Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by l33t2328 1572 days ago
I’ve heard this many times, but I’ve never actually seen it cited.
4 comments

It's the reason why vehicles have a separate "city" and a "highway" fuel economy rating, since the former takes into account the expected stopping and starting you do in city traffic which you would not on an uncongested highway. It also makes intuitive sense if you understand physics: in a non-hybrid ICE vehicle, you impart energy from the engine into the wheels to accelerate the vehicle and you impart energy from the wheels into the brakes to decelerate, effectively wasting the original energy from the engine as heat. In hybrids and EVs some of that energy can be recovered by using the motor as a generator to recapture it in a useful form.
It's just basic newtonian physics, it takes energy to start and stop moving and a lot less to keep doing what you are doing.
Wouldn't it be more-so that with ICE vehicles you loose 100% of the kinetic energy as heat when stopping. With an EV you convert a portion back to the battery packs with regenerative breaking.
Correct, though many times costs are not just fuel - total ROI includes service cost, availability of replacement parts, insurance costs, etc - a NG car could cost more in fuel and still be cheaper for effectively forever depending on how the books land.
Here's a couple of good ones

- https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-01-9379.

- https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-1113

You'll want the second just to compare different speeds. Nice pretty graph to follow.

Not trying to be rude, but it's because it's intro Physics (F=m*a, with F coming from fuel, battery, or brakes), with an understanding that the process that generated that force has an efficiency that's less than 100%, mixed with a dash of intro Calculus (integral of force).
Respectfully, intro physics mentions nothing about ICE operating most efficiently at 50 MPH.