Codyhatfield.me
Codyhatfield.me
✍️Write rieview ✍️Rezension schreiben 🏷️Get Badge! 🏷️Abzeichen holen! ⚙️Edit entry ⚙️Eintrag bearbeiten 📰News 📰Neuigkeiten
Tags:
19.9.2023 17:58twitter.com/thegeoweb… Sneak peek of our work to bring Geo Web content to @latticexyz MUD worlds: our Swift client is reading from...Sneak peek of our work to bring Geo Web content to @latticexyz MUD worlds: our Swift client is reading from MUD Tables deployed on OP Goerli.
— Geo Web (🌎, 🌐) (@thegeoweb) September 18, 2023
Up next is a general Swift-MUD client for anyone to build on-chain Autonomous Worlds on iOS. DM us for access to our TestFlight build! pic.twitter.com/sucNmkgQR0
Finally got around to deploying a Helm Chart repo that enables deploying a new OP Chain in Kubernetes. geo-web-project.github.io/op-chain-…
Thanks to Test In Prod for their work on op-node and op-geth. These were forked and modified to be used specifically for new OP chains.
21.8.2023 22:52Finally got around to deploying a Helm Chart repo that enables deploying a new OP Chain in Kubernetes....More complicated MUD data types are now working using native Swift decoding. Including dynamic strings and bytes.
Testing out cross-posting via ActivityPub and Bluesky using Micro.blog
31.7.2023 22:23Testing out cross-posting via ActivityPub and Bluesky using Micro.blogThis post originally appeared on the Geo Web Network blog
17.4.2023 00:00Augmented WorldsA common metric used when comparing how fast electric vehicles charge is how long it takes to charge from 20 to 80 percent of the battery capacity.
Let’s explore how well this metric may or may not help people understand which electric vehicles are more or less convenient to charge.
Having a metric measured in time is useful to other aspects of life that are already familiar to us.
We all have some concept of how long certain activities take and how it feels when time passes. If we are told a certain vehicle takes 15 minutes to charge, we can immediately compare that to other activities that take about that long, such as going to the restroom or getting a quick bite to eat.
This is simple and easy to conceptualize when being introduced to electric vehicle charging for the first time.
Some other metrics are measured in kilowatts (kW) and are very specific to electric vehicles. These can be useful when comparing electric vehicles to each other, but not so useful when comparing to other types of fuels.
Since this metric is measured in time, it is not specific to any type of fuel.
This metric attempts to be representative of how people charge while on a road trip.
It is common to arrive to a fast charger when around 20 percent state of charge. Fast charging will also start to slow down around 80 percent, which is usually plenty of range to reach the next charger and thus a great time to stop charging and be on your way.
This metric does not, however, put a vehicle’s range into account. Eighty percent capacity of one vehicle could be a very different capacity in another vehicle.
Say two vehicles both take 30 minutes to charge from 20 to 80 percent:
Which vehicle would you rather wait 30 minutes for?
There are many variables that affect how much power an electric vehicle receives at a given time.
Some vehicles have a fairly linear curve, with power being higher at a lower state of charge. Other vehicles have a weird, non-linear curve that is much less predictable. With these different curves, arriving at a charger with the same state of charge could result in very different charging experiences for different vehicles.
In practice, you will not arrive at exactly 20 percent state of charge and leave with exactly 80 percent state of charge every time. Sometimes it will take more time and sometimes it will take less time to actually charge than this metric.
2.9.2021 18:00Using 20 to 80 Charging Time to Evaluate Electric VehiclesA common metric that is used when comparing how fast electric vehicles charge is the average charging power. This is measured in kilowatts (kW) and is usually the average power a vehicle receives when charging from 20 to 80 percent using a DC fast charger.
Let’s explore how well this metric may or may not help people understand which electric vehicles are more or less convenient to charge.
A single number is used for each vehicle and the scale is linear. 200 kW is twice as fast as 100 kW. This is simple for the human mind to understand.(/2021/09/02/using-maximum-charging)
Compared to some other metrics, the size of the vehicle’s battery does not matter.
Charging at 100 kW for ten minutes will result in the same amount of energy being added, regardless of the battery’s size and range.
Compared to the maximum charging power, using an average when charging from 20 to 80 percent is more representative of how people will charge their vehicles while on a road trip.
Most people will stop to charge on a long trip while they eat or use the restroom. They will arrive with different states of charge and stay for different amounts of time. These will all result in different charging powers being achieved in practice. Using an average can help better represent these different scenarios.
Unlike time, the size of the vehicle’s battery does not matter. and distance, power is not as familiar to many people. It can be difficult to put this metric in perspective with other concepts in our lives.
Even where power is familiar, it is hard to relate to it at this scale. An efficient light bulb may only use a few watts, but what the heck is 250 _kilowatts?
This metric does not, however, put a vehicle’s efficiency into account.
Two vehicles that charge at the same power for the same amount of time will have the same amount of energy added. This energy will result in a different amount of range for each vehicle depending on its efficiency.
An alternative metric that does put efficiency into account is range replenishing speed.
Average charging power also means nothing when comparing to how quickly an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle refuels.
This metric is limited to only comparing electric vehicles and not with alternative fuel vehicles such as gasoline or fuel cell.
The time it takes to charge from 20 to 80 percent, the size of the vehicle’s battery does not matter. and range replenishing speed are easier to compare with alternative fuels.
There are many variables that affect how much power an electric vehicle receives at a given time.
Some vehicles have a fairly linear curve, with power being higher at a lower state of charge. Other vehicles have a weird, non-linear curve that is much less predictable. With these different curves, arriving at a charger with the same state of charge could result in very different charging experiences for different vehicles.
A simple average does not capture this complexity. I have yet to find a metric that successfully does, but perhaps there is one that exists.
2.9.2021 18:00Using Average Charging Power to Evaluate Electric VehiclesA common metric that is used when comparing how fast electric vehicles charge is the maximum charging power. This is measured in kilowatts (kW) and is the maximum power a vehicle can receive while charging.
Let’s explore how well this metric may or may not help people understand which electric vehicles are more or less convenient to charge.
A single number is used for each vehicle and the scale is linear. 200 kW is twice as fast as 100 kW. This is simple for the human mind to understand.
Compared to some other metrics, the size of the vehicle’s battery does not matter.
Charging at 100 kW for ten minutes will result in the same amount of energy being added, regardless of the battery’s size and range.
Unlike time and distance, power is not as familiar to many people. It can be difficult to put this metric in perspective with other concepts in our lives.
Even where power is familiar, it is hard to relate to it at this scale. An efficient light bulb may only use a few watts, but what the heck is 250 kilowatts?
This metric does not, however, put a vehicle’s efficiency into account.
Two vehicles that charge at the same power for the same amount of time will have the same amount of energy added. This energy will result in a different amount of range for each vehicle depending on its efficiency.
An alternative metric that does put efficiency into account is range replenishing speed.
Most vehicles actually rarely achieve their maximum charging power. Even if they do achieve it, it is only for a brief amount of time.
The average charging power and time it takes to charge from 20 to 80 percent are alternative metrics that try to acknowledge this limitation.
Maximum charging power also means nothing when comparing to how quickly an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle refuels.
This metric is limited to only comparing electric vehicles and not with alternative fuel vehicles such as gasoline or fuel cell.
The time it takes to charge from 20 to 80 percent and range replenishing speed are easier to compare with alternative fuels.
2.9.2021 18:00Using Maximum Charging Power to Evaluate Electric VehiclesA metric used when comparing how fast electric vehicles charge is range replenishing speed. This is usually measured in the average amount of range gained per minute while charging from 20 to 80 percent.
The first I heard of range replenishing speed was from InsideEVs. They have great fast-charging analysis on many electric vehicles with a wide range of metrics used and is currently the best (only?) place to find tests measuring this metric.
While perhaps not as simple as just time, it is also relatively simple and familiar to understand a rate over time.
Time and distance are both familiar concepts that we use in other parts of our lives. Understanding how much distance is gained over time is an additional, but subjectively simple step.
Two vehicles that charge at the same power for the same amount of time will have the same amount of energy added. This energy will result in a different amount of range for each vehicle depending on its efficiency.
This metric is simply the average charging power multiplied by the vehicle’s efficiency.
Compared to some other metrics, the size of the vehicle’s battery does not matter and is taken into account.
This means you do not need to look at battery size in addition to this metric when evaluating a vehicles charging experience.
Some other metrics are measured in kilowatts (kW) and are very specific to electric vehicles. These can be useful when comparing electric vehicles to each other, but not so useful when comparing to other types of fuels.
It may not be as easy as time, but replenishing speed could be compared to other fuels and not just electricity.
There are many variables that affect how much power an electric vehicle receives at a given time.
Some vehicles have a fairly [linear curve][3], with power being higher at a lower state of charge. Other vehicles have a [weird, non-linear curve][4] that is much less predictable. With these different curves, arriving at a charger with the same state of charge could result in very different charging experiences for different vehicles.
This metric has the same downfall as average charging power and does not capture this complexity.
There are several standards around the world for determining the efficiency and range of vehicles. No matter the fuel type, efficiency depends on a number of variables that are difficult to test and control across all vehicles.
Since replenishing speed depends heavily on efficiency, it shares all of its unpredictability as well.
2.9.2021 18:00Using Range Replenishing Speed to Evaluate Electric VehiclesIn 2019 I wrote a couple of posts about a road trip I took in my Tesla Model 3.
31.8.2021 00:00EV Road TripMy main goal in purchasing my Tesla Model 3 a couple of years ago was to reduce the amount of carbon emissions I contribute to the atmosphere. Driving an electric vehicle almost always means emitting less carbon emissions. However, there are certain scenarios, such as carpooling and public transit, that can still result in lower emissions.
One common scenario is when I have a choice between riding as a passenger in an ICE (internal combustion engine) car or driving myself in my EV (electric vehicle). So, the question is: which of these would result in lower carbon emissions?
Let’s do some quick math to try and come up with an estimate.
The key word here is additional. The vehicle is assumed to be driving no matter if I am in it or not. So how much carbon emissions results from the additional weight I would add to the car? First, some assumptions:
We can first calculate how much emissions that car would have if I was not riding in it.
1/24 gallons per mile * 8.89 = 0.370 kg of CO2 per mile
Then, we can calculate how much emissions it would have if I was riding in it.
24 MPG * (1 - 0.01)^(68 kg / 45) = 23.638
1/23.638 gallons per mile * 8.89 = 0.376 kg of CO2 per mile
The difference between those is the additional carbon emissions.
0.376 - 0.370 = 0.006 kg of CO2 per mile
Now let’s compare that to the carbon emissions from driving an EV by myself, with no other passengers. The key point here is that this car is assumed to not be on the road if I choose to carpool with the ICE car. So we will take the entire car’s weight into consideration.
Since EVs do not emit any carbon emissions directly, we will compare the carbon emissions from the electricity grid that is used to charge the car.
The lifetime efficiency of my Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD is around 0.257 kWh/mile (kWh -> kilowatt hours, the same unit that is shown as the usage on your electricity bill). The vast majority of miles are from me driving by myself with no additional weight, so this seems like a good number to use.
This is the tricky one. The answer here depends on where you get your electricity from. The amount of emissions varies quite drastically depending on the geographic region, so we will look at multiple examples.4
The first example is my home state of Washington5, which emits a total of 0.089 kg of CO2 per kWh.
0.089 * 0.257 kWh/mile = 0.023 kg of CO2 per mile
So what results in more carbon emissions? In this case, it depends greatly on where your electricity is coming from. As you can see in the chart below, there are plenty of countries where riding in the ICE car has less emissions, and also some countries where riding in the EV has less emissions. There is even Iceland, which emits zero carbon emissions from electricity generation.
As time goes on, all these countries will start to move further down on this chart as they transition to renewable energy, without EVs needing to change anything. Meanwhile, the ICE car will not be emitting any less emissions in the future than it did on its first mile.
Most of the energy for my car comes from the public utility Seattle City Light. Over 90 percent of their energy comes from renewable sources (mostly hydro), and the small emissions they do generate is offset every year. 5 Because of this, I try to choose driving alone in my EV over carpooling in an ICE car as much as possible.
Although I find in most situations people would much rather ride with me anyway.
Taken from the average fuel economy of a typical US car ↩
https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php ↩
All these examples use data from Carbon Footprint, which aggregates data from various global sources. ↩
Most of my electricity comes from Seattle City Light, which is far cleaner than the rest of the state and country. I could not easily find data to use on Seattle City Light, so I stuck with the entire state of Washington. ↩
Update 2020-04-07: This has now been built into a single command line tool. Installation and usage can be found on Github.
There are various reasons you may want to backup your iOS device somewhere other than iCloud.
This post describes how to perform manual backups of your iOS device over USB or WiFi to a local IPFS node via the command line.
Script available: A script is available on Github that automates much of this process.
*This has only been tested on Mac, but the dependencies should work across all platforms
IPFS Desktop is what I use to run a local IPFS. But there are many other ways to do this as well.
IMPORTANT: It is highly recommended to use a private IPFS node. Following this tutorial will encrypt your backup, but it will not encrypt metadata for your backup. This metadata contains potentially sensitive information, including the phone number and list of apps installed on your device. See this issue for more information.
Ensuring your IPFS node will only connect to peers that you trust will prevent this unencrypted metadata from being available to others on the public IPFS network. For more information about private networks, see this.
You can simply generate a swarm key
go get github.com/Kubuxu/go-ipfs-swarm-key-gen/ipfs-swarm-key-gen
ipfs-swarm-key-gen > ~/.ipfs/swarm.key
And remove all peers from the bootstrap list
ipfs bootstrap rm --all
This will create a private network where your local node is the sole member. In future tutorials, I will show how this network may be expanded so your backups may be stored on multiple computers that you own.
The only dependency needed is libimobiledevice, a cross-platform library that enables communication with iOS devices.
The easiest installation method for macOS is using Homebrew. This package has not had a formal release for quite some time. I recommend installing from the latest HEAD to avoid issues that have been fixed.
brew install libimobiledevice --HEAD
If the Homebrew solution does not work for you on macOS or you are installing on Linux or Windows, you will need to compile the package from source. Build instructions can be found here.
At the time of writing, HEAD does not support performing backups over WiFi. I have opened a PR with a simple change to enable this. If this is still not merged and you would like to use WiFi, try building from this fork.
Once you have installed libimobiledevice, the first step is to see if your device can be discovered.
idevice_id -l -n
This will search and list the device identifiers for all devices connected via USB or WiFi.
If you have never connected this device to your computer, you may need to pair it first. See if the device is already paired by running
idevicepair -u $DEVICE_UDID validate
If it is not paired, initiate the pairing process
idevicepair -u $DEVICE_UDID pair
You should see a dialog show up on your device asking to “trust this computer”. Choose “Trust” and enter in your passcode if prompted.
If you need to distinguish between multiple connected devices, try getting more info about a device using ideviceinfo. For example,
ideviceinfo -u $DEVICE_UDID -k DeviceName
will print out the device name.
Before performing a backup, it is highly recommended to enable encryption.
idevicebackup2 -u $DEVICE_UDID encryption on -i
You should be prompted to enter a password for the backup. This encryption is using the standard iTunes backup encryption provided by Apple. See the Apple Platform Security Guide for more details.
We will now perform the backup to the local filesystem. You will need to specify a BACKUP_PATH. There are two different methods here to choose from:
BACKUP_PATH temporarily and copy to IPFS as blocks (slower)BACKUP_PATH permanently and add to IPFS via filestore (faster)Option 1 is a simple solution that uses the normal IPFS usage patterns you are probably familiar with. However, this will result in the entire backup being saved to the local filesystem and then copied into IPFS. I have found performance significantly increases if you use the filestore instead.
Option 2 uses the filestore, an experimental feature that allows IPFS to reference files being added instead of copying them. Because we are dealing with such large files, this will significantly improve performance. However, be aware that the backup must live somewhere permanently on the local filesystem. If these files are modified in any way, things will break.
You can enable the filestore by making a change to your IPFS config:
ipfs config --json Experimental.FilestoreEnabled true
Now, perform the backup
idevicebackup2 -u $DEVICE_UDID backup $BACKUP_PATH
This may take some time.
Once the backup is complete, we can now add it to IPFS. As mentioned previously, there are two options.
Copy the backup to IPFS
ipfs add -r "${BACKUP_PATH}/${DEVICE_UDID}"
Clean up the temporary backup
rm -r $BACKUP_PATH
Add the backup to the IPFS filestore using --nocopy
ipfs add --nocopy -r "${BACKUP_PATH}/${DEVICE_UDID}"
Once the backup has been added to IPFS, I find it useful to keep track of different backups using MFS (Mutable File System). I keep a directory called ios-backups at the root of MFS.
ipfs files mkdir /ios-backups
This directory contains a list of files named by DEVICE_UDID with the contents being the CID of the latest backup for that device.
echo "${CID}" | ipfs files write --create /ios-backups/${DEVICE_UDID}
If you have any issues or questions, feel free to reach out and create an issue.
Also check out Github to find a script that automates most of this process.
25.3.2020 08:44Backup Your iOS Devices to a Private IPFS NodeHealth Exporter 1.1.0 is now released on the App Store.
This release allows you to export multiple data types at once into a single CSV file.
Health Exporter is a simple iOS application that allows you to export iOS health data to a CSV file. See more details here.
27.2.2020 08:54Health Exporter 1.1.0 ReleasedThis post originally appeared on Medium
Let’s talk about RSS. You may have heard of it or seen it appear across the web. Perhaps you have always wondered what it is, or perhaps you already know all about it. No matter which it is, I want to talk about why you should care about RSS and why we should learn from it.
RSS is a web feed format that is used to distribute content across the web.1 Two types of content that are commonly distributed over RSS include blog feeds and podcasts.
If you have ever listened to a podcast, that episode you listened to was most likely distributed using RSS. You may even be reading this post using RSS.
When content is consumed from the web, there are two players that matter: content producers and consumers. RSS empowers both and gives producers control over how they produce and distribute their content, while also giving consumers control over how they consume content.
With RSS, content producers can own their content while still successfully reaching consumers. Unlike other media industries, there is no need to give up ownership in order to increase distribution. A content producer can host their content wherever and however they like. This could be on their own servers under their own domain. Or maybe they own the domain but use a hosting service to host their content. Perhaps they use a large content management system or a statically generated site. No matter what they choose, they can simply publish an RSS feed to distribute their content to the open web.
RSS allows consumers to consume content however they prefer, without having to give up the convenience of discovering content. In other words, it allows consumers to bring their own user agent. The “user agent” in this case is an RSS reader or podcast player. Any user agent can be used to access the content from any content creator. Do you not like the changes your podcast player made in the latest update? Switch to another one while still being able to listen to the same podcasts. Did the RSS reader you were using for years announce they were stopping future development? Move your feeds to a different reader and pickup right where you left off.
The consumer can use whatever user agent they prefer and the content producer can produce their content however they like, without either caring what the other is doing. Both players have total control over how they use the web, while still being able to discover and connect to one another.
RSS is the example I use when describing how the web should work. Just as useful is having a counter-example for how the web should not work.
My counter-example is Medium. This is ironic (or maybe hypocritical?) since I am producing this post using Medium and there is a high chance you are consuming this post using Medium.2 Nevertheless, I hope you can see why Medium takes away control from both of us.
For content producers, Medium is both a writing tool and publishing platform. Producers must use the Medium editor in order to publish their content. Sure, we can write drafts using any tool we like, but eventually every post must be published using their editor. This means producers do not have full control over how their content is created and shown. My current frustration is the lack of support for footnote linking in Medium.3 If you have ever used the Medium editor, you may think it works just fine for you; until it doesn’t. I also do not own my content that is published to Medium. What happens if Medium goes away? What happens if they break links to my post?
As consumers, Medium takes away control over how you consume and discover content. There is a lot of great content on Medium. But, how can you discover and consume this content? You most likely are using the Medium website or mobile app. Today, Medium has support for subscribing to a blog using an RSS feed. But, what happens when they remove this functionality?4 What happens when they add a paywall? How do you discover content that is not on Medium? What about the content producers that do not want to publish on Medium?
The more content producers that use Medium, the more it pushes out consumers who do not. The more consumers that use Medium, the more it pushes out content producers that do not. This is not an open web. This is a closed web.
RSS is not perfect or even close to being perfect. And neither is the open web. But, I hope you can see how we can learn from RSS to build and use the web we want. For me, RSS is the best example to describe to others how I believe the web should work. No matter what your role is in the web, think about what you want the web to be. And maybe think about using RSS as your example, too.
As a consumer, think about supporting independent content creators. Does the platform you use to consume their content support them? If not, why not? Think about the reasons and tradeoffs being made when you use that platform.
As a content creator, think about the ownership of your content. Do you really own the content you are producing? Does the platform you use empower and give you control over your content? If not, think about why you use that platform? What benefits does it provide?
As a developer, think about why RSS has been successful. Why have podcasts been so successful while blog feeds are struggling to keep up with other platforms like Medium? How can this pattern be improved and applied to other areas of the web?
If you are just learning about RSS and want to start supporting it more, I encourage you to checkout different RSS readers and podcast players. Some RSS readers I use are NetNewsWire and Reeder. My main podcast player is Overcast. A quick web search will bring up many different options.
Atom is another web feed format. Personally, I use the term RSS even when what I am talking about applies to both. Just note they are different formats that try to accomplish the same thing. ↩︎
This post also exists on my personal blog. However, this Medium post is the canonical link. Medium has support for canonical links to make sure this pattern does not harm content discovery and search engines. To be fair, Medium has many tools today that play fair with the open web. But, what is the net effect? ↩︎
Isn’t it annoying to have to scroll back and forth between footnotes? Thanks for coming down here anyway! ↩︎
Did you know Twitter and Facebook used to support RSS? Hmm. ↩︎
This post is part of a series of posts about a recent road trip I took in my Tesla Model 3. You can see a list of all posts in the series here.
The assumption most people make when learning someone has gone on a long road trip in an EV is that there must have been a lot of planning involved. They imagine spending a few hours laying out the exact route ahead of time. Every stop to charge must be pinned on a map and printed out, right? And if you deviate from the route, you will most definitely run out of charge and be stranded? Once you are on the route, it must be stressful? Whatever you do, do not take a wrong turn!
Planning is definitely required. The amount of planning is more than an internal combustion engine (ICE) car. However, once you have gone on a few trips it is really not that stressful, nor does it take much extra planning time. There are two main steps I take on a trip that is more than 300 miles:
The first step is pretty straightforward. I like to use A Better Routeplanner to check routes beforehand. Tesla also has their own trip planner as well as the in-car navigation. With a Long Range Model 3 (310 miles on a single charge) and the Tesla Supercharging Network, it is rare to find a route in the US or Europe that is not possible to drive without stopping for an impractical amount of time. There are still a few routes that are impractical, however. Mainly in the Dakotas, Northern Montana, and Central Canada. Tesla has spent years deploying the Supercharging Network with over 1,500 stations. They will continue to expand it for years to come, both to increase capacity and eliminate those impractical routes.
Once I know the trip is possible and practical, I am done planning until the trip starts. I do not bother planning each and every stop. Where I stop really depends on how hungry I am, what time of day it is, or how tired I am. These are the same as any road trip. The only planning I do during the trip is deciding what my next stop will be before departing from a charging station. This is mainly to make sure I always leave a charging station with enough charge to reach the next. The in-car navigation makes it pretty difficult for this to happen. It knows where you are trying to go, how much charge you currently have, and can predict fairly accurately how much energy you will use while driving. It will warn you if you try to leave without enough charge, and will even tell you how much longer to wait before it is safe to leave for the next stop. As the charging network grows, this will become less of an issue. Soon, you will be able to decide where to stop as you are driving, similar to waiting until the gas light comes on before thinking about where to find the nearest gas station.
Ask yourself, when driving for 45 hours across four days, how many times will you stop and for how long?
On my road trips I normally stop to either go to the bathroom or eat a meal. Bathroom breaks are pretty quick: around five minutes. Stopping to eat varies, but is usually around 30 minutes. I prefer to make some stop every 1.5 to 2 hours. Most of those would be bathroom breaks and every five hours would be a meal. The cycle of stops would look something like this:
What would a 45-hour drive look like?
01:45, 03:15, 06:45, 08:15, 11:45, 13:15, 16:45, 18:15, 21:45, 23:15, 26:45, 28:15, 31:45, 33:15, 36:45, 38:15, 41:45, 43:15
05:00, 10:00, 15:00, 20:00, 25:00, 30:00, 35:00, 40:00
So for a 45-hour drive, that is approximately 26 stops for a total length of 5.5 hours.
But, what happens if I am driving an electric car? Charging is slow, so I need to stop for much longer, right?
Most people I talk to assume that charging an electric car is just like filling a car with gas, only it takes much longer. This is the intuitive way to think: compare a new, unknown experience with a familiar experience that seems similar. On a long road trip in an ICE car, for example, you would drive along until your tank is low, quickly stop to fill it up, and continue on your way. It is so fast to fill up that the total amount of time you spend getting gas is negligible.
When and how you charge an electric car on a road trip is different. A large reason is because charging is much slower mile-for-mile than filling a gas tank. We just looked above at how long we would stop on a 45-hour road trip. This stopping does not include the time to get gas because, again, that is negligible. However, the time spent charging an EV is not negligible, so we should keep track and add the time spent charging as well, right? Let’s look at this at a fundamental level. When not driving, either:
Here’s an idea: instead of stopping to only charge or only eat, let’s stop to charge and eat at the same time. Sounds simple, right? If it is so simple, I encourage you to think about why the number one question I have been asked after going on my trip is: “how long did you have to stop and charge?” Nobody asks, “how long did you stop and eat for?” For the most part, they share the same answer.
This is the fundamental idea that Tesla Superchargers are based on.
Stop along the world’s fastest charging network while you grab a quick bite to eat.
They are located between urban areas and nearby restaurants for you to stop and eat. The charging speed is extremely fast compared to typical charging situations at home (up to 80x faster than a 120v outlet). So, how do they affect road trips? Well let’s take a look at the 45-hour drive I just did.
As you can see, using superchargers makes road trips for EVs fairly close to ICE cars. Interestingly, the number of stops I took was much less than what I projected it to be in an ICE car. Some of this can probably be attributed to the fact I stopped and charged overnight. The total time spent charging was about 18 percent longer than the estimated time to stop with an ICE car. And this is only getting better.
I acknowledge there are a lot of assumptions when estimating the stopping time for an ICE car. This number could vary quite a bit from what I calculated. A better way to look at this is to compare the amount of time required to charge against the amount of time needed to stop. The difference between these is the time spent waiting to charge.
(Time spent charging) - (Time needed to stop) = Time waiting to charge
This is the time that really matters.
I was originally going to try and measure this time during my trip, but I found it difficult and distracting from the trip itself. The best I could come up with for “time needed to stop” is the estimate above: 5.5 hours.
6.5 - 5.5 = 1.0 hours waiting to charge
While I do not have any hard data to back this up, it feels about right from my experience.
The big remaining question is: what will it take for this number to reach zero? There are two major improvements I see that, if implemented, will make this number zero or less.
From my data, bathroom breaks had:
Tesla has announced the next iteration of superchargers will allow a Long Range Model 3 to charge 75 miles in five minutes. That is an average of 900 miles per hour over five minutes. If all the superchargers I used at bathroom breaks had this rate of charge, the average charging time would have been approximately 6 minutes. In total, this would have saved 1 hour and 10 minutes over the entire trip.
If you remember from above, the estimated time spent waiting to charge was 1 hour. We are now below zero.
(6.5 - 1.16 saved from faster bathroom breaks) - 5.5 = -10 minutes waiting to charge
Of course, the rate above only happens in the ideal scenario. There are a few factors that can affect charging speed. The first factor I experienced quite often last winter was having a cold battery. If the battery is too cold, it cannot accept as high of a charging input. However, this has recently been addressed with a feature called “On-Route Battery Warmup” that was announced alongside V3 Supercharging. Teslas will now use excess heat from the motor to warm the battery slightly before arriving at a Supercharger station. Tesla claims this decreases the average charging time by 25 percent. This was the second trip since I received this feature, and I can certainly tell the difference. Just by downloading a free, over-the-air update, my car now charges 25 percent faster at all Supercharger stations. There was no trip to the service center and no purchase required.
The largest remaining factor that affects charging speed is sharing a charger with a nearby car. Many people do not realize this, but there is actually only one charger for every two charging stalls at a Supercharger station. Each charger currently has a maximum power output of 150 kW, not each stall. This means if a car is charging in each stall they will share that power.
I experienced this a couple of times on my trip and it was definitely noticeable. For some part of the charge I had to share power with another vehicle at both Rock Springs, WY and Ritzville, WA. The average charging speed at Ritzville got as low as 191 miles per hour. If I had a dedicated charger, I could have saved 16 minutes of charging time at a single stop.
The great news is V3 Supercharging is solving this problem as well. Every stall will have a dedicated charger capable of up to 250 kW. No sharing with a neighboring car and no worrying about which spot to park in. That means short, bathroom breaks will have a consistent, fast charge no matter how busy the station.
Supercharging already makes road trips in an EV very comparable to ICE cars. With a little more planning and slightly longer stops, EV road trips are just as convenient. The continuing expansion of new locations along with V3 Supercharging are the last steps needed to make EV road trips as simple as the trips we have all taken in ICE cars.
Of course, they are just a little more fun, too.
Interested in seeing the raw data from my road trip? Check it out here.
Questions or suggestions? Feel free to DM me on Twitter @codynhat.
23.9.2019 19:35EV Road Trip: ChargingUpdate: This post is part of a series of posts about a recent road trip I took in my Tesla Model 3. You can see a list of all posts in the series here.
I recently drove a 2700 mile road trip alone with my electric vehicle: a Tesla Model 3. Many people have asked me why I would want to drive from Seattle, Washington to Steamboat Springs, Colorado. Even my own family members chose flying over riding with me. Someone even asked if the gas was more expensive than a plane ticket 😏.
There is quite a bit of information and opinions out there about electric vehicles. I have had my Model 3 for almost a year and many people have asked me questions about my experience. People are always very curious, yet the questions they ask tell me that most people do not know enough about electric vehicles. Even with all the information out there people are having their fears blown way out of proportion, are being misled, and even have outright false information.
This is why I chose to drive 2700 miles instead of buying a plane ticket. We are all overwhelmed with information these days. Information coming from the first-hand experience of someone you know will be more memorable than misleading articles you see online. I hope to share my experience with the people I know, so they may start asking different questions. Our planet and future generations depend on it.
There is, of course, another reason I deciding to pass on the plane ticket. Electric vehicles are just fun to drive. There is no other way to put it. I would choose driving my car over any other form of transportation in almost any scenario.
The questions people ask are always about common concerns with electric vehicles. They never ask about the benefits. What I have come to realize is most people do not know what the benefits are, yet even realize they exist. The pros-and-cons list in people’s heads looks something like this:
This is completely normal. Electric vehicles are new and different. We are scared of what is different and tend to focus on it. People were skeptical of the original iPhone because it didn’t have a keyboard. Whoa, different. Scary. Does anyone remember using a phone with a physical keyboard?
Electric vehicles are currently seen as a compromise. They are better for the environment, but I have to give up a lot to have one, right? Well, let’s spend some time looking at that other list that people tend to forget.
More specifically, I would like to share some benefits I experienced throughout my road trip, many of which I experienced for the first time.
I will start by getting this out of the way. Most people I talk with understand this benefit pretty well. In fact, most see it as basically the only benefit. Nevertheless, it is always great to see some real-world data. How much cheaper is an EV road trip compared to the same road trip in a internal combustion engine (ICE) car?
We will start by estimating the cost of driving 2700 miles in a comparable ICE car. Let’s start with the following assumptions:
With those values, driving 2700 miles would cost about $275 with a cost per mile of $0.10.
2700 miles / 28 miles per gallon = 96.4 gallons of gas
96.4 gallons * $2.85 = $275
Looking at the data from my road trip, the total charging cost came to $98 with a cost per mile of $0.04.
This comparison is not perfect, but gives us a good idea about the difference in cost. Keep in mind that cost will vary depending on how you drive and the price of fuel. The cost of electricity at Tesla Superchargers varies by location at a state-wide level and has occasional price adjustments.
Tesla has a useful calculator on their website for comparing the cost of supercharging. There are also great tools for estimating the cost of an EV trip; my favorite being A Better Routeplanner.
Driving through mountain passes in an electric car is one of the best driving experiences I have ever had. Much of this is due to regenerative braking.
Every manufacturer of hybrid and fully-electric vehicles implements regenerative braking differently, so it is hard to generalize the experience across all EVs. The basic idea is that an electric motor in your vehicle can also act as a generator. When you want to slow down, this generator will start to convert the kinetic energy of your moving vehicle into electrical energy to charge the battery, slowing down the vehicle in the process. The “when you want to slow down” is very different across vehicles. Some require the driver to use the brake pedal, a certain gear setting, or a stalk on the steering wheel.
In a Tesla, the only vehicle with regenerative braking that I have experience driving, all regenerative braking is controlled by the accelerator pedal. When you let off the accelerator, regenerative braking will be applied instead of letting the car coast. This allows you to precisely control the speed of the car by only using the accelerator pedal. The only time I use the brake pedal is when I come to a complete stop at intersections and when I need to slow down in a hurry.
So, how is this related to driving through mountain passes? Well, whenever you drive down a mountain or large hill in a ICE car, how do you drive differently? Maybe you downshift to lighten the load on your brakes? Perhaps you just keep your foot on the brake pedal, switching between coasting and braking throughout the descent?
For my car, the experience driving down a hill is the same as any other. No shifting, coasting, or even using the brake pedal. All I have to do is use the accelerator pedal to control precisely what speed I want to go. And thanks to regenerative braking, I do not even need to use the brake pedal when going down a steep mountain pass. I just let off the accelerator a little more than normal and that is it. Not only is an EV not using any energy when driving downhill, but it is actually gaining energy by recharging the battery. This often happens over long distances and without ever using the brake pedal.
There was a point in my trip where I averaged -10 watt hours per mile of energy consumption over five miles of driving.
The projected range was a comical 999 miles. Seems like Tesla needs to replace that with an ∞ symbol.
Having precise control of downhill speed makes the driving experience down mountain passes a lot of fun. It was easy and safe to pass trucks and other slow vehicles, and fun to not have to slow down 20 miles per hour around corners thanks to the precise speed control and tremendous handling from the weight of the battery pack.
Of course, going up mountain passes was fun, too. Again, it was easy to precisely control speed going up steep mountain passes. This time due mostly to tremendous horsepower, torque, and acceleration from the two electric motors. No shifting, awkward automatic transmission, or increase in engine noise. It really does not even feel like you are going uphill. You may even wonder why everyone else on the road has started to slow down so much.
I love coming across signs like this. I have experienced this before a number of times when waiting for a draw bridge or taking a ferry. I also experienced this again on my trip.
Idling sucks. It is a waist of fuel and pollutes harmful toxins in our air, often near places with heavy traffic and many pedestrians. You can turn off your engine when sitting in traffic to avoid idling. Or maybe your car will automatically do it for you. Neither of these are perfect solutions. Ask yourself: when sitting in traffic why don’t you turn your engine off? Maybe it is too inconvenient? Are you worried about not being able to turn it on back in time? What if your engine fails to start again? Having your car automatically turn the engine off isn’t the best solution either. If it was so great, why doesn’t everybody use it?
One more thing you don’t need to worry about if you drive an electric car. There is no engine to start and nothing to “turn on”. It is just a simple switch from park to drive. If you are still worried about switching from park, just let the car “hold” the brake for you. It is just a simple tap on the accelerator to continue moving forward.
On my way home from Colorado, I decided to drive through Yellowstone National Park. Unfortunately, there was a major car accident in the park as I was making my way through. Traffic came to a dead stop while the main road was closed down to one lane for a couple of hours.
We would end up sitting in one spot for ten to fifteen minutes before moving up a little at a time. The waits were long enough that everyone decided to turn their engines off, but short enough that drivers had to pay attention and be ready to turn on their engines at any time. There were always those one or two cars that were not ready in time and backed up traffic for a few car lengths. It didn’t really matter in the end, but it is the small things that count! Since I could switch to drive at a moment’s notice, I usually waited until two or three cars ahead started moving before switching.
It was the evening and still a little warm out. Most cars would leave windows unrolled and engines off, including myself. As the evening went on, the bugs started to come out. Eventually, I rolled up my windows and turned on the air conditioning. No problem. For the ICE cars, they had to compromise. They could continue to keep windows unrolled and deal with the mosquitoes. They could also roll the windows up and turn on the air conditioning and engine. Or they could roll up the windows, leave their engine off, turn on the fans and risk running their battery down.
This may not matter to everybody, but the little things add up. And when you are already in a stressful situation, like stuck in traffic in the middle of nowhere, one less decision to make goes a long way.
This first post has gone over a few of the benefits of taking an EV on a road trip. I hope you have learned something new and are one step closer to being comfortable owning an EV.
There are a few other posts I have planned in this series that will cover some of the concerns surrounding electric vehicles, Tesla-specific features, and deep dives into nerdy, technical details. So stay tuned!
Questions or suggestions? Feel free to DM me on Twitter @codynhat.
21.8.2019 00:00EV Road Trip: For the Fun of ItThis post originally appeared on Textile’s Medium
27.2.2019 00:00AirSecure — Own Your One-Time PasswordsThis post originally appeared on Hiya’s Medium
31.7.2018 00:00WWDC 2018: A Guide to Siri Shortcuts