The safety thing is 100% true but only part of the picture.
E-bikes don’t need maximum energy density because they’re not gonna be used for long trips and are significantly lighter than cars and trucks.
China has many, many more electric vehicles than any other country and a ton of electricity production to run them. At some point it’s gonna become important to save the lithium batteries for the stuff that needs that high density power.
Maybe these better chemistries that will replace lithium are just around the corner. I certainly don’t count unhatched chickens.
E-bikes don’t need maximum energy density because they’re not gonna be used for long trips and are significantly lighter than cars and trucks.
Actually, ebikes need energy density the most. They tend to not have fast public charging. A lighter ebike has huge advantages, if only for maneuvering a couple of stairs or over a log, but also in suspension and handling + a huge difference in range/acceleration.
For an EV, you don’t need “race car” performance, and heavy chemistries are ok. Bike performance just gets a huge boost from relatively minor cost to improve weight/range and performance.
Sodium Ion batteries would be a better weight compromise than going to shitty old lead batteries. The new sodium batteries have almost no downsides but aren’t quite as energy dense as lithium types. So they might be great in a large vehicle that’s already going to be heavy, not so much in a smaller car. Saving the lithium stuff for smaller things is best (phones, laptops, etc)
EV’s already weigh more than most of their ICE equivalents. I don’t think we want even heavier chemistries in them. You could reduce the battery capacity to keep the weight down but then it’s a double hit to range.
Heck a Model S weighs more than a fair number of F150’s on the road.
Wait, what? I drain my battery every day. I need more energy density, not less. I do use my bike for long trips, driving a car during rush hour sucks, parking fees are insanely high and parking spots are rare. I sold my car and do everything by electric bike. But after 2 hours of cycling at 32km/h I need to charge.
I meant the ~300 mile ranges common in electric cars. That’s a long trip. Plus if the car rolls to a stop by the side of the road you just gotta have it towed or charge it up in the field somehow, electric bikes have pedals.
It sucks to pedal a heavy ass ebike but you can do it in a pinch to get where you need to go.
Yeah, have fun peddling a heavy as fuck ebike when you’re 1 hour 32km/h drive away from home. That’s over 2h of super heavy cycling because you’re going super slow.
I have. It sucks but it’s possible and because I live in a mountainous area I avoid that problem by using less assist so everything lasts longer.
The broader point I was trying to make is that If you’re trying to allocate the limited raw materials to the types of transport that benefit people the most then pushing e-bikes to lead acid makes a lot of sense. Yeah, the bikes could benefit from a more power dense battery, but they have backup pedals and ultimately their rider is the majority of the loaded bikes weight.
Electric cars and trucks weigh at least ten times what a person does and are generally used for longer distances than e-bikes so it makes more sense to use very energy dense batteries in them.
Again, I’m speaking from a position that recognizes the proliferation of electric vehicles in China and recognizes that the raw materials used to make lithium batteries are finite and in high demand, not from the position of trying to optimize the e-bike.
Just get rid of cars and fix proper biking and public transportation infrastructure. No need for that many cars, electric or not. Lithium is finite, the mines are horrible. But we’re getting nuclear diamond batteries soon, they are a massive upgrade.
China has very developed bicycle infrastructure and massive public transportation compared to almost anywhere else. There are fewer car owners per capita than other countries. It’s still a smart play to use the hand of state to take steps to allocate the more energy dense batteries to applications that require them.
As I said before: Maybe these better chemistries that will replace lithium are just around the corner. I certainly don’t count unhatched chickens.
It’s heavy and bursty. It’s really not great for sustained energy discharge, which is why it’s used as a starter and not for hybrid engines at runtime.
I’m hoping sodium ion takes over the ebike market. It’s less energy dense then the very best lithium batteries, but most ebikes aren’t using the very best lithium batteries, anyway. They’re cheaper and alleviate the safety concerns (which are mostly overblown, anyway).
Yeah, I’d totally buy a sodium ion battery. I think they have something like 75% the energy density per mass vs lithium ion, which is totally fine for my use case (commuter).
I don’t think you realize just how fast lead acid batteries deteriorate when using their smaller charge capacities. In cars and many electronics they are used because they can be shamelessly charged to 100%, and they are supposed to maintain 100% or close to it. They require constant monitoring to be stored properly in a way that lasts. Using them up below 50% will decrease their lifespan significantly. Lithium batteries are quite different, they shouldn’t be charged to 100% but in turn they can use a greater amount of their charge while holding more of it without significant deterioration. They have significantly longer lifespans when used properly. Before we had gasoline cars we had electric cars that used lead acid batteries, there’s a reason they stopped being used.
What China wants to do is eliminate the older lithium ebikes because they were built with barely any safety regulation. To do this, they need to offer a cheaper option to their citizens, and the only way they can essentially do this without the original problem persisting is using lead acid batteries, because even a cheap lead acid battery with a cheap charger isn’t going to fail spectacularly like the lithium ones. LiFePO4 are far safer than lithium while still having higher energy densities, but you won’t see those get promoted because they would be costlier.
They should offer upgrade to newer lithium ebikes, LFP and sodium ion is not ideal for ebikes, but way better than SLA. Standards for BMS and pack soldering, and possibly a metal casing (like Lectric XP bikes) for holding battery, and metal case for home charging. There are safety standard designations (UL) used in US markets that may or may not be cash grabs, but seems like a good approach.
I know right, they are cheaping out because why bother subsidizing new bikes when trading in an old bike? Just sell a cheap shittier e bike. If only the citizens were able to pay the government some cash to help make their community more safe and better than before. /s
The safety thing is 100% true but only part of the picture.
E-bikes don’t need maximum energy density because they’re not gonna be used for long trips and are significantly lighter than cars and trucks.
China has many, many more electric vehicles than any other country and a ton of electricity production to run them. At some point it’s gonna become important to save the lithium batteries for the stuff that needs that high density power.
Maybe these better chemistries that will replace lithium are just around the corner. I certainly don’t count unhatched chickens.
Makes sense. Thanks, Gayhitler.
Actually, ebikes need energy density the most. They tend to not have fast public charging. A lighter ebike has huge advantages, if only for maneuvering a couple of stairs or over a log, but also in suspension and handling + a huge difference in range/acceleration.
For an EV, you don’t need “race car” performance, and heavy chemistries are ok. Bike performance just gets a huge boost from relatively minor cost to improve weight/range and performance.
Sodium Ion batteries would be a better weight compromise than going to shitty old lead batteries. The new sodium batteries have almost no downsides but aren’t quite as energy dense as lithium types. So they might be great in a large vehicle that’s already going to be heavy, not so much in a smaller car. Saving the lithium stuff for smaller things is best (phones, laptops, etc)
EV’s already weigh more than most of their ICE equivalents. I don’t think we want even heavier chemistries in them. You could reduce the battery capacity to keep the weight down but then it’s a double hit to range.
Heck a Model S weighs more than a fair number of F150’s on the road.
Model S: 4,323-4,960 lbs
F150: 4,021-5,540 lbs
Wait, what? I drain my battery every day. I need more energy density, not less. I do use my bike for long trips, driving a car during rush hour sucks, parking fees are insanely high and parking spots are rare. I sold my car and do everything by electric bike. But after 2 hours of cycling at 32km/h I need to charge.
I meant the ~300 mile ranges common in electric cars. That’s a long trip. Plus if the car rolls to a stop by the side of the road you just gotta have it towed or charge it up in the field somehow, electric bikes have pedals.
It sucks to pedal a heavy ass ebike but you can do it in a pinch to get where you need to go.
Yeah, have fun peddling a heavy as fuck ebike when you’re 1 hour 32km/h drive away from home. That’s over 2h of super heavy cycling because you’re going super slow.
I have. It sucks but it’s possible and because I live in a mountainous area I avoid that problem by using less assist so everything lasts longer.
The broader point I was trying to make is that If you’re trying to allocate the limited raw materials to the types of transport that benefit people the most then pushing e-bikes to lead acid makes a lot of sense. Yeah, the bikes could benefit from a more power dense battery, but they have backup pedals and ultimately their rider is the majority of the loaded bikes weight.
Electric cars and trucks weigh at least ten times what a person does and are generally used for longer distances than e-bikes so it makes more sense to use very energy dense batteries in them.
Again, I’m speaking from a position that recognizes the proliferation of electric vehicles in China and recognizes that the raw materials used to make lithium batteries are finite and in high demand, not from the position of trying to optimize the e-bike.
Seems like cars don’t all need 300 mi range, but a 5 lb weight difference in a bike is huge.
Just get rid of cars and fix proper biking and public transportation infrastructure. No need for that many cars, electric or not. Lithium is finite, the mines are horrible. But we’re getting nuclear diamond batteries soon, they are a massive upgrade.
China has very developed bicycle infrastructure and massive public transportation compared to almost anywhere else. There are fewer car owners per capita than other countries. It’s still a smart play to use the hand of state to take steps to allocate the more energy dense batteries to applications that require them.
As I said before: Maybe these better chemistries that will replace lithium are just around the corner. I certainly don’t count unhatched chickens.
Also isn’t lead acid heavy as fuck for the energy stored? The difference there is more noticeable on a bike.
It’s heavy and bursty. It’s really not great for sustained energy discharge, which is why it’s used as a starter and not for hybrid engines at runtime.
I’m hoping sodium ion takes over the ebike market. It’s less energy dense then the very best lithium batteries, but most ebikes aren’t using the very best lithium batteries, anyway. They’re cheaper and alleviate the safety concerns (which are mostly overblown, anyway).
Yeah, I’d totally buy a sodium ion battery. I think they have something like 75% the energy density per mass vs lithium ion, which is totally fine for my use case (commuter).
I don’t think you realize just how fast lead acid batteries deteriorate when using their smaller charge capacities. In cars and many electronics they are used because they can be shamelessly charged to 100%, and they are supposed to maintain 100% or close to it. They require constant monitoring to be stored properly in a way that lasts. Using them up below 50% will decrease their lifespan significantly. Lithium batteries are quite different, they shouldn’t be charged to 100% but in turn they can use a greater amount of their charge while holding more of it without significant deterioration. They have significantly longer lifespans when used properly. Before we had gasoline cars we had electric cars that used lead acid batteries, there’s a reason they stopped being used.
What China wants to do is eliminate the older lithium ebikes because they were built with barely any safety regulation. To do this, they need to offer a cheaper option to their citizens, and the only way they can essentially do this without the original problem persisting is using lead acid batteries, because even a cheap lead acid battery with a cheap charger isn’t going to fail spectacularly like the lithium ones. LiFePO4 are far safer than lithium while still having higher energy densities, but you won’t see those get promoted because they would be costlier.
Who would have thought a ml user named gay hitler would be wrong about everything.
They should offer upgrade to newer lithium ebikes, LFP and sodium ion is not ideal for ebikes, but way better than SLA. Standards for BMS and pack soldering, and possibly a metal casing (like Lectric XP bikes) for holding battery, and metal case for home charging. There are safety standard designations (UL) used in US markets that may or may not be cash grabs, but seems like a good approach.
I know right, they are cheaping out because why bother subsidizing new bikes when trading in an old bike? Just sell a cheap shittier e bike. If only the citizens were able to pay the government some cash to help make their community more safe and better than before. /s