Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Promises of Electric Vehicles?
Contra Costa Times | December 11, 2010 | Vlado Bevc

Posted on 12/11/2010 3:38:13 PM PST by editor-surveyor

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-107 next last
To: editor-surveyor

As a means of providing energy from an on-board source to the wheels or any of a number of non-propulsion amenities on a moving vehicle, the use of electricity is hard to beat. It is the SOURCE of the energy that is the problem.

Generation of power from fuel cells, by the conversion of hydrogen into electrical energy, runs into a couple of problems right away, where is the hydrogen coming from, and how do we carry a sufficient supply on board for a reasonable radius of travel distances?

Regardless of how dangerous gasoline is as a fuel, at least the technology for its distribution and dispensing have been worked out over the past century or so, to the point of relatively few instances where it causes uncontrolled flame spread. So we shall have some version of the internal combustion engine as a compact and relatively lightweight power source for some time to come. The fuel may change, but the pronciples remain much the same. There may be fuels with higher energy densities than gasoline, such as Diesel fuel, requiring a more compact on-board storage tank, but most of the alternatives offered, like compressed natural gas, propane, or ethyl alcohol, have a much lower energy density than gasoline or Diesel fuel per pound, or volume, or any other measure.

Battery technology, despite a couple of hundred years of trying to find a means to pack higher energy densities into smaller and smaller space, has not yielded the reliability and means of quick refueling that liquid fuels have provided. Seems like the materials used just do not respond well to some of the thermodynamics that come into play. Rapid transfer of electrical energy almost always results in steep increases of heat output, resulting in a molten puddle of whatever materials the batteries were constructed of.

Now, if we just had superconductors that would transmit a stream of electrons at ambient temperatures, perhaps we could find a way around this bottleneck. But alas, like the promise of nuclear fusion, this always seems to be some 30 years in the future.

Except we have had several “30 yearses” in succession already, and seem no closer to the resolution of the problems.

Meanwhile, this constant tinkering with batteries as a storage medium of energy does not seem to be moving the problem. As an alternative, could one suggest the development of a compressed gas over a hydraulic fluid medium. The power plant builds up pressure in the system by compressing the gas over the hydraulic fluid, and the hydraulic fluid is piped to the propulsion wheels, which are turned by a slave hydrostatic pump. By reversing the valving, the hydrostatic motor could be turned into a pump to provide vehicle braking, building the pressure back up, which is stored in a reservoir. No mechanical drive line in involved, no gears, universal joints, or shafts anywhere.

Very large mine trucks already use a similar driveline, and it has had a number of applications in relatively low-speed, heavy-duty off-road machinery. This could be refined into a much higher-speed application, suitable for conventional road travel, with relatively few tweaks.

Is it more or less expensive than this really weird engineering that is now being put into various hybrid or full-electric vehicles? Can it be done on a practical scale?


41 posted on 12/11/2010 4:54:37 PM PST by alloysteel ("If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

would you rather have this, or some electric car?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fpi6d5Y8PJs


42 posted on 12/11/2010 5:02:17 PM PST by chicken head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

This is what the PG&E SmartMeter™ program is about. Having the necessary amperage for charging the batteries on the cars and reducing the amount used for homes.

We need to get out of the UN as fast as possible.


43 posted on 12/11/2010 5:12:17 PM PST by B4Ranch (Do NOT remain seated until this ride comes to a full and complete stop! We're going the wrong way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Promises are best bought cheap.


44 posted on 12/11/2010 5:22:10 PM PST by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reg45
I want fusion mass-conversion plants, fueled by shoveling envirowhacks into them...sort of like one of my favorite schlock movie serial scenes:

The early episodes of this strip were adapted pretty faithfully in the first Buster Crabbe-starring serial, with its spark-sputtering spaceships and with Flash condemned to shoveling uranium into an atomic furnace (I always loved that part).

Like the author, I always loved that scene, too.

45 posted on 12/11/2010 6:19:00 PM PST by ApplegateRanch (Made in America, by proud American citizens, in 1946.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear

several years ago the army built several Hybrid Humvees. they had a turbo 3.0 Diesel instead of 6.5 and higher performance and claimed 35% increase in fuel economy. They would also go 20 mi on battery alone.
I tried to get more specs on them as to motors and batteries with out success. As far as I know no production models were ever built. Mercedes builds Hybrid farm tractors and
electric Motors are used on implements instead of PTO


46 posted on 12/11/2010 6:58:02 PM PST by barb-tex (What else did you expect from the likes of 0? BTW, What ever happened to Rhodesia?, Oh, yes, Zimbabw)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear

Powerline losses aside, just look at the drops in both battery & electric motor power output/draw due mainly to increased resistances in cold conditions.

We’ll even ignore the large driving-capacity power losses involved in using a heater, headlights, and wipers...

With the various increased loads & losses from cold weather, what happens to range/milage, or whatever measure they use, when the thing sits in a sub-zero parking lot for 8+ hours, then must be driven home in the snowy, sleety dark?


47 posted on 12/11/2010 7:00:28 PM PST by ApplegateRanch (Made in America, by proud American citizens, in 1946.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Many are planning to do exactly that, at a profit too!

First of all, most businesses will not allow freeloaders to charge their cars in the parking lot. Not only employees can do it, but also any member of the public. And businesses pay pretty penny for electricity.

But there is another interesting aspect. If a business provides some free (or nearly free) service to the employee then IRS will want to know more about it, since it's an unreported, untaxed compensation. No business will be willing to put its neck under the IRS's axe just to please a few employees.

So in the end there will be chargers with meters, and you need to swipe your access card to get it started, and the cost of the energy will be deducted from your paycheck.

As more and more EVs show up on the roads, energy companies will be able to take control of the situation and raise the prices to the market levels. This means that many owners of those cars will not be able to afford charging of their vehicles! The market price is not the price which everyone can afford; it's the price that results in maximum profit.

Today PG&E indeed has a rate schedule for EVs. It is time-dependent, and it can change at any time. We can't be sure that the price of gas will always be $3.20 or whatever it is today, but similarly we have no reason to believe that electric energy will be always sold for $0.10/kWh at the lowest tier.

48 posted on 12/11/2010 7:13:01 PM PST by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Thanks for the ping.

I love when sane folks deconstruct the myths.


49 posted on 12/11/2010 7:31:23 PM PST by calcowgirl (“Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat’s dream. If you control carbon, you control life” —Lindzen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: eCSMaster

Had electric heat years back. Cost an arm and a leg!


50 posted on 12/11/2010 7:41:45 PM PST by pankot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Huh. I thought the Volt has regenerative braking. Is that not so? Any links?


51 posted on 12/11/2010 7:58:25 PM PST by MV=PY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

‘Chevy Volt has a 435-pound battery costing $8,000 which wears out after 100,000 miles.’

I remember when Insinkerator came out with their residential model. It cost about $250.00. Not much difference than to days price, but the average hourly wadge was $.55 per hour.


52 posted on 12/11/2010 8:01:20 PM PST by steveab (When was the last time someone tried to sell you a CO2 induced climate control system for your home?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“At heating value of 3 kWh/lb, 1.3 pounds of coal is needed to generate 1 kWh. As coal is 80% carbon 3 pounds of carbon dioxide is emitted in generating 1 kWh of electric energy. “

Can someone please explain to me how 1.3 pounds of coal produces 3 pounds of carbon dioxide.......It just doesn’t sound right....


53 posted on 12/11/2010 8:01:20 PM PST by Trteamer ( (Eat Meat, Wear Fur, Own Guns, FReep Leftists, Drive an SUV, Drill A.N.W.R., Drill the Gulf, Vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trteamer
Can someone please explain to me how 1.3 pounds of coal produces 3 pounds of carbon dioxide.......It just doesn’t sound right....

short, simplistic answer that ignores impurities, and other variables; ignores (most) dismal points in calculations; and and just keeps it simple:

coal = carbon

CO^2 = 1 carbon plus 2 atmospheric oxygen atoms

C= atomic wt 12; O= atomic wt 8; O^2= atomic wt 16

CO^2 atomic wt= 12 + 16 = 28, or 2 1/3 X Carbon alone

2.33 X 1.3 pounds coal = 3 pounds CO^2

54 posted on 12/11/2010 8:38:15 PM PST by ApplegateRanch (Made in America, by proud American citizens, in 1946.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

The only chance that Electric Cars might be feasible is the availability of cheap plentiful nuclear generated power. As of now electric cars run on coal.


55 posted on 12/11/2010 9:21:01 PM PST by Mike Darancette (Democrat Party is shovel ready)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

The ‘article’ is full of false and misleading statements. Two thumbs down.


56 posted on 12/11/2010 9:29:42 PM PST by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“Electric power plants supplying energy require from 3.5 to 4 kWh of thermal energy to generate 1 kWh or electrical energy. “

False. Coal plants are about 2.5:1, gas plants are about 1.7:1


57 posted on 12/11/2010 9:33:13 PM PST by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“Reader Coughlan (CCT, November 13, 2010) correctly pointed out that at residential electric rates of 40 cents/kWh “

PGE top tier rates in the Bay area are about 30 cents per kwh. If yo go to smart meters and off-peak (it could be MUCH less).


58 posted on 12/11/2010 9:39:35 PM PST by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

“About 70 % of electric power generating plants America use coal.”

But coal is less than 45% of the electricity production. I think the Bay area is mostly nuclear and gas.


59 posted on 12/11/2010 9:41:21 PM PST by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Particularly unreasonable is the hint that electric vehicles while parked in employee parking lots could be running their gasoline engines to feed energy it back to the network.

Probably the reason no one but this kook brings it up.

60 posted on 12/11/2010 9:42:41 PM PST by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-107 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson