Stuck in traffic questions

[johnny_cakes]

With respect, no.

”In a nutshell, watt-hours measure amounts of energy for a specific period of time, and watts measure rates of power at a moment in time. A common analogy for watts and watt-hours is speed and distance.”

What you're now quoting is correct and is consistent with what I wrote. watt-hours is amount of energy and watts is a rate (e.g. 1 joule/second). But what I was correcting is what you previously wrote (re-pasted here for your reference):

2,100 watts/hr

"2,100 watts/hr" is incorrect. What you meant to say instead is any of these, which are all correct:

• 2,100 watts
• 2.1 kW
• 2.1 kWh/hr

...but "2,100 watts/hr" is not correct. "2,100 watts/hr" would be the rate of change of the rate (analogous to how acceleration is the rate of change of velocity). In the context of energy consumption, it doesn't make sense.

 

[Farmer]

I live in the SW suburbs of Boston, but often have to go up and down Rt. 128 which goes around west of the city to the Northshore. Traffic can be very heavy - or light. Whenever I get slowed over this route by stop and go traffic, I always have much more range leftover than when I get to do 65mph the whole way. That is, the aerodynamic savings from being forced to go slow always more than makes up for whatever extra time I sit with the heat or AC running (or whatever I lose to less-than-perfect stop-go-stop regen efficiency for that matter.) I have a MY now, but back when I had a plug-in hybrid RAV4 Prime with its 50ish mile EV range, stop and go traffic often meant I could do the whole trip on battery regardless of the weather, but if traffic was free-flowing, the Prime usually came up some miles short.

Stop and go traffic is always a highway range extender. HVAC power is too low to matter much.

 

[TomServo]

Our man from Norway does all sorts of documented testing: