It's an engineering challenge, but doable as you get about a
| ton of extra weight for EVs.
|
| The main mental miscalculation I think people make when they
| say "why not just trains" is ignoring that rail is a super
| conservative industry, at least in the US, and in the case of
| passenger rail (not on existing tracks) that building out new
| rail infrastructure is super expensive, particularly for HSR
| where rights of way have to obey Newton's Laws when it comes
| to turning radius.
|
| It literally may take more time to do the environmental
| review for adding, say, catenary lines to existing rail than
| to just go to electric trucks. Some companies have been
| really effective at building out charging infrastructure.
| Additionally, just convincing the rail industry to make
| changes to enable/allow electrification (especially in non
| traditional ways) could take a generation.
|
| Additionally, the US has removed a lot of seldom-used rail,
| so you just need a lot of trucking. Moving cargo from truck
| to rail to truck just may be a lot more cost and hassle than
| direct via truck.
|
| Electrifying trucking, even long haul trucking, is just
| potentially the fastest way to electrify a lot of current
| logistics given the cultural, infrastructure, regulatory
| _reality_ we live in today, as opposed to the ideal cultural,
| infrastructural, regulatory world we'd LIKE at here to be.
|
| Engineering a decarbonization transition _with realistic
| assessments of infrastructure & industry/regulatory inertial
| as a constraint_ is very different than "ideally we use
| trains for logistics as they have a lower coefficient of
| friction."
| robertlagrant wrote:
| It makes perfect sense. Roads let people take a variety of
| vehicles and loads anywhere they want. Rail needs specific
| drivers who can strike, construction and maintenance people
| same, and a load of land and planning and budget to add any
| addition destination.
| shadyfroyo wrote:
| https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-reaches-15-billion-settlem...
|
| Likely being forced to, a reminder this is the same company that
| deliberately and consistently cheated on emissions tests in the
| USA.
| oblio wrote:
| It's still a net positive that they're doing this.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Unless this is cover for something else. Unless this is just
| greenwashing. Unless this project pulls money in that would
| otherwise have gone to more effective projects. Commercial EV
| charge points are great but the low hanging fruit remains the
| vast numbers of private vehicles not currently served by
| charging schemes. Those people are basically everyone who
| doesn't own a house with a garage where they can install the
| bespoke charger for their particular EV.
| kwhitefoot wrote:
| > the bespoke charger for their particular EV.
|
| What EVs would they be. At least in Europe all new EVs use
| CCS and most of the older ones used Type-2. They can all be
| charged from an ordinary 230 V, 10 A domestic supply;
| Schuko in Europe or BS1363 in the UK (and Ireland?).
| rippercushions wrote:
| Electric trucks have huge batteries and will need super-
| fast chargers to "refuel" on the road, you can't just
| plug them into an ordinary outlet. (Well, I guess you
| _can_ , you just literally won't get anywhere.)
|
| The good news is that there's an emerging standard for
| this, so hopefully Daimler adopts it:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megawatt_Charging_System
| fwungy wrote:
| They're being forced to do it.
|
| The natural market for EVs is a maximum of 20%. The cost/benefit
| is only positive for certain use cases.
|
| Ford can't sell its Lightning F150 EVs. They just had a fire on
| one of the holding lots too that burned a bunch of them down. I
| guess they'll have to take the insurance.
|
| Fun fact about EV fires: they're a chemical reaction, not an
| ordinary fire. Removing the oxygen source like you would with an
| ICE fire doesn't work.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| Do people normally remove the oxygen source with ICE fires?
| Wouldn't that be...the atmosphere?
| fwungy wrote:
| When a lithium-ion battery catches fire, it can be very hard
| to extinguish and can burn very fiercely3. If a battery is
| going to catch fire, the likely cause is thermal runaway1.
| This is when a battery experiences an increase in temperature
| that eventually leads to cell short-circuiting or
| disintegration that can spark a fire1. There are three main
| abuse factors that can send a battery into thermal runaway --
| mechanical, thermal or electrical1. The contents of the
| battery are under pressure, so if a metal fragment punctures
| a partition that keeps the components separate or the battery
| is punctured, the lithium reacts with water in the air
| vigorously, generating high heat and sometimes producing a
| fire2.
|
| (1) What are the lithium-ion-battery fire risks & safety
| issues?. https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/battery-fire-
| lithium-i.... (2) Just how concerned should the solar
| industry be about battery fires?.
| https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2020/02/just-how-
| conce.... (3) Why Lithium Batteries Catch Fire - ThoughtCo.
| https://www.thoughtco.com/why-lithium-batteries-catch-
| fire-6.... (4) Can Batteries Catch On Fire? Do They Ever
| Explode? - Firefighter Insider.
| https://firefighterinsider.com/batteries-catch-fire-or-
| explo.... (5) Lithium Battery Fires: How to Spot the Warning
| Signs. https://www.erieinsurance.com/blog/lithium-battery-
| fires.
| sjsdaiuasgdia wrote:
| The problem is the battery has everything it needs to burn
| already inside its chemistry. It doesn't need the atmosphere
| to supply oxygen.
| cesarb wrote:
| > Fun fact about EV fires: they're a chemical reaction, not an
| ordinary fire.
|
| Aren't all ordinary fires a chemical reaction?
| fwungy wrote:
| A chemical is a compound that has been purposefully refined
| or purified.
|
| A chemical fire is far more complex and potentially dangerous
| than a normal fire.
|
| Gasoline is a chemical, however we have a lot of experience
| dealing with gasoline driven fires and they can be easily
| doused with water. Large battery driven fires in vehicles are
| a new thing, and they are not easily doused with water.
| Robotbeat wrote:
| It would be nice if the article had mentioned something
| technically useful like charge rates. Megawatt charging?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-28 23:02 UTC)