Battery Powered Tram Charges in 60 Seconds
SK writes to tell us that a new streetcar, powered by lithium battery, has been invented by the Railway Technical Research Institute in Kokubunji, Tokyo. The new transport is capable of speeds of 40 kph for 15 kilometers and can convert 70 percent of its deceleration energy into electricity which is then sent back to the battery which can recharge in under one minute.
Well, yes and no. Power delivery is not a problem at all. Look at the cable cars in San Fransisco, any modern subway... really most modern rail systems. However, if they can turn 70% of their breaking power in to electrical energy, accelerating the train back up to speed or, apparently, 15Km of crusing can be done absolutely for free. Lowering the carbon footprint to make it more environmentally friendly and cutting costs for the opperator all at once.
Yup, and adding batteries and control electronics and employing people to write control software and building the damn things doesn't add any carbon at all!
See, that's the problem with current thinking re the carbon problem. We're just throwing more technology at the problem, technology which is subsidized entirely by the present fossil fuel economy. The only real long term solution to the carbon footprint problem is to radically re-think how we live our lives. Do we need to travel to and from work everyday when all we do is manipulate information?
It seems we now have the ideal battery (also called a "capacitor"), now let's concentrate on creating the superconducting cables and contacts.
Often the short term cost of a long term solution is great. From that the long term problem eventually gets solved/improved though. Even if this seems a waste in some ways it places building blocks for the next step. With out these kinds of projects it would be difficult for us to think differently or even transition to a new lifestyle. In New Zealand, if everyone employed solar water heating we would save 50% of household power usage from the old water cylinder. That's the amount a $1 billion power plant could give us extra. So each person spends an extra $10,000 on their home instead of a cheap water cylinder and the long term savings for the country are huge.
I agree that throwing ever more Hi-tech at the problem probably won't fix anything but thinking about how we use our current low tech in different ways will. I am studying architecture and have taken many papers and read many books on sustainable building (Not just in the sense of green building either) and can tell you from my point of view it is where humanity can save the most resources. Building smaller more contained rooms saves on heating, so does building thick concrete floors. The way we use windows etc etc.
I also think that taking an open source approach to more of our research and getting rid of patents will save a lot of money and carbon dioxide emissions. Too much effort is being put in to redundancy.
The benefit being a reduction in your personal power bill, lower carbon emissions etc. We did it and save around $100 per month now. Over 10 years your installation is free.
If its battery is anything like lithium ion batteries used in laptops, then after a year it'll only go 5 km on a charge instead of 15. Also it will do weird things like indicate that it has enough charge to go another 5 km but just suddenly use up its last 20% in under a minute.
I am not a big fan of lithium ion tech. It seems very gimmicky to me; allowing manufacturers to claim that their laptop batteries last N hours when in fact that will only be true for less than 6 months, as the charge capacity of lithium ion batteries always rapidly deteriorate.
My Panasonic Y2 battery started at 6+ hours per charge, and is now, after not even three years, down to about 2.5 hours per charge.
So if the streetcar in question uses similar tech, then I would expect its range to diminish rapidly with recharges. Since it will be recharged much more frequently than any laptop would, can we even expect its battery to last a whole year before becoming basically worthless?
Visit Seattle and ride the SLUT!
Have gnu, will travel.
Rail doesn't necessarily mean heavy. And trams are usually powered by low-voltage DC (relatively low: 600V as opposed to up to 25kV for a lot of trains) overhead lines, which makes pumping energy from regenerative braking back into the system relatively easy. And keep in mind also that rolling friction on steel rails is a lot less than friction from a rubber tire on a roadway.
-b.
Most cities in the US don't fit that model, however. Public transit just won't work without population density and clustered areas of employment, and in the post-WWII development boom we put almost no limits on how much people could spread out. A lot of new development and zoning (at least on the east coast where I live) is beginning to take public transit into account, forcing suburbs back into more of a small-town model, with sidewalks and a centralized school, shopping district, and transit station that everyone can easily walk to. Maryland has more info up at http://www.mdp.state.md.us/smartintro.htm/.
New planning like this is really most effective near an old city with effective public transit, however. Cities which primarily developed in the 50's or later were planned around individual car ownership. When each individual is driving the most effective layout is to encourage a high number of lower-volume commuting routes, and it is very difficult to make mass transit work in a setup like that.