Posted on 07/18/2006 12:05:31 PM PDT by LouAvul
If you're fed up with paying high gas prices, Hybrid Technologies says it has a solution for you.
The company is out with an "electric smart car" that runs on a lithium battery.
The company's co-founder, Richard Griffiths, pointed out to The Early Show co-anchor Rene Syler Tuesday that that's the same type of battery you'll find in cell phones, PDAs, computers, "pretty much anything we use now that's a portable electronic device."
Griffiths showed Syler how you simply plug the car in, literally, to a conventional 110 volt outlet.
"If you completely drain the battery," Griffiths said to Syler, "it's like your cell phone, if you drain the battery, a full charge is five to six hours. Normally, people won't drain the entire battery, so maybe one to two hours at night. Basically, it's like, 'Honey, did you take out the garbage and plug in the car?' It's kind of a new way of thinking. It's a plug-in hybrid. It uses absolutely no gas.
"On a single charge, you can go up to 120 miles and, depending how you drive, 150 miles."
"It's very, very small, though," Syler observed. "I am thinking safety. How does it crash test?"
"It has a three-star crash test rating," Griffiths responded, "and it has air bag systems, five air bags, three in the front. It's like a walnut. It's actually a very safe car. This is a city commuter car, so it's not a car that you'll necessarily be driving on the highway every day. So we're not looking at high speeds, necessarily."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Proof positive Americans are failing in science.
It doesn't matter how many turbines it hits - a drop of water will only produce an amount of energy directly proportional to the height it falls. To get it back to its original height, you have to put the same amount of energy back into it. Because machines aren't 100% efficient, you have to spend more energy pumping it back up than you would ever get from the turbines.
What you describe is ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY IMPOSSIBLE.
FYI, a perpetual motion machine would never need a net input of energy to keep running. What you're claiming is that it produces more energy than it takes to run, which makes it even more physically impossible than a perpetual motion machine. Unless you are converting some of the mass of water to energy via fission/fusion or some process like that...
Too bad the executive forgot to mention rechargeable batteries tendency to get a "memory", if you charge them before they are fully discharged, that lower level soon becomes their new maximum charge!
At $35K this thing is about three times more expensive than is should be.
Almost anyone can convert a Beetle/VW to electric for $5,000 or less.
Several companies sell the kits, but customers are few unless they can claim a large state sponsored rebate/scam.
We will probably see many types of solution, probably like the birth of the auto industry 100 years ago, or the birth of the IT industry a few years ago.
I checked out the availability of E85. Some midwest states have a few dozen statons. Minnesota has over 200. Several midAtlantic states have about 3, none open to the public. Many newer cars are manufactured to be converted to E85 for no more than $200. E85 supports farmers and minimizes transportation costs by being used close to home. The distillation residues can be used as livestock feed.
Demand for solar panels is outrunning production. Nevertheless, all our states should allow net metering (the capacity to feed excess electricity back into the grid). Last I heard only 36 states had it. The industry is predicting major breakthroughs in panel production soon. A lot sooner than hydrogen technology.
A probable scenario for the future might be as follows: 1) increased use of hybrids. 2) Ramping up ethanol and biodiesel production and imports using corn, sugar cane and beets, oilseeds, etc. 3) Breakthroughs in cellulose/ethanol production and manufacturing. 4) Other kinds of breakthroughs, such as Bikers' comment. 5) eventually, hydrogen, maybe? Many of these developments will help farmers and smaller entrepreneurs. The big guys won't like it. Watch out for political sabotage and help fight it.
"I doubt whether a cold car in the winter would appeal to many americans. "
Winters here in Minnesota demand heaters. Most often, they also demand 4WD. One of our cars is a 4WD with an excellent heater. That's what I'd use in the winter. The rest of the year...who cares.
I can live without A/C, frankly. My beater's AC quit working a while ago. I just roll down the windows and remember the days when no cars had A/C. No biggie.
Don't the recent-ish oil discoveries under the Rockies make this a moot point? Or is NewsMax pullin my leg?
Drill more,
Drill deeper,
Build more refineries,
Wring more power and efficiency out of gasoline,
Build more nuclear plants,
Take an American approach and we can use the electric cars as the wonderful toys they are.
Believe what you'd like, it's happening.
I'm not going to bother arguing with you about it.
A large dam does not include the pumping of water back up to the level above the dam. Dams produce energy by capturing the potential from falling water. There is NO pumping it back up.
It couldn't replace my truck and I have no intention of getting rid of my full sized 4x4 truck, but I might consider a small, and fuel efficient vehicle as a second vehicle if it were cheap enough.
For the time being driving my truck, which I do have a need to keep, if much cheaper than adding a second vehicle even getting 15 MPG with gas priced at $3 a gallon.
Believe what you'd like.
Last time I checked, gravity was free.
Give us a number, we'll call them, and then they'll call you back laughing their tails off at your claims...
In Seattle, I rode to and from work from renton to Lynnwood (32 miles one way through the heart of Seattle and rush hour) on I-405, I-90 abd I-5, year round, rain or shine. It was scary at first, but I really never even came close to a misshap. I did this for two years.
The worst was 5:00 in the dead of winter, pitch dark and driving rainstorm, riding at 50 in the HOV lane with the traffic going 20 or less next to me. You just gotta be paying attention, because they sure aren't!
That is still not viable. You are still thinking in terms of going 300 miles and getting your energy "fix" by filling your tank in 2 or 3 minutes before resuming the trip. When you have exhausted the 300 mile range, you will have to stop your travel for 4-6 hours minimum before having a go at the next 300 mile increment. The trip I make from Pocatello to San Diego is 927 miles. I can do that in 3 stops before a fillup at the destination. It's a 15 hour drive with a gasoline powered car. The electric would add another 24 hours of end to end time to allow for the recharge intervals.
Sorry slick, process is proprietary.
"You're saying that you generate more energy than you expend by pumping the water back to the top. That would mean every multistory apartment building would have a water tower with one of these generators to power the apartments and we would have endless energy. No, there is something missing here. Anyone else care to comment on this?"
They may be pumping in hours of low demand. In the Sierras in California, they make a whole industry of it. At night, they use surplus electricity to pump water up the mountain to holding basins, then feed it back through the turbines during hours of peak usage.
The energy to do that comes from hydroelectric plants that don't have that system in place. The cost to run those is minimal, so they use off-peak energy to pump water back uphill.
Very interesting stuff. They've been doing this as long as I can remember. It only works on hydro systems, though, because there are always losses in pumping water up the mountain. If you have another hydro plant, though, that runs all the time from river-fed dams, the cost is minimal.
I read about a variant to the falling water mine generating technique. That was to pump water up to a large pond or holding tanking on a hill/mountain. Pump the water up during the night when power demands are low, let it flow and generate during the day when the grid needs more energy.
It is. But it's unidirectional only.
Then it has to work a lot differently than what you describe because that system would lose energy, not create it. Einstein has to be turning over in his grave hearing about this.
There must be a huge step in this process that you left out, otherwise there's no way it could produce power.
How in the world could you think that the water running downhill would generate more energy than it takes to pump it back to the top?
If that worked, a person could set up a hill, pump water, run a generator and get energy for free. There's no free lunch in science.
At my age,if I drive 300 miles from home, then stopping for a few hours rest wouldn't be so bad!
:)
But I understand what you mean.
O.k. That's a different story and I agree that is becoming common where you have a source of water and a nearby hill or cliff (or a mine shaft) where you can do this to produce peaking power. But the energy to pump it back up to the top does not come from the energy produced by its descent, but from another source.
One hour's charge in a 110 v. outlet even at the full 15 Amp capability of most outlets, stores about 3% of the energy in one gallon of gasoline (assuming a very high efficiency in the charging operation). Either the reporter or the car company is smoking something strong. The car will likely go further on whatever they are smoking than it will on the electric charge.
No, really, it works. ;^)
I apply the same principle when I bench press. As I lower the bar I store that energy in my muscles and I then I use part of that energy to raise the bar again. By the time I'm done lifting I'm so refreshed and full of energy I usually run a marathon.
Don't worry, you'll never explain the fundamental limits of physics to someone who knows better. :)
You're right...they're missing a step. Roughly, the plant generates power during peak (read: expensive) periods and pumps the water back during off-peak (read: cheap) periods. Energy is *not* conserved, just money. :-)
Hydro plants do this all the time - generate during the day and pump at night.
"It doesn't take as much energy to pump the water back up as it generates going down because instead of passing just one turbine the same water passes hundreds of them generating enough to pump the water back up and they sell off the rest."
C'mon, now, think about what you're saying. In falling over a given distance, there is only so much potential energy in the water. In falling that potential energy is converted to kinetic energy (ie velocity), which is then converted into electricity by a turbine. One turbine or a hundred on the way down, there is only a fixed total amount of energy that can be extracted in the form of mechanical motion (with losses) and then into electricity (with more losses). The total amount of electricity generated will ALWAYS be less than the original potential energy of the water, and that original potential energy is the minimum (assuming no losses, which is impossible) that would be necessary to restore that water to the top of the shaft.
The laws of thermodynamics are immutable and no clever device or system can get around that. You've either misunderstood what they're doing down there, or they're selling snake oil.
You're a braver person than I.
I've seen too many accidents on the highway on my morning commute. Too many people just aren't paying attention in the morning - for some reason, the accidents are far less common during the evening commute.
That could be accomodated. Plug the car in, swipe your employee ID card and the power comes on....metered. The kilowatt-hr charge appears as a deduction on your paycheck.
"But the energy to pump it back up to the top does not come from the energy produced by its descent, but from another source.
"
Right. That's the only way such a thing would work, obviously. There's no free energy in a closed system, I'm afraid.
I love hydroelectric power. If I were in charge, we'd be generating from every river and stream of adequate size. Back in my Mother Earth News days, I even had a small turbine working in a stream so small you couldn't really call it a stream. It powered an automobile alternator, then charged 12 v. batteries to run lights in the chicken house.
But that was long ago and far away. It's amazing what a small stream can do.
I didn't see them until after I posted. TANSTAAFL!
They use the pool at the top almost like a giant storage battery for potential energy and then use it during peak loads.
"Would you consider a large dam to be perpetual motion?"
Normal hydroelectric plants don't involve pumping water back up into the resevoir (although this can be done as a means of storing excess electrical power from other sources for a later time). The water does make its way back up into the resevoir eventually, thanks to the input of solar energy that drives the precipitation cycle (you know, solar heat causes evaporation which turns into rain in the mountains that ends up in the resevoir again). Technically I guess you could call hydroelectric solar power, but then almost every form of energy on earth does originally derive from solar energy, if the "fossil" fuel model is correct. Nuclear and geothermal energy are exceptions.
It's not about what I believe, its about physics.
Water at a higher elevation has POTENTIAL energy.. when it falls it releases that energy as KENETIC energy... When it reaches the bottom of the hill.. it takes as much energy to put that water to the top of the hill as it gave up falling down the hill.. its called the law of conservation of energy.
So, to do what you claim, every bit of energy of that water falling would need to be captured, and then used to put that water back to the top of the hill... which would not throw of any extra energy at all for any other use... not to mention the loss of energy through friction and basic inefficiencies of mechanical devices.
What you are suggesting is going on is impossible, not because I believe it to be, but because it defies the fundamental laws of physics. Trust me, if someone has built a system as you describe they would be receiving the nobel price for science and it would be headlines around the world. Our fundamental understanding of physics would be shattered.
If it was cheap enough, people would buy it.
One of the local lakes rises and falls a foot or more due to this process, depending on time of day. I took the time to figure out how many gallons it look to change the water level by an inch.....this was back in my college days.
If I was smart, I'd have spent the time figuring how much energy pumping all the water back in would've consumed.
"Now, how much will it cost me to recharge it?"
I'm recalling around $1.00 per night, so roughly $30.00 a month, for a Prius converted to plug-in hybrid. Even though the guy refers to his as a hybrid as well, it's a pure electric, so expect something higher, but certainly not double; fifteen dollars a week on your electric bill is way cheaper than a tank of gas a week. Battery replacement is costly, and would have to figure in somewhere, in order to get a good grasp of the comparison, though.
yeah, you gotta pay attention enough for BOTH of you. I have had cars try to share lanes with me LOTS of times. It get's were it's kinda fun. Especially when you are prepared for it.
Sorry, but they forgot to mention the sail and the footholes for the Flintstone Shuffle. :>)
I loaded sixteen tons and what do I get
Another day older and deeper in debt.
Saint Peter don't call me cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store...er, um, electric outlet.
:)
http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/sixteen2.html#
Doesn't work. Each turbine is lower than the one before it. So every turbine that gets spun also represents more distance you have to pump the water back up.
Assuming a 100% efficient water lifting system, call the amount of energy it takes to raise one kilogram of water by 1 meter, E(1). That is also the maximum amount of energy that could be extracted by letting the same water fall back down that 1 meter. The reason they are the same is that potential gravitational energy stored in the kilogram of water as a result of raising it one meter is the amount of energy released when you let it fall.
Now, start with that water above a single turbine (and say each of your turbines only needs to have the water fall 1 meter to run the turbine). The turbine cannot produce E(1) of energy because the turbine is not 100% efficient. But to transport the water back up takes the full E(1) of energy (actually, it takes more as real pumps aren't 100% efficient). You lose net power every time you pump the water back uphill.
Ganging the turbines together doesn't help. Each turbine uses up the potential energy in the water that passes thru it that is represented by raising the water the height of the turbine. That is, the only turbines that can use the water already used by another turbine are below that other turbine.
It's not perpetual motion because you do have to use energy to run the pump.
It is if the total energy to run the pumps (regardless of source) is less than the total energy generated by the turbines.
It's a lot like Zimara's self-blowing windmill (designed in 1518) that ran a set of bellows. The bellows then blew the windmill sails round.
Do you have a url for this magical system? It sounds like it needs a boost from Teddy Kennedy's magic reality altering wand :)
"That could be accomodated. Plug the car in, swipe your employee ID card and the power comes on....metered. The kilowatt-hr charge appears as a deduction on your paycheck."
Heh, heh. That takes away the whole advantage. ;)
Lithium batteries have been getting news about catching on fire. There's supposed to be two new types of lighter weight lead acid battery technologies. Why aren't they on the market yet?
Environut answer:
[But, but, but what about the salmon and other fish, what about them? -- whiny enviro type]
And of course the environazis are working to remove all hydropower, especially on small dams in the NE, which were originally constructed for the mills and usually in areas of natural dams.
The mutual attraction between masses won't cost you anything, but you still have to separate them to harness the energy. That isn't free. Just climb the stairwell of a 100 story building and ask if you feel tired. You've just converted food energy into gravitational potential.
"There's supposed to be two new types of lighter weight lead acid battery technologies. Why aren't they on the market yet?
"
Some of them are. But them durned bass fishermen is buyen 'em all up to run they trollin' moters.
Seriously, go to a boat place and have a look at the new generation of deep cycle batteries. Lighter, by far, than the old ones and better, too.
Although many environmentalists may think electricity comes from magic, the people pulling their puppet strings know differently. Electric cars means more control over the populace -- "Sorry, today is a brownout day. Only emergency vehicles are allowed to drive. Be prepared to show your papers..."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.