Brammo Owners Forum
Brammo Empulse Discussion => Brammo Empulse => Topic started by: 1lesscar on April 19, 2012, 08:36:16 PM
-
I don't understand why the children these days don't believe in the technology. Is it because it is soo different they are afraid of it. They still think ICE is the best for motorcycles. Do they love the sound or what? I am having a hard time talking sense into them. The Empulse R is here, in their faces and they make fun of it, like they never heard of it and won't give it a chance. ::)
-
It's a rabbit hole you don't want to jump into unless you have some goal in mind, like, "If I can convince ONE person to change their mind, then it's worth it." I've seen so many haters over the two years I've owned my Enertia, and I'm sure I haven't convinced a single one to change their minds. It used to bother me, but it doesn't anymore. Eventually, some day, the world will change and they will too, or they will be left behind. Their reasons are their own - My favorite: "It doesn't make any sound, so it doesn't have a soul." ::)
-
Case in point... Engadget's post about the Empulse earlier today. I have been working on these people, but you have to just ignore the folks that just want to hear themselves complain... they are usually easy to spot though.
-
http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/19/brammo-empulse-electric-motorcycle-six-speed/ (http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/19/brammo-empulse-electric-motorcycle-six-speed/)
The article itself is rather benign, but the comments section is full of the mobs of uninformed or misinformed. Nice job fighting off the crazies, EB.
-
I don't understand why the children these days don't believe in the technology. Is it because it is soo different they are afraid of it. They still think ICE is the best for motorcycles. Do they love the sound or what? I am having a hard time talking sense into them. The Empulse R is here, in their faces and they make fun of it, like they never heard of it and won't give it a chance. ::)
I am 22 years old and I had a cbr600rr for 2 years. I sold it last August and It was an awesome bike! I had it dyno tuned and got the baddest exhaust ever, which was a two brothers exhaust pipe. I spent over roughly 12 grand on it. I thought it was the coolest thing in the world, although, my perspective changed while in college. I am majoring in biology and going to apply pharmacy school next year. I learned a lot in my required science courses that the cars are polluting the environment. That was enough to convince me that maybe we should change before it is too late. I told myself that electric is the way to go, although, this alone doesn't convince people. Some critics that I know have a chemistry degree are actually saying that the electric car's batteries are contributing more in pollution than gas vehicles. In my head, I thought this is ridiculous. But then I thought more about it and I always wondered, what are we going to do with the batteries when it goes out in ten years or so? Can we recycle it? Is it possible? Or is this just another chemist making up stuff that was invented by the oil companies?
-
I am 22 years old and I had a cbr600rr for 2 years. I sold it last August and It was an awesome bike! I had it dyno tuned and got the baddest exhaust ever, which was a two brothers exhaust pipe. I spent over roughly 12 grand on it. I thought it was the coolest thing in the world, although, my perspective changed while in college. I am majoring in biology and going to apply pharmacy school next year. I learned a lot in my required science courses that the cars are polluting the environment. That was enough to convince me that maybe we should change before it is too late. I told myself that electric is the way to go, although, this alone doesn't convince people. Some critics that I know have a chemistry degree are actually saying that the electric car's batteries are contributing more in pollution than gas vehicles. In my head, I thought this is ridiculous. But then I thought more about it and I always wondered, what are we going to do with the batteries when it goes out in ten years or so? Can we recycle it? Is it possible? Or is this just another chemist making up stuff that was invented by the oil companies?
The Tesla plan for dying batteries, and I'm sure this can apply to electric motorcycle battery packs as well, is to repurpose them as storage ballast for clean energy farms that have the problem that they produce electricity independently from demand and so they can either let it go to waste or store it for a light day...
-
Some critics that I know have a chemistry degree are actually saying that the electric car's batteries are contributing more in pollution than gas vehicles. In my head, I thought this is ridiculous. But then I thought more about it and I always wondered, what are we going to do with the batteries when it goes out in ten years or so? Can we recycle it? Is it possible? Or is this just another chemist making up stuff that was invented by the oil companies?
It is good to see that people are talking about conserving he environment -- after all, it would be very foolish if we replaced one problem with an even worse problem.
Yes, many batteries are very bad for the environment, but not all batteries. According to this (http://www.hybridcars.com/battery-toxicity.html) and this (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/hybrid-technology/hybrid-cars-cause-pollution3.htm) website, they say that lead acid batteries are the most harmful to the environment, nickle based are better, and lithium based are the least harmful.
All modern electric vehicle companies us lithium these days mostly because they need the high energy density that only lithium has been able to provide, but also because the recognize the need to have a battery that is not going to pollute the environment when it has outlived its usefulness.
The useful life for lithium car batteries may be quite a long time, because after they have spent many years inside the car, they they can spend even more time in second life uses (http://blog.betterplace.com/2011/02/before-recycling-electric-car-batteries-enjoy-a-second-life/). (flar pointed out Tesla's plan (http://www.treehugger.com/cars/heres-what-happens-to-a-tesla-electric-car-battery-at-the-end-of-its-life.html).)
Furthermore, it is possible to make batteries that are completely non-toxic. The CEO of BYD (a company that specializes in battery research) proved this by drinking battery liquid (http://green.autoblog.com/2009/04/14/wang-chuan-fu-byds-ceo-drinks-battery-fluid-to-prove-a-point/).
Yes, lead acid batteries are bad for the environment, but many people are aware of that and there are solutions available that are a lot more environmentally safe. Saying that the pollution produced by modern EVs (specifically their batteries) is worse than that produced by regular ICE cars (which, incidentally, all have a cheap and toxic lead acid battery) shows a lack of understanding of the current state of battery technology.
-
You know the saying, "don't argue with a fool, they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"? Yeah. Sometime the best course is to present information, answer questions from interested folks, and let the crazies go rant off in a corner : P [small]Not that I always follow that advice..[/small]
@nshortri Generally speaking, lithium batteries are almost entirely recyclable. The lithium salts are non-toxic and if the battery is not worth reusing in a secondary application (such as grid storage) then it can be recycled or disposed of in a landfill. You aren't allowed to throw away most other types of batteries, including lead-acid and most primary cells.
Cars generally produce more CO2 (due to consuming / combusting more gasoline), but ICE motorcycles produce FAR greater levels of other pollutants (NOx, particulate matter, etc) due to the EPA's hands-off regulatory stance. I'm in general a fan of limited government interference in markets, but pollution control is a fantastic example of "tragedy of the commons" .. and modern car pollution vs modern motorcycle absolutely demonstrates this.
-
Promotech's got it right.
First off the batteries at the end of their useful life in a transportation vehicles are not dead, they just have a reduced capacity. Most packs are limited to 80% DoD for EV use, and even less for HEV. Once the pack can no longer hold 80% of its original rated capacity (not usable or allowed usable) an owner would notice performance decreasing. This is the point where the consumer throws up their arms and says my battery has issues I want a new one! (reality is people will realize its not that big of a deal and keep driving for quite a bit longer on reduced range) As the model goes, the EV gets a fresh new battery, possibly with upgraded chemistry and the old battery then heads to its second life application. Second life applications are looking for cheap energy storage with high cycle life on shallow discharges. Lithium batterys to be more exact. They use these batteries until they are actually dead at which point the batteries are broken down back into their raw elements and recycled.
As far as car vs. motorcycle smog. Motorcycles are way worse due to near zero EPA regulation. You can also add all boats (before 2007 or 2008?), lawn mowers, snow mobiles, and anything else that's fun with no catalytic converter.
Now back to the haterade crowd. There are already EV bikes out there with way more power than an ICE could pack, but they are not production ready yet. As the performance trickles into the market, it will change peoples minds. Performance and run costs will sell the EV over any type of environmental adgenda.
-
Once the pack can no longer hold 80% of its original rated capacity (not usable or allowed usable) an owner would notice performance decreasing.
Is this really true for Lithium Ion batteries? Because one of the super cool things I love about my lithium ion batteries for my power tools (hand held drills, saws, etc) is that they seem to have a really steady power output, right until they are out of juice and just stop. It isn't like a Ni-cad battery where the tool runs slower and slower the less power there is in a battery.
I'm sort of expecting an experience more like my lithium ion tools, where power output won't change that much based upon charge and age and capacity. I'm not expecting performance to change all that much, I'm just expecting the battery indicator to show the battery gets used up faster, but the power at the throttle will remain the same.
I've done the math on my commute, and my worst case I can still get to work on just 50% battery capacity before I will have to do anything as drastic as replacing the battery. And based upon 77 miles/charge mixed driving, and 1500 charge cycles to 80% depletion, I'll die of old age before I need to replace a battery.
-
It might be fun to produce one of those "this is what X thinks Y does" Facebook meme pictures (http://jonathanbjorkskog.com/how-to-make-this-is-what-my-friends-thinks-i-do-pictures) with boxes involving the anthropomorphism of engines. What [X] thinks [Y] do:
X = ICE owner, IC engine, E engine, EV owner, the planet
Y = I, referring either to ICE engine or EV engine
Some suggestions for graphics - most ICE drivers think their engine simply provides thrust but does little else. In reality the ICE engine is probably most focused on keeping the pistons spinning and only occasionally feels some power draw as some of the power is directed to other purposes. Contrast with an EV engine where the engine literally only produces what is needed. How to depict that disconnect in some cute pictures? I'm guessing a picture of spinning pistons as the "What I think I do" for the ICE engine?
Another suggestion - driving needs a wide variety of power demands that are constantly shifting - Gas, coast, GasGasGas, brake, coast, maintain, coast, Gas, etc. An ICE engine tends to just want to sit and spin at its optimal envelope and then have you drain as much excess as you can, but it is never asked to do that, so it kind of wants to see a "power request" graph that is a straight line, but what it gets from a driver is a ridiculously random sawtooth. An EV engine tends to not care. (Maybe "driver thinks ICE wants sawtooth", "ICE wants straight line", "driver thinks EV wants pegged power ;)", "EV wants driver to smile"?)
Another suggestion - ICE has a floor of "power consumed" and when the "power requested" changes then it will always have a large loss, plus some lag in terms of once you get it spinning and then let off, the power consumed will still be relatively high compared to idle. Comparatively the EV's power consumed will track the power requested quite closely with only a small efficiency gap, even when you lift off at high RPMs. Also, include negative values to represent regenerative braking capabilities.
Or - this one is more "showing results" than "showing why the results happen" and so is more argumentative than demonstrative, but say that the planet thinks ICE engines simply burn the oil right out of the ground with a small tube funneling through them to their drive wheels representing how much energy actually makes it to their end product. It sees the EV at least harness most of that energy expenditure into a ballast, supplement it with other sources, then direct nearly 100% of the ballast into the drive wheels.
I'm not artist so I couldn't even begin to draw up any of those, but I thought I'd throw it out as a suggestion in case anyone wants to create a meme image to forward...
-
I'm sort of expecting an experience more like my lithium ion tools, where power output won't change that much based upon charge and age and capacity. I'm not expecting performance to change all that much, I'm just expecting the battery indicator to show the battery gets used up faster, but the power at the throttle will remain the same.
It depends how close they are to the C-rate limit.
Brammo has suggested that the 6.0 and 8.0 Empulse got nixed due to not being able to fully power the 40 kW motor, so it stands to reason that when the pack decays down to 8.0 kWh effective capacity that it probably will lose a bit of performance.
At least, that's how I think it would work : P
-
The fun part of this dead battery model is when you are at 80% capacity based off original capacity, now you can discharge a true 100%. At that rate the battery will start degrading exponentially faster.
In reality, people won't be driving their bike into the ground every single ride, and that cycle count will last for longer than most people will ever ride this bike.
1500 cycles at 77 miles range (combined) is 115k miles, how many other street bikes can make it that long without some major work?
-
Returning to EV haters for a second, I think that many motorcyclists really don't like change. That is why Harley Davidson does so well on the motorcycle market and has done very well for over 100 years. I think there are many motorcycle riders that worry about the sport changing and maybe having their ability to ride eventually limited by the government and forced to only ride electric. I don't think that would happen in their lifetimes, but you know how fear is. It tends to obscure the facts and breed paranoia.
-
maybe having their ability to ride eventually limited by the government and forced to only ride electric.
Yeah, I think that's definitely the source of most of the anti-EV vitriol. These are generally the same "drill baby drill" people that don't understand that oil is globally priced, and domestic production would at most add a few percent to global oil production.. and take 3+ years to from project start to production.
"The gubmint / Obama makes the oil expensive" (and in fairness, there was a lot of anti-Bush rhetoric 4-5 years ago in the same vein) .. and ignoring that we're reaching farther and farther and farther to get what oil we can. We'll never run OUT of oil.. but the oil companies wouldn't undertake incredibly expensive and risky oil excavation projects if there was anything easier left to tap.
-
Brammo has suggested that the 6.0 and 8.0 Empulse got nixed due to not being able to fully power the 40 kW motor, so it stands to reason that when the pack decays down to 8.0 kWh effective capacity that it probably will lose a bit of performance.
At least, that's how I think it would work : P
Would it be related to the number of cells needed to draw enough power for its performance? If so, then all cells degrading in capacity would not necessarily limit the amount of power they can collectively put out. In other words 10*N cells at 100% storage capacity can power it. 8*N cells at 100% capacity cannot. But, 10*N cells at 80% capacity could probably still power it. Otherwise, you would only be able to use the first 20% of the battery capacity, no?
Also, you say "fully power". Perhaps 6.0 and 8.0 could not hit 100MPH and they wanted to stick with that claim so they only provide the 10.0.
Look at the Tesla Model S:
- 40KWh battery can do 0-60 in 6.5s and tops at 110MPH
- 60kWh does it in 5.9s and tops at 120
- 85kWh does it in 5.6s and tops at 125
- performance model with 85kWh and high performance inverter does it in 4.4s and tops at 130
As the battery capacity increases really what is happening is they are giving you more banks of cells, not cells that have more energy in them. Because they have more banks they can draw more power in parallel and get more performance out of the same engine. Similarly, I don't think it's the capacity of the Empulse 6.0 and 8.0 that are holding them back, it is the number of modules across which they can distribute the load when they are hitting their performance numbers...?
-
Thank you all for the information on the batteries! The surprising thing about those batteries is that it has a very high use for the medical industry. I use a cochlear implant and I have two lithium ion rechargable batteries. I got the new processor back in 2008 and i am still using it after 4 years with the same 2 rechargable batteries. It is great batteries! I was just confused on what we are going to do with those batteries after their life ended and it calms me down when we can recycle it to use in farms.
I agree with other people that it is harder to change society's perspective to go toward the electric bike just because the people want that noisy harley davidson. I guess it is badass to see a harley revving up his dirty smoking full exhaust system. It will change soon enough when someone sees your new brammo empulse and go what is that? Hopefully it will be like the ipad and get everyone to buy electric vehicles.
-
I get a ton of questions about the Zero, and its design is a little bit plain. Someone caught me in the cafeteria @ lunch the other day with questions. Noone I knew, and I wasn't just getting off the bike; our campus has a few thousand people, maybe I'm becoming known as "that weird guy with the electric bike". I imagine the Empulse is going to get a lot more attention..
Battery-backed solar is a great use case for degraded lithium batteries, assuming they're still operational and efficient to recharge. Lead acid costs $200/kWh, or about $0.70/kWh-cycle (300 cycles). I'd love to get my hands on a degraded lithium pack (say 3x Enertia 3.1 @ 2.5 kWh remaining) @ $400/kWh, or about $0.40/kWh-cycle (1000 cycles).. more compact, better for the environment, less sag under load.
-
Speaking of IC motorcycles, I just finished reading the June issue of Motorcyclist magazine in which they test the Aprilia Tuono V4R APRC. It has a 3.9 gallon fuel tank (which uses premium fuel) and gets between 25 and 29 miles per gallon of gasoline. So owners of the Tuono will be riding faster, but not much (if any) further than the Empulse R. The Aprilia costs $15,000, but the model it was compared with in the test is the Ducati Streetfighter S, which gets between 34 and 37 mpg and costs $19,000.
Both of these bikes will be quite costly to operate and maintain. I'll bet the Empulse will save their owners a lot of cash, compared to each of these Italian stallions, no matter what the MSRP of the Empulse turns out to be.
-
So owners of the Tuono will be riding faster, but not much (if any) further than the Empulse R.
Because, presumably, when the tank goes dry it takes 5 hours to refill it? ;)
-
Yeah, but will the Empulse be supplied with an open clutch cover so we can hear it chatter when we take off from a light and rev it before releasing the lever?
I mean, let's get our priorities straight here!
-
Speaking of IC motorcycles, I just finished reading the June issue of Motorcyclist magazine in which they test the Aprilia Tuono V4R APRC. It has a 3.9 gallon fuel tank (which uses premium fuel) and gets between 25 and 29 miles per gallon of gasoline. So owners of the Tuono will be riding faster, but not much (if any) further than the Empulse R. The Aprilia costs $15,000, but the model it was compared with in the test is the Ducati Streetfighter S, which gets between 34 and 37 mpg and costs $19,000.
Both of these bikes will be quite costly to operate and maintain. I'll bet the Empulse will save their owners a lot of cash, compared to each of these Italian stallions, no matter what the MSRP of the Empulse turns out to be.
I must first say I'm the only one of my friends excited about the Brammo. I currently ride an RC51 with a 15/41 gearing change, I barely get 120 miles out of a tank or ~ 30mpg. I think no matter which way you go, you will spend a certain level of $ for transportation costs. Haters are going to hate because of a number of reasons, let me see if I can break it down:
Noise: "Mah harley sounds like a real bike" - I'll just put these in the old school supercharged musclecar group. There are tons of reasons a "loud" bike might be "better" than a silent one. Try an unpowered downhill ride on your current bike... see how much more in tune with everything you are! It's absolute bliss if you ask me, a different kind of bliss than an RC51 with Yosh carbon pipes. I literally can't wait to see some Empulses on the road. I can't imagine how awesome it would be in the mountains where you can hear everything, along with see it! But alas, some people will claim that louder is better for X reasons.
Cost: (rumored) 20k for an empulse R, holy cow expensive! Either you pay it now, or you pay it down the road in gas/oil costs. I bet if I run some math it's really more even than people think, just hard to choke down the initial payment, when it's easier to justify $15 in a tank of gas now and again.
Fun: Yes, it's hard to go on a multi-day trip, but who really does that on a sportbike anyway? Not many. The most I've done on my RC51 is 250 miles, and that was only twice! Every other trip is under 120 (or a tank of gas). I've heard of a guy doing a multi day trip on his S1000rr, even said it was fairly comfortable... but he's definitely out of the "norm".
Pollution: The rumor about batteries being less "green" than gas comes from the process to make those batteries. Right now, electricity is much cheaper to purchase than gas. You can bet if and when electric takes off, the cost will be normalized. Already there are states talking about an "electric" vehicle tax, based on how many miles you drive. This is to offset the same tax that is already built into the gas you buy. Or google how Li-Ion batteries are made and the up front pollution that offsets your gasoline pollution.
I think in the end it's going to be like everything else. People are going to have their own opinions, some will try and infuse theirs on you, and you will have to decide on your own what will work best for you. I think some people love to knock things down, as opposed to see how awesome something might be. Glass half empty, to half full. Me? I'm going to wait around a little bit till the initial cost comes down a little (or I get a giant bonus, or I'm the 1 in 1000) to get my Empulse. But I can't wait!
-
I think some people love to knock things down, as opposed to see how awesome something might be. Glass half empty, to half full. Me? I'm going to wait around a little bit till the initial cost comes down a little (or I get a giant bonus, or I'm the 1 in 1000) to get my Empulse. But I can't wait!
Sounds like a plan to me. And welcome to the forum, jonnyd76!
-
You can bet if and when electric takes off, the cost will be normalized. Already there are states talking about an "electric" vehicle tax, based on how many miles you drive. This is to offset the same tax that is already built into the gas you buy.
I would bet anything I own against a fuel cost normalization. Solar and wind provide an absolute ceiling on electricity costs, if we're willing to pay $0.25-0.30/kWh (2 to 2.5x national average) then we can completely switch over to renewable energy. I'm getting about 120 Wh/mile on my Zero, so $0.30/kWh is $3.60/100 miles or 100 mpg at current prices.
Take a look at our national energy inputs and outputs:
http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/diagram1.cfm (http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/diagram1.cfm)
Transportation consumes just over a quarter of our national energy budget. Battery EVs of course are really just a switch from petroleum energy to a mix of coal, nuclear, hydro, and natural gas energy; replacing a 25 mpg car with a 300 Wh/mi four-wheeled EV or a 50 mpg bike with a 120 Wh/mi two-wheeled EV additionally reduces BTU consumption by about 50%. (you can get the same BTU consumption by replacing a 25 mpg car with a 50 mpg car or a 50 mpg bike with a 100 mpg bike without changing the type of energy)
Conversion to grid-powered transport via battery EV will be slow as long as prices remain high; even if we're seeing hundreds of thousands of EVs sold per year as we approach Pres. Obama's million EV 2015 sky-pie target, there are still approximately 250 million registered vehicles in the US (though not all daily drivers). Switching 1% per year of the US transportation energy from petroleum to grid power will have a very negligible effect on total grid consumption; after 10 years we'd see a 2-3% increase in total grid energy consumption, but a 30% drop in the amount of oil we import from the Middle East and South America .. and the money we're sending to countries that hate the US.
If you'll permit some hand-waving, most of that growth in grid consumption should occur during overnight charges. Overnight charging can actually smooth out the grid power consumption and allow the grid to use more cheap base-load power (24/7) and less peaking power only used during the day.
As for road taxes, there's definitely talk of switching away from or supplementing the $0.18/gallon tax to alternative taxation. GPS-based taxation has been kicked around, other options are a flat tax or some type of annual odometer-based taxation. There's also talk of bumping up fuel taxes as overall petroleum consumption drops due to fewer miles being driven and more efficient cars.
I think the public as a whole will reject GPS-based taxation. A flat tax or binning mile-based tax (say < 2500 miles, 2500-5000 miles/year, 5000-10k miles/year, 10k-20k miles/year, etc) might work. I believe some states already have a flat annual tax in place for EVs .. that's the simplest approach.
-
I would bet anything I own against a fuel cost normalization. Solar and wind provide an absolute ceiling on electricity costs, if we're willing to pay $0.25-0.30/kWh (2 to 2.5x national average) then we can completely switch over to renewable energy. I'm getting about 120 Wh/mile on my Zero, so $0.30/kWh is $3.60/100 miles or 100 mpg at current prices.
Here is another site that breaks things down from worst case (small home install in a cloudy climate with zero subsidies) all the way to the best case (large industrial install in a sunny climate, pre-subsidy).
"the high solar condition industrial industry index was down to 15.15 cents per kWh in March 2012....Solar energy rebate programs have not been built into the data."
http://www.solarbuzz.com/facts-and-figures/retail-price-environment/solar-electricity-prices (http://www.solarbuzz.com/facts-and-figures/retail-price-environment/solar-electricity-prices)
At $0.15/kWh (sunny industrial production) solar would put you at 200 mpg. Pretty cool, and a huge downward pressure on electricity prices if they rise over $0.15/kWh over time.
As for road taxes, there's definitely talk of switching away from or supplementing the $0.18/gallon tax to alternative taxation. GPS-based taxation has been kicked around, other options are a flat tax or some type of annual odometer-based taxation. There's also talk of bumping up fuel taxes as overall petroleum consumption drops due to fewer miles being driven and more efficient cars.
I think the public as a whole will reject GPS-based taxation. A flat tax or binning mile-based tax (say < 2500 miles, 2500-5000 miles/year, 5000-10k miles/year, 10k-20k miles/year, etc) might work. I believe some states already have a flat annual tax in place for EVs .. that's the simplest approach.
Right now electricity is already taxed. As more electricity is used for transportation, a portion of those taxes that are already being collected should be earmarked for road construction. That is truly the simplest approach. All it takes is an ombudsman determining once a year roughly what percent of electricity goes towards charging electric vehicles, and then take that percent of taxes already collected on electricity and ear-mark those dollars in the budget to go for road work.
-
I can't imagine how awesome it would be in the mountains where you can hear everything, along with see it!
On my daily commute, I have a decent sized downhill stretch of interstate where I can maintain speed without using any gas on my motorcycle. I keep pulling the clutch in and letting my rpm's drop to 750 every day on that stretch just to get a taste of what riding without all the roar and buzz of a V-twin SV650 engine. I have to say, it is a really, really cool feeling. I keep trying to push it a little further before letting the clutch out and going back to 5-6,000 rpm and having the drone and buzz come back.
Edit: Status change: now an "Empulse Guru". Just in time for the release! :D