Slashdot Mirror
Electric Vehicle Kits for the Masses?
Aciel asks: "I just finished watching 'Who Killed the Electric Car', and was quite impressed. I'm too poor to buy anything but an old clunker, and not eager to pollute the atmosphere (or empty my wallet) with gasoline. The movie inspired me: I think I'd like to convert an old car (or perhaps a motorbike) to run on electricity. Have Slashdot readers attempted such a thing before? What experiences have you had, and what would you recommend or not recommend?"
It might be easier/cheaper to convert the car's existing engine to accept ethanol, and ethanol is reasonably enviromentally friendly.
Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
The expensive components in this amplifier are large bucket capacitors and rediculous huge transistors or valves.
The whole rig would cost roughly the same to build as a small radio transmitter, plus the cost of modding the car itself (connecting the motor(s) to the drive shaft) and building the computer and controller.
It would be great to see the following prices suggested by traders or users below:
10KW Transistors / 100MV Capacitors / 10KW Motors / Embedded controllers i.e. ARM7 / etc...
P.S. Thanks for asking the question, I was thinking EXACTLY the same myself. The cars currently available are beyond my financial reach, but the fuel isn't ...
This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
Your first qualification takes you out of the race: The cost of components, motors, controllers, (and especially batteries) are much more than the cost of a gas-sipping clunker. As much as people want to save gas/the world, the economic reality for most is that the total cost of electric is much more than conventional alternatives.
/.'er the coolness factor is what really matters anyway.
That said, I love my Prius. I can justify it with a long daily commute, as I get a more comfortable drive in it than a similarly thrifty gas-powered car. Overall, I could have saved money with gas, and the environmental difference is negligible. As a
Check out http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/ for over 800 examples of electric cars, most of which are conversions or kit built.
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."
Unless your electricity is generated in a way that doesn't damage the environment you are simply moving the pollution from your car to the power station. A conversion to run your existing car on methanol or something similar would do more to help the environment. The simple truth is that private vehicle ownership will have to end one day, and the ideal time for it to end would have been 30 years or so ago.
Todays batteries are not good (and cheap) enough for the market. Li-ion,poly,whatever and NiMH batteries can be charged only by a small current, taking an eternity until you're back on the road again. :)
v ersion
High capacitance capacitors, on the other hand, seem to have a huge problem with storing energy over a longer period of time and voltage drops proportional to theammount of stored energy. All of these problems with capacitors can be circumvented. btw. short-circuiting one of those might give you a bad (suborbital flight) experience
As for the rest of the stuff, brushless motors can give you up to 95% efficiency.
check this out: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Electric_Vehicle_Con
Delta-Mike November Bravo Tango
You might take a look at some of the used ones they have: http://www.zapworld.com/cars/salecars.asp
A properly designed small direct injection Diesel powered car (VW Golf in the 100HP version, say) is probably about as good as you can get in terms of fuel plus lifetime costs (pollution arising from manufacture and disposal). Hybrids like the Prius don't seem to factor in the batteries in the equation. If it was possible to build high capacity batteries with a low manufacture and disposal energy footprint, an electric car deriving its power from nuclear, wind or wave energy would do much better. But it is not yet possible. Some forecasts suggest that significant benefits from technologies like fuel cells are probably in the 30-50 year timeframe.
So, right now, I suspect the best you can do is a VW, Toyota or Peugeot small Diesel. In any case, buying the smallest vehicle that meets your needs and renting if you need bigger is plain environmental sense. In a few years, perhaps Diesel hybrids will do better for high mileage. Electric cars - don't hold your breath.
Pining for the fjords
just to shift the debate a bit...
Ethanol and bio-fuel pollute a little bit less, but do still exhaust CO2.
The cleanest alternative seems to come from a little known company that created a compressed air motor. They use it in conjuction with a standard engine for starting the vehicle
Few pollution whatsoever, you need a little bit of electricity to run a compressor, and get almost 2000 km in one go...
here : http://www.theaircar.com/
Maybe we should start getting interested in the technology, the drawback in electric cars being the pollution you create in actually producing the batteries and the electricity to feed them.
Also, as it uses very few fuel, the big petrol/car companies doesn't show any interest in the technology...
Da5Id
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
You can't afford to buy anything but an old clunker, yet you are inspired to convert a car to electricity? Am I the only one confused here? Do you think that converting a car to electricity is free? I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but first you need to acquire an automobile - which costs money. Then you need to convert said car to electricity - which also costs money and probably more than the car is even worth.
How about asking this instead: Dear Slashdot, does money grow on trees? Because I want some expensive things for free.
Is that a real poncho? I mean, is that a Mexican poncho or is that a Sears poncho?
But they do sell a bunch of $1500 electric mopeds, if you're interested in going that route.
There are some other vehicles out there, too -- you'll have to look for them, though. Some are only in development, like the x-cycle, while others are incredibly expensive, like the Sparrow.
Here's my suggestion.
I'm going to assume that you can get under the hood of a car, remove the engine, and essentially work on a car without killing yourself.
In that case, you probably want to get a street-legal old vw-bug or Ford Fiesta (or Yugo)... anyhow, something that is small and aerodynamic, and then convert it to electric with a $3000 conversion kit from e-volks. (They also have a $1500 conversion kit, but I'd go with the better one if I were you.) This is Wilderness Energy (which sells hub bicycle conversion kits, unfortunately also of Chinese manufacture and easily broken) expanded to automobiles.
Just... I'd go ahead and make the electric supply/recharge system separate from the vehicle, for the reason that you'll want to change it over later as you get more money.
Initially, you'll want Sealed-Lead-Acid batteries as can be had from Wal-Mart in the Bike section. They're cheap but heavy, and you string up enough of them to get whatever distance and speed you need.
But later, you'll want to convert to Lithium-ion phosphate, since it is lightweight, extremely efficient, long lasting, and doesn't blow up like a DELL.
Two sources for those are A123 and Valence.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Here's a couple of cornpones putting together a 3 wheeled electric car.
br> http://www.driveelectric.org/cars/index.html
There's a lot of good links to other sites with parts and kits and the like.
Suck a lemon?
I want to know how to go about converting my 18-speed. Going thirty miles an hour uphill would be teh aw3some.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
"Would America be able to make enough electricity to power up every car if they would use electricity as an energy source?"
Sadly, i highly doubt it, there is a lot of cars and they would need a huge amount of electricity to make them all run...
oil is pulled out of the ground and turned into fertilizer to grow the corn.
This isn't *strictly necessary*. There are other options. And with algae-derived biodiesel, it isn't necessary at all.
The point is to be carbon-neutral. As long as we can stop pulling NEW carbon out of the ground, we'll be okay.
+++ATH0
I've looked pretty hard at this question myself. But, sorry to say, electricity to drive a vehicle doesn't make much sense. The problems are two-fold.
(1) The electricity. Here in California, paying PG&E rates, the cost to drive a mile with a given vehicle size/weight is much less for gasoline than electricity. I have seen this argued endlessly, but it is simply true. Even if you are willing to pay the cost, availability isn't there either.
The electricity infrastructure is teetering on the edge of failure now. Adding a bunch of electric cars would collapse the system. If the public would encourage the building of a bunch of new nuke plants (I think the Pebbel-Bed reactors being designed now are very promising) we might be able to meet the demand, but realistically that isn't going to happen. Adding new coal plants to charge electric cars seems just WRONG on several levels.
(2) The vehicles. The technology for electric vehicles simply isn't there for anything more than a glorified golf-cart. The best batteries are nowhere near good enough, are way too expensive, and don't last near long enough. Heck, we can't even build a good reliable battery for a laptop computer yet. And as for avoiding pollution, not only does most current electricity generation use fossil fuel and thus pollute at the generation site, but the manufacture and disposal of large numbers of toxic batteries is not exactly green either. And think those exploding Sony batteries have been a headache to laptop owners, wait until the scenario repeats itself on the scale of an automobile sized battery. Can you say "Car Bomb"?
I honestly think the best solution is to buy an older, small and efficient car from a manufacturer known for producing reliable and efficient cars. I bought a 20 year-old Toyota MR2. Cost, under $500.
Pollution? First, when buying an older car, simply budget putting a new catalytic converter on it right away, even if the one on it is working. Ditto, a good tune-up. I did, and then when I registered it the state mandated a smog test at speed, under load on a dynometer. The numbers returned were so low, the tech was blown away. He actually re-tested it a second time before believing the numbers. He said I could qualify as a "Super Low Emission Vehicle" based on the numbers alone. But since the make and model wasn't endorsed for that category, I couldn't officially do so. But new catalytic converters do work very, very well.
Mileage? Around town, grocery store runs and the like, it gets 37-39 mpg. On the road, between 43 and 48 depending on various factors. Plus, it's fun to drive. Plus, it's been dead-bang reliable.
It ain't a Prius, but it's darn close in terms of overall pollution and mileage. Cheap to buy, cheap to run, low impact on the environment, and reliable. Downsides? Well, it's getting a little long in tooth, appearance-wize. I probably should budget some paint and trim sometime soon, and because it's so tiny, I keep banging my head when I get in and out.
I keep hoping to put up a bunch of solar panels and charge my own electric car and declare my own personal fuel independance some day. But it isn't practical, and may not be for a long time, if ever. Ask me again in 20 years or so. Like it or not, the old-fashioned gas-buggy is the overall best solution. Just pay attention to what you're buying, buy just what you need and no more, and arrange your life to require as little driving as you can, and you will know you are living a life in harmony with both society and the environment.
Stony
Vespa.
Monstar L
No, it really isn't. You're basically trading one bad (more greenhouse gases) for another bad. The production of Ethanol requires significant amounts of water, the vast majority of which (especially in places like Minnesota, where ethonal is becoming more and more popular) comes from groundwater. Groundwater is already a scarce resource, and with a dramatic spike in usage because of ethanol refineries places like the Midwest will turn into deserts. The best power sources that are feasible right now are true renewables like wind and solar. The next best are nuclear, both fission (because that's all we have right now) and fusion (think ITER.) Hydroelectric power is devastating on the environment because of the drastic changes over the extremely short amount of time, which can (and does) severely disrupt the ecosystems for both the areas upstream as well as downstream. One of the most recent examples of this is in China, where they just finished/are building the largest dam to date.
The electric vehicle needs electric motors, which have weight. It currently needs hundreds of kilos of batteries to get a reasonable range, far more than that maybe 100kg penalty of IC over electric + 30kg of fuel. Charging and discharging batteries is far from 100% efficient - if I am lucky, with low discharge rates I get about 80% recovery output to input for my marine battery bank, which has advanced charging. So your baseline is something like 40% * .8 transmission loss * .8 charge and discharge loss * .7 electric motor efficiency = approx 18%. I will allow you a recovery on that for the percentage of electricity which is nuclear generated, so say the fossil fuel efficiency of the current electric route is around 25%.
This is approximately the same as a DI turbocharged Diesel achieves in practice. However, it requires less oil to build a Diesel engine (mostly made of iron) than the electric system plus batteries (a lot of Al, which requires huge amounts of electricity to extract, plus Li, polymers.) Then there is the additional power loss due to dragging the huge batteries around. Look at the weight of the Prius - which has only a short electric range - compared to an equivalent Toyota TDi. So, overall, the equation is still biassed in favor of the IC engine. However, this will change - in quite a long timescale, IF we build nuclear plants and plenty of wind and wave plants, IF we build the infrastructure for lots of recharging points, IF we accept that vehicles for passengers need to be smaller and lighter so we don't spend most of the generated energy moving around the vehicle rather than the occupants.
Pining for the fjords
Though it isn't in the price range of the OP, this company here has demonstrated that the motors and control system (including ABS and traction control) to convert any small car into a 4wd EV can certainly be made available to DIYers:
d _mini.php
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/08/the_hybri
Someone had to do it.
Someone on this thread remarked disparagingly about a "glorified golf cart," but given your budget constraints you should seriously consider a street-legal electric golf cart. They're cheap, and reliable. Of course, they're golf carts, so they're slow, and don't have a great range. But as a second car, or for someone who doesn't travel much every day, it can be a practical solution. Watch out for cold weather, though -- it'll drastically affect battery performance unless you warm your batteries.
Apparently you've not driven an old VW Beetle. Small? Yes. Aerodynamic? Not so much.
I'd have to agree that the conversion route probably won't work out too well. You'll end up with a car that can go 30 MPH and has ~20 mile range.
Get yourself an old GeoMetro (or even older Chevy Sprint if any still survive). They get at least 50MPG on the hiway and 40 around town. It's too bad they don't make them anymore...
I'm waiting for the Toyota Aygo that's supposed to be available in the US next Fall (2007). As it will have a 3 cylinder, 1 liter engine in a SmartCar-sized package I suspect that the milage will be in the 50's. Price will hopefully be much better than the SmartCar and it should be a lot more durable than a Metro as it's a Toyota.
Years ago, I read the book Divorce Your Car!
It tells the reader about how even if cars ran on pollution and planted flowers everywhere they went, they're still a big pain in the ass and really, not worth the trouble. They're hard to maintain, expensive, deadly, hard to find parking for (and when we build more roads and parking, traffic and parking problems just get worse), and expensive to society as a whole.
The book also tells of two possible solutions to the problem, that you can implement right away. There's the car-lite life, and the no-car life. Because I was young and living in a big city with good public transit (where I still currently live, but not for much longer), I chose the no-car life. Instead of buying a car, I found an apartment closer to rapid transit, which gives me a direct route to work. I get my groceries delivered to my door - I can do this over the internet or any one of the many local grocery stores. If the trip is short, I just walk or bike. And if I *need* a car, I call for a cab.
The car-lite life means using your car as little as possible. 90% of all trips are less than a mile anyway, so why not walk or bike them? And yes, you'd be amazed how many shops will deliver, but I'd bet you hadn't had the need to ask before, have you? If your city has rapid transit in one form or another, it more than likely lets you park at the nearest train station, so that you can keep the trip distance down. Or perhaps you can lock up your bike there. There's not always a need to bike the *whole* way to get where you're going.
Either option is also good for your health, by the way. Not only are you contributing less to smog, but you're getting more exercise. And no doubt, your doctor knows how that's a good thing.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
Before thinking about building your own electric car, think a lot about what you need to do with it.
The conversion cars I saw there mostly used about 15-20 batteries if they used lead-acid or 10-15 if they used more expensive NiMH, so you're looking at at least $1500 in batteries, plus motors and anything else you need.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
DO it! Bill Stewart's advice was good. I got good stuff off of the austinev trading post. Join EVEAA, go to meetings, ask for spare parts for sale, you may be able to get a battery discount & share a pallet with someone else to bring down battery cost. After you've figured your needs, look in the freebie ads for a car. YOu want a low Coefficient of Drag (googleit)weight under/around 2500# The most expensive item is the transfer plate between your emotor & trannie so consider a car type thats already been converted. VWs are popular but bugs are too small, and the gear ratios suck- Be sure the frame and vanity stuff is in good shape whatever you choose- the rubber details on my VW cost as much as the conversion b4 batteries. I saved $3000. in gas the first year & my conversion cost $3K. Adaptation is survival, this project you are considering saves considerable amounts of CO2 emissions ... there may be other social benefits too, but I am not interested in all the attention from women.
Or a 2003 VW Golf TDI. It also gets 50+ mpg highway, and better than 40 mpg city. It's also a bit bigger so it carries people much more comfortably, and more cargo, and it's actually a really safe car, unlike the deathtrap that is a Geo Metro. (Have you ever been in an Geo Metro at 70 or 80 mph? Dear god...)
true, but I doubt you can find a 2003 VW Golf TDI for less than $10K and the OP was looking for cheap. I suspect you can easily find a metro for $500.
I replied because of the impression that I was given by the show, that both of the technologies, while not as powerful as gasoline, or other fuels, were feasable. One stated that you could get about 300 miles from one full tank of air.
/.
I didn't respond to his math, or state that the whole thing wasn't a scam. However, all I stated was that I _saw_ this exact company with this exact car on the show. While I know that the Science channel may not be the most accurate place to receive scientific information, as well as the fact that they themselves could be tricked by a company trying to use the promise of an air-powered car to scam money from investors, I do, however think that they have people evaluating the items that they put on their shows that are at least, if not more qualified than the general population of
Now, an argument could be placed that this type of thing is alarmist propaganda as part of a larger goal of the company to spread Al Gore's version of global warming and it's effects. I would be more apt to agree to that, given that I saw a show, just today, on global warming, followed by "What happens when the oil runs out."
I abuse commas, I cannot help myself.
Compressed gas is fundamentally an impractical way to store energy. In theory you could get 100% efficiency by reversible adiabatic compression of the air into a compressed cylinder, followed by a reversible decompression, where all your energy comes back out.
The problem comes from the irreversible process in between. When you compress air it gets hot. As the hot air sitting in the cylinder slowly cools, energy is lost to heat the surroundings. When you come back to draw on that power you will find that the pressure has dropped significantly. When you buy compressed CO2 cartridges for example, you are getting much less energy out of them than was put into them at the time of manufacture.
This could be mitigated by wrapping lots of insulation around the gas to keep it warm but you see what the fundamental problem is.
http://www.beyondtomorrow.com.au/stories/ep17/fren chaircar.html
I abuse commas, I cannot help myself.
While the synopsis is the same as the last link, the link to the Austrailian company's site is below the pictures, rather than the French "Air Car".
I abuse commas, I cannot help myself.
http://www.beyondtomorrow.com.au/stories/ep17/auss ieaircar.html
I abuse commas, I cannot help myself.
At least solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, ethanol, etc are all possible at the plant (or in your house). It may be expensive, but we could actually switch them over to clean energy. You can't do that at all if everyone's driving gas cars.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Nice link, those cars however that they rebuilt were disgusting. Old bodies, poor range, poor performance, and poor price. The positive thing is it rules out remaking an old gas powered car into electrical. As many have suggested going for a more efficient gas or diesel car is your best bet.
Hmmm... Pie...
So, what is your rebuttal to the movie? You've claimed, despite the movie, that the market has "proven" that people don't want electric cars. You've claimed that the guy is "easily impressed" for being impressed with the movie. You've ignored that there is a small but avid bunch of people out there who want these converted cars desperately enough to do it themselves. You've even claimed that the batteries alone will cause more pollution than all the gasoline they were meant to replace.
Seriously, these statements each require justification. I would especially love to see a trustworthy source for the last one.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
You keep replying as if I am asserting that this is not a flawed idea. If I state it more plainly, maybe you will understand me. I make no assertion as to the feasability of these engines that use air as a fuel. I did however see the exact car mentioned in alienw's post on a televison program. The people who produced the television apparently think that this is a feasable idea. The only assertion that I made was that from the demonstration given, it sounded like it was air powered. I then stated that the network has fact checkers, and that I believe at least some of them are more qualified than the general population here. My intentions in making that statement was not to wholly validate the "air car" people, or to say that if it was on the network, it must be true (illuistrated by the fact that I later called into question wether or not the network has an extremist environmentalist agenda, which you were unable to understand), rather to say that if this is a scam, they, through demonstration, as well as other information, have managed to convince some people who have more information available to them about this specific application than either you or me (again note that I called into question wether or not the network has ulterior motives for painting environmentally friendly technologies in a good light).
Those are very good points. On the show, they did not touch on those areas, and as I do not have the knowlege to make any I can not offer any counterpoints. I am simply providing information that I received from the show that I watched, which only demonstrated the technology, and offered less information on the engine than is available on the companiy's website.
I abuse commas, I cannot help myself.
I think converting a bicycle is a good first project. It can be done for a couple hundred dollars and is pretty nifty as you can race around at a decent clip, you have almost no fuel cost, you can pedal if you run out of charge, and you can throw it on a bike or in the back of a car if you need to go long distances. Not at all bad for a weekend project and less than buying a XBox.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Let me just reiterate that my point is not that it is impossible to use compressed air to store energy and perhaps power a car. It's possible. My point is that fundamental thermodynamical constraints impose hard upper limits on the efficiency of that process. As in, it won't scale. With the pressures they are using, the energy density is horrible -- their car has a range of something like 50 miles moving less than 30 miles per hour, and that's without headlights, windshield wipers, ventilation, air conditioning, radio, and other things we expect from a car. Adding those things would reduce the range even further. This isn't something you can easily solve -- the tanks are already state of the art, so you can't jack up the pressure. On top of that, the efficiency is horrible and cannot be improved. When you are running the compressor, a large part of the energy input is dissipated as heat (this is proportional to the difference in pressures). If you want to increase the pressure to get better energy density, even more energy gets wasted by the compressor. This cannot be avoided in any way. In fact, this car is probably already far less efficient than an ICE when you consider losses in the compressor. They say it takes $2.50 to drive 50 miles, which is even worse than a much larger Prius.
In comparison, vehicles powered by batteries have much higher charging efficiency, far better energy density, and far fewer parts. Lithium-ion batteries can easily give you a range of a couple of hundred miles. Electric motors are pretty much maintenance-free. It's easier to add things like power steering or air conditioning. It's easy add regenerative braking, which boosts efficiency by a lot in stop and go traffic. Not to mention, you don't have tanks with enough ultra-high-pressure air to level a small building.
Seems like Wikipedia covers EV conversions in this article
Since a lot of the Beetles still run in South-America, an electric conversion kit for it could be a good idea.
The demand for EV conversion kits, even though many of them are not that well designed, is another indicator, that the traditional car (and oil) industry, do not want to fill the people's demand for electric cars, since they obviously will earn less on them, because of the lesser demand for servicing, and the obvious need for uh, no oil.
Oh, even replacing the batteries, and even if they really were expencive, wouldn't make the automobile industry's day, since the battery is (or should be) ONE component you can replace fairly easily, if the car is reasonably well constructed, for a quick replacement of the batteries. (Few are, to this date, however unless you use lead acid batteries, the batteries can last much longer than you would expect, or they really should!)
And who says you would want to buy a new battery from the original manufacturer, if this were priced after the same scheme as ink cartridges? The batteries would be subject to a price competition, and maybe you would stick to cheaper battery technology with a lower range, if your needs for driving were not that big, or maybe you replace electric components or batteries yourself, 'robbing' the automotive industry for even more bucks they'd planned to earn on service?
Therefore also, GM owns the patent on the NiMH battery-patent (they are in a patent dispute with Toyota), and control it, so that cells over something like 10AH cannot be licensed for production (Which, in turn, make them unpractical for homebrew EVs) Guess they somehow 'ask questions', if your little EV-factory suddenly order 10000s of these ones, to connect 10 or 20 by 20 in parallel and series for a hefty EV-battery, or they simply give you a price which simply isn't affordable for your 'project'. NiHMs are very good batteries, but need close monitoring, not to be under or overcharged, so they get damaged, which means, you want battery packs with fewer, larger cells, not many smaller cells, for your EV conversion.
How about other alternatives?
Sturdy wet electrolyte filled NiCd batteries from SAFT are heavily overpriced, though they are as easily made, as ordinary lead acid batteries, and for some 'mysterious reasons', there has been much more trouble with them in our electric cars in Norway, than there probably is with them in airplanes, trains, submarines etc. If you have a lot of money and know what you do, you could use NiCds, but must first be able to get hold of them. (Which might prove difficult in countries outside those who have many EVs which use them, like Norway)
Litium ion batteries are not so much in the hands of the automobile industry, but need very well constructed circuits, to protect them from over or undercharge, plus you need to keep them not too cold during charge, are still expencive to buy (but not to produce) and is still no real option for those who want to convert their electric car 'at home', which means most people in practice are left with ordinary lead acid batteries as their only option, if they are going to do a conversion to electric.
Which means, you will probably not get the best range out of your lead acid electric converted automobile, which together with the less resources those who make electric cars have, compared to the regular automobile industry, makes people falsely believe that electric cars is doomed to be something awkward, golfcart-like, only two seats, and only a short range, novelty item.
The truth is, as many Californians, and some Norwegians do know, that really good electric cars WERE made some years ago, like the Toyota RAV 4 EV, GM EV1, Ford Ranger EV, Peugeot 106 EV, Citroën Saxo EV, Berlingo Partner and not the least - Think City, although it has only two
Anyone working for $20k should invest part of their paycheck in something called "condoms". Don't have kids if you can't afford them. And if you get pregnant anyway, there's millions of people looking to adopt.
If you dig around on their site you'll find that the only documented range for their car is 7 km (from memory). That is less than 5 of your Earth miles. They then demonstrate that this can be extrapolated out to several hundred kilometres by multiplying it by a series of numbers. That is pretty funny.
Note that vehicles powered by compressed air have a long history, it has been used in a shunting lococmotive, and many early torpedoes. I am quite sure they have a running vehicle, what they don't have is a useful solution for most people.
From the literature i have read, putting the batteries in the front adds a bit of weight which helps balance the thing a bit, and also is better from a safety point of view. Those lead acid batteries are nice and crumply(sp?) too, which helps in a frontal collision. Not sure if using unexploded li-ion batteries would give you the same benefit though... might want to improve the firewall a bit.
So aerodynamics aside, they aren't a bad choice for a first ev.
The people who produced the television show apparently think that this is an interesting enough show to get ratings.
There is no reason to believe the network has fact checkers which do anything more that a cursory look. I really got turned off in the first place by your apparent willingness to trust the supposed fact checkers of a sensationalist "science" show over the (very easy to check) math of the post you replied to. Then to add insult to injury you use that fucking line saying basically you assume the network has fact-checkers more qualified than
I understood your attacks on them possibly having an "extremist environmentalist agenda." What didn't make sense was how an air powered car is better for the environment. It burned my ass again because it appeared to be an out-of-the-blue attack on a nonexistent foe.
(bye bye karma)
I dub thee... Sir Phobos, Knight of Mars, Beater of Ass.
Old Beetles (and Squarebacks and Fastbacks, if you can find them anymore) are surprisingly simple and effective vehicles. Many of the parts are stamped or welded stampings (don't *ever* let the hamfisted towtruck operator sling your old Beetle.) They're pretty simple to work on, though you should expect to hack yourself a couple of times on the engine air shroud. As an EV donor, it's probably a pretty good choice.
However, I've driven them on the New York Thruway in winter, and lemme tell ya, the things dart around something fierce at highway speeds in the slightest of crosswinds. Ballasting with lead batteries up front will definitely help keep the nose pointed where you requested. A friend of mine, who's an Aero professor at U of Texas, described the old Beetle as "one of the most abominable aerodynamic designs ever." He'd done wind tunnel testing to back up his statement. Hopefully I got the quote right.
Dude, you need psychological help.
and then convert it to electric with a $3000 conversion kit from e-volks. (They also have a $1500 conversion kit, but I'd go with the better one if I were you.)
Please don't.. the e-volts kits are fantastically underpowered for a car. Despite their claims, a 72V series DC vehicle will not do freeway speeds. Best practice in hobbiest conversions has been closer to 120VDC for awhile. The absolute minimum for a freeway EV is 96V and a small car (Geo Metro). Top end at 96V will be 60-65mph, and a 29+ second 0-60mph time. Most Americans will not be comfortable with that level of acceleration. Also e-volks is using a 6.5" diameter motor. Once again 8" motors are the minimum, and most conversion choose 9" motors. A 6.5" motor will be prone to overheating on long grades, and will not live long.
Expect to spend about $8000-$10,000US on the parts and hundreds of hours of labor on a hobbiest conversion. There are a few kits to simplify the process. Canadian EV has an S-10 and Geo kit, and Electric Automotive has Porsche and Rabbit kits.
I have been working on a kit for the 2003-2006 Mazda 3. It is still in the early stages, but if a customer wants to purchase the parts I will do the conversion work for free. I have done a few others, including a 99 Ford Ranger, 1987 Toyota MR2, and assisted in several others. Some notes from my conversion can be found on my website
and TV segment showing the MR2 on the road from the show Austin Now! (about 2/3 thru). Please feel free to email if you have more questions. evinfo AT mindbent.org
The energy needed to move my car with electricity is roughly the same as the energy needed to move my car with infernal combustion. The right question is "How much energy does it really take to haul my ass to the office/groceryStore/brothel and why do I continue to bump it when I try to fly?"
There is a reason that we call moving freight around shipping even when it gets done in a truck.
Television is all about entertainment. I bet owning an air powered car would be entertainment too! No one mentioned maintenance of a compressed air system. Compressing air creates condensation inside the iron tanks. Note that tanks have a lifespan. An air dryer is required. Often this would be a heat exchanger and a molecular sieve to reduce the dew point down to -40F. 100 horsepower is going to need 74,600 watts by definition assuming 100% efficiency. Since we are dealing with compressed air, multiply that by 10. So you are going to need about 1 megawatt from the utility. Bring in the electrical switchgear. The support center for a single car is going to end up into one big industrial megaplex with three phase oil filled transformers.
People have tried this. Its not science, its not practical, its fun. If you enjoy waste.
Glad to see you responded non-AC. Always the better approach. My only criticism of your view is that you assume that there AREN'T fact checkers who work for television who give things more than a cursory glance. Having worked in network television in the past, I can very easily, and with authority, tell you that you are wrong. The so-called "fact checkers" are continuity personnel. Not only are they responsible for making sure that everything in the show flows properly, but they also need to make sure that the show doesn't come off as people "talking out of their asses". They spend a good deal of time on thoroughly checking fact with experts when they can, or by doing reasonably heavy research. The reason why? To keep the know-it-all windbags in their places (Seeing that /. is the realm of the know-it-all windbags, I can see why a lot of Slashdotters would be offended by this notion). It was also my experience that when the continuity folks couldn't gain access to experts, the fact checking dropped in quality to a point where a snivveling windbag would complain, but the general population (including some knowledgable people) wouldn't. Some of us are very happy to overlook slight amounts of wrong information if it's not damaging. This is one of those case. Unless you're some kind of know-it-all windbag... ;P Just kidding.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Fact checkers or not, the show allowed a company to make erroneous (if not fraudulent) claims. To claim a vehicle running off of compressed air is a suitable replacement for an ICE or battery powered consumer vehicle in all but the most extreme of cases is ludicrous.
Ailenw's math is simple, sound, and correct - as are the simple conclusions he draws.
No one seems to be willing to attack his math - everyone keeps defending the idea of an air car because it passed the muster of a frickin' TV show.
That is what compels me to continue this debate. Point out the flaws in his math or reasoning. Stop using the TV show as any sort of defense.
I dub thee... Sir Phobos, Knight of Mars, Beater of Ass.
They wouldn't use steel (iron) tanks. They most likely would use some sort of blown thermoplastic (HDPE?) tank wrapped nine-ways-to-Friday in fiber composite.
I dub thee... Sir Phobos, Knight of Mars, Beater of Ass.
I can do 18-20 in the flats on my road bike with just me providing the power. If that is all the power that the electric kit will produce - why bother. Just get into shape and do it yourself.
I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them
Face it. This is the modern world where TV has more power to move people than fact. If you want something different, your time is over. The only way to change this is to dismantle the progress of the previous century. Once we hit the 21st century in 2000, the time to pine away for the old days and the old ways was all gone. I'm not going to try and disprove the math because I don't understand it, nor do I want to. I also don't think most people care. IF you want to argue about something your best bet is to argue against the entire culture of humanity since television is more powerful than any force (internets aside) that has ever impacted civilization. Or you can just join the 21st century and watch what really matters on TV...
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
WTF?
I'm not rallying against TV. Where you got that I don't know.
I'm saying that I had good reason to question the existence of fact-checkers on that program.
I don't understand how this conversation went from:
alienw: "air cars aren't practical - here's the math why"
to
whatshisname: "yeah huh, I saw it on TV"
to
me: "Forget what you saw on TV - the math is sound"
to
whatshisname: "I believe the TV program checks it facts"
to
me: "I can't believe they do, or if they do they don't care - for the math is sound."
to
you: "Trust me - TV programs have fact checkers - good ones."
to
me: "Then they messed up (if they exist) - for the math is sound."
to
you: "Why are you wasting your time rallying against TV. I don't understand nor care about the math."
I dub thee... Sir Phobos, Knight of Mars, Beater of Ass.
Well in general you got it right. Who cares about the math? If it's on TV, then it must be true. That's the general perception of the world. We don't need people on crusades to try and enlighten the masses if the masses are too stupid to know what's true. If TV says air powered cars are feasible, then they are and the math can go take a hike. How do you think we got to where we are today? Education? Get into the 21st century groove dude!
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
You're wondering the same thing I was not too long ago. Should I? Could I? I WILL!
I recently bought a 40' bus to make into an RV. I started considering various things about it. The bus has huge spaces to store batteries. It has a whole lot of real estate on the roof for solar panels. I could use the solar panels to charge the batteries, and replace the heavy diesel engine with an electric motor at a fraction of the weight.
I started crunching numbers on my own. Then I talked to some folks who are already doing EV conversions. The bus only has about 250hp and gets almost 10mpg, which is comparible to many SUV's, although it weighs a whole lot more (roughly 30k pounds). The gearing allows that seemingly low horsepower to move the heavy weight.
If I stuffed the lower sections of the bus to a reasonably heavy weight (roughly 8 tons), it would take days or weeks to charge the batteries, and even then I would only get about 100 to 200 miles out of it. The cost would be more than I could possibly spend in the rest of my life on diesel fuel, even at the recent high prices.
You can convert a car. There are several companies offering kits of some variety. You will lose a good bit of storage space to the batteries, and a lot of the performance due to the added weight. You'll most likely only get 100 miles or so on a full charge in ideal conditions.
A conversion car should be small and light. Unfortunately, that means you don't have a lot of room for batteries, which means you'll need to recharge more. Don't plan on going far from home, or you'll be catching a ride with a tow truck.
The worst part is, unless you are really close friends with someone willing to sell you parts under wholesale, or you have a rich friend willing to finance your project, you'll put more into the car than it'll ever be worth.
Now, with all that said, I *DO* eventually plan on building a small electric car to run to the grocery store with. It'll be a matter of when the price of solar panels drop more, and I have some free time on my hands. A sand rail / rail car / dune buggy with something resembled an enclosed body is what I'm thinking of. It won't be practical for much, but it'll be a fun hobby. Don't set your expectations too high if you start building one. There are garages all over the world where people have started all kinds of fun projects and never finished.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Actually I thought that if you compressed the air enough, and it lost enough heat, that liquidification might increase effeicency from "laughable range" up to the "chuckle-snicker" range. Using ambient heat to boil the liquid air would help; and I'm too lazy to do the math.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
"I'm too poor to buy anything but an old clunker, and not eager to pollute the atmosphere (or empty my wallet) with gasoline."
First where do you live?
Electric cars do not do well in very cold climates. The cold can really shorten their range.
Also if you are in a very hot climate and if you put in AC you will shorten your range.
How far do you have to drive a day?
Is it all flat or do you live in area with a lot of hills?
What is the maximum distance you will need to drive?
Anything over about 35 miles and a do it yourself ev will not work.
Might I make some other suggestions.
How about an old VW golf diesel? They get 40+mpg and you could try and locate a source of biodiesel if you want to be extra green. Not only that you would be supporting a new fuel source.
How about Propane? There are conversion kits available that will allow you to run off clean burning propane. Hank Hill will thank you.
You could also try and ride a bike as much as possible. It will help keep the air clean an you healthy.
A nice Ninja 250 motorcycle is also an option. You can buy one new for 3000 and used for about 2500. If you don't crash it you will get close to what you pay for it when you sell it. Did I mention it gets over 70MPG and is a lot of fun to ride?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I have been watching the EV conversion market for a long time. I have amassed a few quality web sites links for advise on converting a car to EV and some of them sell the parts. The arguments about moving the pollution from tail pipe to smoke stack are just arguments. As long as you don t expect an EV to totally replace an ICE car and want to save energy and money on your daily commute, an EV is great way to go.
Most EVers have one EV car for the daily drive and one ICE or hybrid for longer trips. All of the EVers I have read about get a kick out of sneeking up on friends with their silent cars and out running sports cars from a standing start at the light. Electric motors can provide max torq at any RPM. ICE motors only supply max torq at a very narrow range of RPMs.
The only reason I don t build one myself is the lack cash to buy a host car and materials to convert it. If I had the cash, I would go with an AC based system with nickel metal hydride batteries and maybe some ultra-caps for enhanced acceleration and regenerative braking. AC systems do the best job at regenerative breaking even without ultra-caps. DC systems require special circuits and the motors requre an extra set of brushes for regenerative breaking or reverse.
The sites listed here have complete guides and step-by-step pictures of their examples conversions. The hardest part is understanding how to size the motor you need and the battery pack to run it and where/how to mount the pack. Otherwise anybody that can change a waterpump or alternator can do one of these. It just takes longer and lots of planning.
AC drive systems for electric vehicles
Electro Automotive Catalog
Electro Automotive Electric Car Conversions
High End AC Drive Systems and Power Electronics for Electric Vehicles
AC Propulsion Home
EVA-DC - Build an EV Choosing a Car
Electricity is made by burning fossil fuels -- the more you consume, the more the environment is polluted.
So don't bother...
Unless you plan to run your car on duracell's....
Convert your car to run on either pure ethanol or biodiesel instead. You might actually save the environment that way.
Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
If you are OK with a vehicle that has a 30 mile range, a top speed under 50 mph, perhaps the e-volks is for you. But in general the frameless construction and torsion bar suspension of the old Beetles makes them an extremely poor choice for electric vehicles (you wouldn't know this from the amazing number of people who've done it... unless you actually talk to those people, that is!).
The Porsche 914, Chevy S-10 pickup, and the Volkswagen Rabbit, on the other hand, all make for excellent conversion vehicles with good range and no "disintegrating suspension" problems from excessive battery weight.
Look for Bruce Parmenter's S-10 or Michael Brown's Voltsrabbit. Or just go to Shari Prange's Electro Automotive site and look at the fine, well supported, time-tested kits for sale there. Shari, Bruce and Michael have been driving electric conversions daily for a decade or more.