These are all second and third order effects.In pure mechanical terms, the amount of energy required to increase a vehicle’s velocity from A m/s to B m/s is the same regardless of the time taken. But, higher rates of acceleration will require the battery to deliver a higher electrical current, resulting in greater energy losses due to the internal resistance of the battery (loss = I x I x R, where I = current draw from the battery and R = internal battery resistance). In other words, if you sink your right boot into the carpet on the exit from every bend and away from every set of traffic lights, you are going to deplete the battery of more energy than if you had accelerated more gently.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
It was said quite early on that a third dose using the same carrier (an adenovirus for AstraZeneca) was possibly a bad idea. Reason being that you will have become sensitised to that - not just the Covid-19-alike bits. Hence more likely to suffer side effects. True or not, my instinct suggests a different vaccine for a booster.
I don't care what order the effects - in the real world, fast acceleration requires more energy. And affects the design and construction of vehicles able to achieve that rather than more sedate acceleration. From tyres, through sustainable current, battery cooling, and on and on.
I can put a figure on it. A couple of weeks after buying my new Nissan Leaf in 2018, I set out on a range test. Using only Normal mode, no Eco, I drove normally continuously using mainly B roads and known lanes but some short A road stretches, eventually getting within reach of home as the battery was getting low, but continuing on local loops until reaching the "Urgent Charge Now" dash message, meaning only 10 + 3 miles left to totally empty. At that point I'd covered 162 miles.
Just over a week later I repeated the test but this time driving aggressively. Here in the South East below London speed doesn't come into that since all the roads where speed could be possible are infected with speed limits to the degree that the majority of drivers just convoy at around 40 mph. And on the back lanes in the country the nature of them prevents high speeds. I used the same Normal mode and similar routes and as well as using aggressive maximum acceleration I managed to include two twisty climbs to the top of the North Downs. The terminal distance covered at the "Charge Now" point was 146 miles.
Both were warm Summer days, so the loss due to aggressive driving was 10%, but with the gain of a lot of fun doing the second test.
The big loss of course as Danidl says is from driving at speed such as on motorways and I've also tested that to a small degree. The difference in range between cruising at 65 or at 75 is quite dramatic, all out of proportion to the time saved.
.
he respects legal principles, he has shown courage in dealing with Labour's traditional anti-semitism, he's shown again and again at the HoC dispatch box that his arguments are well founded and reasoned.
I can see him slowly transforming Labour into an electable party.
I can see the difference in fuel consumption due to speed very clearly in my ICE car - its instantaneous, journey and average fuel consumption figures all being readily available. Yes, I agree, 65 to 75 makes a pronounced difference.
You could also have been speaking about Tony Benn on the benches or even Michael Foot at the dispatch box.
I'm depending on the Tories doing that.
.
the difference is neither Foot or Benn was electable in their time. They had oratory skills but that's all it was.
Look at who the Corbynites like to replace Starmer with: Angela Rayner.
Can you imagine PMQs with BJ and Rayner???
Rayner repeats the typical attacks that sound like a Corbyn's past performance with similar side stories.
She has nothing to add to the debate. Not even oratory skills.
Just a sitting duck.
"Sir Keir could have asked his questions to the PM via zoom, but Labour opted to give Ms Rayner an opportunity to stand in for him in the chamber, the BBC understands.
After Prime Minister's Questions, he tweeted praise of his colleague, describing her performance as "fantastic"."
.
Just as Brexit is fantastic...Of course, "fantastic" has many meanings, including "incroyable".
.
don't you start criticising our greatest achievement in the last 50 years.
.. How could that be viewed as critical ..I said Brexit was fantastic ... As in the stuff of fantasy... I am slowly learning this English trait of irony.