« China Issues Some Restrictions On Coal-to-Liquids Developments | Main | Volkswagen Joins Clean Energy Partnership for Hydrogen Trials »
Tesla Reveals High-Profile Electric Roadster; Calculates EV is More Than 3x as Efficient (WTW) as Fuel Cell Vehicle
20 July 2006
|
| The Tesla Roadster. |
Tesla Motors unveiled its much-anticipated all-electric two-seater roadster. The lithium-ion battery powered sportscar features a 248hp (185 kW) electric motor that accelerates the car from 0 to 60 in four seconds.
Built by Lotus for Tesla, the Roadster has a range of about 250 miles and a top speed of 130 mph. The price for the Roadster will be around $100,000.
The custom-designed battery system (Energy Storage System) weighs in at close to 1,000 pounds and uses commodity lithium-ion cells. The system addresses thermal balancing with a liquid cooling circuit.
The 3-phase, four-pole motor uses a low resistance “squirrel cage” with large copper end rings. This allows the rotor to develop high current flows and torque, with low resistance losses. The use of a small air gap allows tight inductive coupling which, combined with low loss magnetic materials, enables the development of high torque at high rpm. Together, these factors allow the induction of large currents, even at high rpm, producing much flatter power and efficiency curves from approximately 2,000 rpm to 12,000 rpm. The motor redlines at 13,500 rpm.
(Devising a cost-effective method for the production of copper motor rotors has been under investigation for years. Siemens introduced three motors with die-cast copper rotors to the US market in April.)
|
| Comparing Well-to-Wheel Efficiency and GHG emissions. Click to enlarge. |
In a white paper (The 21st Century Electric Car) published on the Tesla Motors website, the company calculates the tank-to-wheel (actually, the “electrical outlet to wheel”) energy efficiency of the Roadster to be 2.18 km/MJ.
Assuming electricity supplied from a combined-cycle natural-gas-fired generator, and accounting for transmissions losses over the grid leads them to calculate the “well-to-wheel” efficiency of the Roadster to be 1.14 km/MJ—double the efficiency of the Toyota Prius.
Tesla then tackles the question of hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCV) fuel cars, deriving a theoretical efficiency for an FCV fueled with hydrogen produced by steam methane reforming of 0.85 km/MJ.
![]()
Theoretical efficiency of battery-electric and fuel-cell vehicles. Click to enlarge. This is impressive when compared to a gasoline car, though it is 32% worse than our electric car. But real fuel-cell cars do not perform nearly this well.
...The best fuel-cell demonstration car measured by the EPA is the Honda FCX, which gets about 49 miles per kilogram of hydrogen, equal to 80.5 kilometers per kilogram. We know that the energy content of hydrogen is 141.9 MJ/kg, so we can calculate the vehicle efficiency to be 80.5 km/kg / 141.9 MJ/kg = 0.57 km/MJ.
...When we calculate the well-to-wheel energy efficiency of this Honda experimental car, we get 0.57 km/MJ x 61% = 0.35 km/MJ, not even as good as the ordinary diesel Volkswagen Jetta, let alone the gasoline-powered Honda Civic VX or the Honda Insight hybrid car.
However, some proponents of hydrogen fuel cells argue that it would be better to produce hydrogen through electrolysis of water. The well-to-tank efficiency of hydrogen made through electrolysis is only about 22%, and the well-to-wheel energy efficiency of our theoretical fuel-cell car would be 2.78 km/MJ x 50% x 22% = 0.30 km/MJ, and the well-to-wheel energy efficiency of the Honda FCX would be 0.57 km/MJ x 22% = 0.12 km/MJ, even less efficient than a Porsche Turbo.
Resources:
Copper Motor Rotor Project website
July 20, 2006 in Electric (Battery) | Permalink | Comments (143) | TrackBack (2)
Comments
Posted by: James | July 20, 2006 at 11:00 AM
This is now a direct competitor to Hybrid Technologies electric Mullen GT/LiX-75, both priced approx the same ( LiX-75 was around $125K )
I wonder when will we see a major motor magazine doing a one on one race between those two ?
Posted by: kert | July 20, 2006 at 11:10 AM
SWEET!!! ... now I just need to pull 100K out of my back pocket. ... guess I'll have to wait for the family sedan ... sigh
Posted by: Neil | July 20, 2006 at 11:28 AM
Catering to Jay Leno and George Clooney type of buyers, maybe the only buyers!
Posted by: Mark A | July 20, 2006 at 11:30 AM
250 mile (400 km) range is impressive, but 285 hp is not needed. They can reduce the 285 hp and the cost. That where the production volume will go up.
Posted by: Max Reid | July 20, 2006 at 11:32 AM
Max, it's a sports car.
Posted by: James | July 20, 2006 at 11:34 AM
Wired story and some other actually quote $80K pricetag. And they have a sedan in the pipeline for 2008
Comeon, we want to see a face off between Venturi Fetish, Hybrid Tech LiX-75 and this beast already.
Which one is the most "silent but deadly?"
Posted by: kert | July 20, 2006 at 11:44 AM
The future belongs to EVs.
Posted by: Harvey D. | July 20, 2006 at 11:49 AM
Well here we go again, another carrot to dangle in front of us and then we can't afford it. I read that they want early adopter for this car and that's the only people that will buy it. What kind of crap is that? The electric car isn't a brand new invention! It doesn't need early adopters unless they are 120 years old! The EV has been around longer than the gasoline car. We need products the general masses can afford, not the 'hoidy toidy'. Please, they can afford the gasoline in the first place. And spare the rethoric about saving the planet, the rich aren't interested in that, they want little toys to play with, while the rest of the world needs real solutions that everyone can afford. Bad marketing Tesla...but good product! Please come out with something soon!
I guess they didn't consult a real marketing firm. Every car maker starts by making an introductory car that cost little. Remember the Honda Civic? Kia didn't start with a $100k car! Nisan's car was a gas miser and it didn't cost much. Hey it just goes to show money doesn't make you smart!
Posted by: Richard | July 20, 2006 at 11:51 AM
Dang It! GM could have been comparably far along by now if they had not killed their EV-1. Resized and revamped EV-1s (with or without a small ICE) could have served 3/4 of the population, while a juiced up version could satisfy the speed demons. The rest would be served by station wagons, minivans, crossovers, and light trucks.
_
___On the other hand, it would be like hitting the jackpot for electric utilities. They might get better efficiencies out of their powerplants by running them at optimum rates, but in the end, you would likely have seen an enormous rise in coal usage.
Posted by: allen Z | July 20, 2006 at 12:05 PM
Max; James,
Perhaps a variable driving profile software patch. Some sports cars already have




Built in the UK by Lotus but won't be available here. Nice one.