Slashdot Mirror
6 Major Pre-Production Electric Vehicles Compared
rbgrn writes with a review of six major pre-production electric vehicles. The review offers an easy side-by-side comparison of these six cars with projected release dates of either 2008 or 2010. "With all of the hype surrounding hybrid vehicles today, I thought I'd do some research and post my findings on the next generation of fully electric and plug-in hybrids. The fully-electric EV has had a bad name in the past, mostly due to insufficient battery technology, politics, lack of performance models and other factors. Starting this year with the Tesla Roadster, the EV is going to take on a new form in the eyes of John Q Public. Quiet, efficient EVs will start to become commonplace in the next few years as major manufacturers go into production with the newest generation of vehicle sporting more powerful motors, efficient generators and the latest battery technology."
Very nice but how long until they come standard with warp drives?
Excuse me while I gather the virgin sacrifice and assemble the pentagram required to solve your problem
There are very few $100,000+ cars that outperform the $100,000 ...
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Must be running their servers off that "insufficient battery technology"
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
It's only going to take one vehicle fire involving lithium ion batteries and then the public will sour on the whole thing for years.
Nice to hear, but EV's won't be feasible until the costs and reliability approach those of gas vehicles ( or when gas goes up to 10 bucks a gallon ). They also move the problem upsteam to the power plants. Still, we can dream, and I'm drooling over the Tesla.
But a purchase price of $30,000 for a hybrid (which you'll need if you plan to drive it more than 120 miles round trip without a recharge), no cargo space, and room for only one passenger makes this an extremely limited option. TFA's right, the Volt, provided they can keep the price UNDER $30K, will be by far the most attractive option. As a small car, I'd like to see the Volt priced under $20K, actually, but I'm sure it's only a pipe dream at this point, given what 1st gen hybrids like the Prius are going for.
My blog
Now if only the government could be relied upon to provide the necessary financial incentives to fuel this changeover...
With all these electric only cars on the horizon, what will hollywood use to explain the ease of exploding cars? Not that gasoline is so spontaneously explosive as they'd have people believe, but I'd imagine Li-Ion batteries would be even less so.
How will they sell movie tickets if everyone becomes aware that cars wont explode from a couple bullets?
By Robert Green on November 19, 2007 1:53 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)
With all of the hype surrounding hybrid vehicles today, I thought I'd do some research and post my findings on the next generation of fully electric and plug-in hybrids. The fully-electric EV has had a bad name in the past, mostly due to insufficient battery technology, politics, lack of performance models and other factors. Starting this year with the Tesla Roadster, the EV is going to take on a new form in the eyes of John Q Public. Quiet, efficient EVs will start to become commonplace in the next few years as major manufacturers go into production with the newest generation of vehicle sporting more powerful motors, efficient generators and the latest battery technology.
The big change will be the introduction of full EVs and plug-in hybrids. Full EVs are as one would expect: A fully electric vehicle that uses no other fuels. A plug-in hybrid is a vehicle that uses electricity as its primary power source and is equipped with a generator that supplements electricity as-needed. Many of the plug-in hybrids have an electric-only range of 30-60 miles with an extended range of 400-700 miles. The difference to the consumer is the way in which the vehicle is charged. Traditional hybrids are powered primarily by gas and thus need to be refueled regularly. Plug-in hybrids plug in at home and to most people that means they park the car at home, plug it in overnight and it's ready to go the next morning. This means that if you're driving less than your EV range each day, you'll never need to put a drop of gas into the car. How nice does that sound?
The following table is a consolidation of data collected from many different sources, cited at the bottom of this article. It has many key points that the average person may be interested in. Much of the data is still not readily available due to the pre-production and concept status of some of the models. I will do my best to keep this chart up-to-date.
(Copy of the chart)
As you can see from the production dates, four out of six of the vehicles are scheduled to be in production in 2010 but the other two, the Tesla Roadster and Aptera are scheduled for production in 2008. Both companies are currently taking pre-orders. Estimated production numbers are difficult to find but Chevy has claimed 60,000 in the first year.
Performance is a hot issue with EVs and this generation is no doubt going to address that. I calculated a figure where applicable which divides the vehicles weight in pounds into its peak power rating. The resulting number gives an indication for how well the vehicle should be able to accelerate. While numbers are only available for a few cars, the Tesla Roadster easily takes the lead with a a 0-60 of 4 seconds and a 68.5 Watt/Pound ratio. This should prove to many that EVs are now capable of being mainstream performance cars.
Most of these plug-in hybrids are expected to have a 3-cylinder turbo diesel or gasoline generator which usually produces slightly more than the continuous power rating of the car. Translation: You can drive as far as you want with this car only refueling and not having to recharge. This alone should resolve many people's fears of range with EVs.
The Aptera is one of the most interesting vehicles here with its very aerodynamic, futuristic design and high range specifications. It comes in two models: Fully EV and Hybrid. The Full EV model is estimated to be $26,900 and the Hybrid at $29,900.
The Mitsubishi MiEV Sport is supposed to compete with the Tesla Roadster but currentl
Yay! Let's all buy fully-electric cars! Together we can take the power grid down!
You just got troll'd!
It depends where you live. In large portions of the US, we use this new-fangled thing called hydro-electric power, and we supplement it with wind power. So, our basic cost is less than 7 cents per KWh. Other areas of the US use different energy supplies - Vermont is mostly Hydro with nuclear (used to own Green Mountain Power), and much of the Northeast uses imported hydro power with nuclear and some coal.
Some places generate and sell their own power from home or farm based wind turbines and solar cells - especially in the West.
So the cost of the energy ranges from $3 a gallon (cheap in the West) for gas to $0.30 gallon equivalent for electricity in coal states to $0.04 gallon equivalent for electricity in the Northwest.
At that point, the cost of retrofitting - which is less than $5000 if done by Honda or Toyota (which sell plug-in hybrids in Japan even if not in the US yet) or Lexus, or $15,000 if you use say one of the three conversion businesses in my county alone (King County in Washington state) - is price compatible if you commute to work nearby.
Of course, you could do what Willie Nelson is doing and go plug-in bio-diesel with your truck, or even convert a classic Cadillac to get more than 80 mpg using an efficient bio-diesel engine with plug-in hybrid electric power tuned to the make and model.
Some people talk.
Other people do.
P.S.: If you're on facebook and use the I Am Green app, there's a We Are Green Seattle group you can join now. Let's beat out Vancouver BC and San Francisco CA!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Where we're going, we don't need "roads".
EV's are great. They preserve our oil supply since they run on coal.
I know this is offtopic, but I was shocked to see that this page is already in google's index.
The government can't save you.
In all seriousness, there has been much progress on the warp drive front. In 1926 or so, theories claimed that you needed many times the energy of the universe to create a warp field, and your craft had to be a good deal lighter than zero mass.
... and your craft only needs to be very little lighter than zero mass, or maybe it was acually zero.
;)
The latest benchmark is from cirka 1986, I think, and claims only 2-3 times the energy of our local sun
But the warp field won't make a positive impression on those in the lane next to you, or the little old lady on the sidewalk...
"Good news, everyone!"
Amusingly, it seems like there is a car or van on fire in my county probably every day - some days there are up to 10 car fires.
You can live in Fear.
Or you can be a proud patriotic American and refuse to live in Fear.
Those are the choices.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
If the problem is global warming/greenhouse gases, then the solution is fuel that doesn't produce said gases. Electric cars reduce, but do not eliminate, these emissions, because while they are more efficient, the power has to come from somewhere, and right now that means a power plant. The alternatives to fossil fueled power plants just aren't mature enough at this stage in the game. Solar is very inefficient, and wind is costly and unsightly. Nuclear presents its own problems. As far as automotive tech goes, I am much more interested in hydrogen.
Shouldn't there be an iCar just around the corner?
At least the hype should be just around the corner if nothing else.
I suppose considering the battery life issues that surround the iPhone, maybe this wouldn't be such a good idea after all.
At least the thing would look sleek and have good commercials, even if it didn't perform very well and cost 5X more than anything comparable.
The Aptera looks a lot like the vehicle I've been envisioning for several years: 3 wheel, outrigger front wheels, flattened teardrop shape for optimum aerodynamics. The differences are my design had 2 seats and a separate electric motor hub-mounted on each of the front wheels instead of just driving the rear wheel motorcycle-style. Still, at under $30K, I would seriously consider buying the hybrid model for commuting.
If I read this correctly, none of these cars are actually in production yet.
The ZENN car is and can be purchased now.
http://zenncars.com/
The site was slashdotted, so here's the google cache
Reality is now considered flamebait?
So where do you plan on getting the hydrogen? It doesn't exist naturally on earth.
Steam reformation (currently the most economic method)? Releases CO2 as one of the resulting products from the process.
Electrolysis? Where do you get electricity for this? Coal? CO2 emissions. Solar? Inefficient (as of now). Wind? "costly and unsightly" Nuclear?
The only advantage hydrogen offers is that it can be ultimately converted into mechanical energy through both internal combustion engines and fuel cells producing electricity to power electric motors(read: ELECTRIC CARS).
Just remember, with hydrogen, "the power has to come from somewhere," too.
The entire car crashes and turns into an elaborate electric chair....
Or the battery liquefies and dissolves the guy...painfully (think "The Blob").
Or better yet! BOTH AT ONCE!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Check it out at their site. They were showing these vehicles, and giving rides, at the recent AltCar fair here in Santa Monica. The machines are built in Poland and assembled in Rhode Island, and give every appearance of being extremely high quality, rugged machines. They are so-called maxi-scooters, and are very substantial machines, about the size of a Harley and not a Vespa.
And, at $11,000 or so, are not ridiculously expensive. I am seriously considering buying one when they open their LA showroom, supposedly within the next month or so.
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
The ZENN is an NEV regulated to a maximum 25mph. This renders it useless for many, many people.
Hell, even the initial electric vehicles like the Tesla are sub 4 seconds for acceleration.
http://www.teslamotors.com/performance/acceleration_and_torque.php
Mwhahahahahaha... I want one...
Deleted
I really don't see why anyone would want one, except maybe as a toy. It's pretty easy to show why.
The average home has a 150A electrical capacity from the grid. 150A at 120V is 18kW. 18kW is 24hp.
Assuming you have a 100% perfectly efficient electric car and charging system (ha!), and use 100% of your house's energy capacity a one hour charge will let you drive your 24hp moped for one hour. Or, you can drive your tiny 100hp car for about 15 minutes. An eight-hour charge gives you 2 hours drive time on a 100hp car. For a more powerful car (200hp), you'll get one hour on an overnight charge.
That just sucks. I can fill up a car with gas in two minutes, and drive hundreds of miles.
Remember, this is the absolute theoretical maximum, and using 100% of your house's available power. In practice, the numbers are much, much worse. No amount of engineering will ever overcome this.
There are plenty of other problems (battery disposal, electricity generation, reliability, etc.) but the pure energy equation is a killer - there's really no way around it, unless you want to be relegated to puttering around in a golf cart all the time.
I'd really like a plug in car, top speed 65mph or more, 70 mile cruising range (work and back with plenty to spare). The charging time could be 12 hours.
It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
It's amazing how hyped up all these new technologies are, and yet in the long run the best way to save energy is behavioral modification, not necessarily technological innovation(though that isn't bad either). It's amazing how many people in the states still refuse to do this little thing called carpool. 6 people in a gas guzzling SUV is still more efficient than if they all took their own Priuses(or however you make that plural). Not to mention the fact that in the US, something like over 80% of all car trips are less than 2 miles and yet bikers are looked down upon as if they are worthless pieces of trash(and respected accordingly). It still seems that in the states if you aren't driving, you are defective and your life isn't worth the effort of giving you your legal space on the road.
Not to mention technologies like motor scooters that can get over 100 miles/gallon(depending on how you drive them) that many people refuse to use, probably for the same reason as noted above. Conservation is still the best form of alternative energy, and yet I wonder how long it is going to take before Americans realize that!
Monstar L
Those price conversions include batteries?
If so, Of what kind of range?
And you can get Honda or Toyaota to do plug in conversions here in the US??
1 Gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 36.7kW-hr. This is my reference.
1 Gallon @ $3.00 or 36.7kW-hr x $0.07/kW-hr = $2.569 A little less expensive, but not quite as cheap as you make it out to be.
Disclaimer: This comparison relies upon an assumption that the efficiency of an internal combustion engine powered car is (very) roughly equivalent to a battery charge and discharge cycle to power an electric motor of an electric car. Yes, an electric motor will be more efficient than an ICE, but you have to count the power going into the battery charger (which will take into account charging losses, battery losses, and discharge losses), not the just the motor, to properly compare costs. To really make a true comparison, you need the miles per kW-hr for the electric to compare with the gasoline equivalent MPG.
I was kind of hoping that one day I could buy an electric car that was covered in solar panels. I live in a city and drive my car maybe 30 miles a day and occasionally take extended trips sometimes going days without moving it. Theoretically if it were solar powered I could get by never plugging it in anywhere. I think that would be an ideal for people who live in areas such as mine who don't have access to a garage and our personal outlets are above a sixth floor.
FlyingPizzas.com, for the tasteful hermit
How about something that can go on the highway, too.
25 MPH (50KM/h) MAX won't cut it with me.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
Big industrial coal power plants have 35% efficiency. Electric motors have 90% efficiency, and electric cars get 'free' regenerative braking. The standard car engine is 20% efficient.
http://commontragedies.wordpress.com/2007/10/29/coal-fired-car/
So, in spite of burning a dirtier fuel, coal powered electric cars produce slightly less CO2 per mile than standard gasoline powered cars, and there is PLENTY of coal.
You are correct. Hydrogen does not occur naturally on earth. I had recently read an article, but I can't find it now, about a method of generation using electrolysis powered by solar power. The article I read claimed 80% efficiency. I will continue looking for the article, and post a link if I can find one. If anyone else has seen that information, I would be grateful for a link.
The ZENN is a neighborhood vehicle, which can't go more than 25mph. The price of $12k is nice but it's an in-town thing, which is great for some but those with a commute on the highway (like me) are still going to need something else.
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
You can live in Fear.
Or you can be a proud patriotic American and refuse to live in Fear.
Those are the choices. In related news, the population of Fear Town is constantly diminishing for no aparent reason.
Looking back at my sometimes mis-spent youth I'm wondering how long it will take for someone to start selling performance enhancements for these new fangled electric cars.
What's the Prius equivalent to a Holley Double Pumper or headers and glass pack mufflers?
Three Squirrels
Allows you to drive up to 640 miles via it's generator. Since it is just a generator, they can optimize it's performance for charging. There is no need to have all the transmission aspects of a I.C.E. attached to a drive-train. This allows it to be very efficient.
Furthermore, having the means to charge your vehicle in the garage (with a net savings for $35-$75 a fill-up times x number of fill-ups per year) alters the value of solar cell roofing.
Those uber-expensive solar panels on your roof that cost you an extra $200/month for the next 10 yrs, all of a sudden are not quite as costly in your budget when they eliminate $100 or more in expenditures on gasoline.
These vehicles will likely spur major growth in solar cell production.
Batteries depend on the conversion.
Some models have (e.g. Japan) a 5 kilometer range - this is 3 miles for the one country in the world not using metric.
Some models have (e.g. Europe) a 50 kilometer range - this is 30 miles.
Some models have up to a 250 mile range (US conversion usually around this much).
Depends on battery type, car/truck model, and who does it.
Cost depends on factors such as - in factory (Japan/Europe) - usually a lot lower in price, sometimes as simple as the new "switch" added to the dash of Honda hybrids that turns off the A/C unless you turn it on and runs on battery until down to 1/5th charge - which gives you an effective mpg around 60 mpg with no real change to on-board batteries. Or after market - where someone goes in, rips out the engine, replaces it with a decent stepped up electric motor that can go 0-60 in 6.0 and a bio-diesel engine with all the tubes and add ons you need for this, plus putting decent batteries in locations that are more crash-resistant - this can run usually $10,000 to $50,000 depending on how extensive and what the target mpg and usage is.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
1. Make car that is electric with batteries.
2. Use a Stirling engine to recharge the battery pack when it gets down to 30% or less.
3 ????
4. Profit.
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
Down in Eugene Oregon there are a group of electric cars that can outdrag all the other drag racers. They use high-performance electric motors with souped up batteries, get around 100 mpg, and can even outdrag gasoline dragsters while they are going backwards using reverse - an electric motor doesn't really care which direction it spins if designed correctly.
Been doing this for a few years now.
You could easily mod a Prius to outdrag almost any car on the road without even trying. Heck, you could take an econo box and still out drag a gas engine.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The EV1 was only a failure in GM's eyes, no one else's. 120 miles on a charge isn't a bad thing and better batteries are available now than were 10 years ago. Last I looked, the Tesla came in at under $100k, which is still not quite the price point most people can handle. (It could be worse, of course, this could be a Venturi Fetish, at $660k. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2004/10/venturi_fetish.php )
I want my electric car and I want it noooooow, is that too much to ask?
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
My current commute is entirely practical to do with an electric car now. The only issue is availability of a charging point in my apartment building's garage. Here in B.C. most of our electricity comes from hydro power, so I'm not overly concerned about greenhouse gases.
The Vancouver public transit system has one of the larger fleets of electric trolley buses in North America. Assuming they pay more or less what I pay for electricity (they'll get a better bulk/industrial rate, but have distribution costs that I don't have), the running costs for the trolley buses are about the same as a Kei car.
We have hybrid buses in several cities in B.C. as well. They're the GM/Allison hybrids, which act very much like a giant Prius.
...laura
I'm going electric bio-diesel hybrid.
Besides, since electric motors can outdrag gasoline motors, I'll be spinning out so fast the cops won't even see me coming.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119532412570596991.html
"Sen. Clinton's Push to Double Autos' Average Fuel Economy Is Possible but Complicated"
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
How effective would it be to use only magnets for attitude control? A satellite in LEO has to rotate 360 degrees in about 90 minutes, so I'm wondering how that will work without momentum wheels and thrusters.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
In terms of helping the environment, electric and hybrid cars are a joke - they cost so much more (in terms of environmental impact) to produce and maintain than traditional cars. The average hybrid owner will not own their car for more then 3 years before jumping onto a newer model.
As long as cars uses lithium ion batteries, you WILL destroy the environment, you WILL have cars bursting into flames, and you WILL NOT get them at a reasonable price.
Get a car with a PZEV engine (if you can - California and New York are basically the only places you can buy them) if you want to help the environment. You'll save more money on the cost of the vehicle + maintenance + resell value than you ever will on gas compared to buying a hybrid.
The environmental religion (cult) that people have fallen into is probably the WORST thing to happen to the environment.
All of these new technologies do nothing but shift the focus from one form of pollution to another. Trading oil for electricity will not be a good idea for the environment until we can generate more electricity.
Solar panels are bad for then environment because they put out more crap when they're made than they'll ever save by producing "clean" energy during their useful lifetime.
The ONLY feasible solution we have is nuclear power.
It's cheap, efficient, clean, and safe.
The only issues are storing the waste (which we can do safely if we have the funding) and getting over people's fears, which we can't do in this environmentalist cult.
If you really want to make a dent on the market and attract the most number of buyers, the price will need to be down to $10,000, the price of a Hyundai Accent. While the extra technology of making a car a hybrid may justify the increase in cost (Civic vs. Civic Hybrid), someone is going to get out a calculator and figure out how many miles of driving it will take to have saved the different in gas cost...and not find the price to be worth it.
I am the average car buyer who makes a middle class wage. I have a family and bills. I cannot afford a $30,000 car that ultimately wouldn't not fit my entire family and the accompanying resources for 2 kids.
Bearded Dragon
Instead of EV or Hybrid or Hydrogen, what about "Air"?
http://www.theaircar.com/
So, it's 2:00 am and I'm a mile from home when my electric car runs out of joules. What is the electric equivalent of a gas can?
Oh, the humanity...
Presently there is a mental block like, "someday I may have to go more than 30 or 40 miles and what am I going to do if I run out of juice?". If a network of franchises spring up that will rent these dollies then more people would be receptive to the idea of purely electric vehicles. One can be purely on the grid for daily commute and simple errands. On the weekends/holidays where extra range is needed I would rent a dolly.
The steady state power consumption for most cars on the highway is around 40 or less I estimate. How big would be a 40HP genset? Small enough to be towed without serious impact on the handling?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
You are a troll, Taco Meat. Now you are spamming & threatening to troll more? Why don't you just go back to Digg?
What about the cities? I live in the apartment building, my car is parked on the street wherever I can find a spot. How would I charge it if it was electric? I don't believe new infrastructure (publicly accessible electrical outlets on the sidewalks?) will be built.
Does anyone see a viable solution? The only one I see is quick (semi)automated battery swap at the gas station (or "electric" station). But now that I thought about it it will probably be logistical nightmare - different cars will require different kind of batteries.
I think electric cars will only become viable when the time of full recharge is similar to full tank gas refill and mileage on the full charge is similar to that of full tank of gas.
If you click that link, you'll see that there is no way in hell "large portions" of the US use hydro.
Which calls the veracity of your entire post into question, and seeing as another poster debunked your cost numbers, I'd say you're just making things up.
Who does Honda retrofits? I have a Civic hybrid and would love to plug it in.
:v)
Can't find anyone to do it though.
Vik
IIRC, wasn't biodiesel just as safe on the environment and lasts longer versus electric? Isn't the problem with electric that the batteries die after a few years whereas a biodiesel will last hundreds of thousands of miles and also have minimal economic impact as well as actually increasing performance? So why do we push these slow ass inefficient as hell golf carts versus biodiesel getting 25MPG in a hummer with twice the horsepower?? It sure seems to look like they want something that will still fall apart after 5 years to keep market prices high, in the same fashion that apple stopped releasing the older models of their IPODs since you would have been able to find one for under 250 dollars if you were willing to settle for a 40 or 80 gig.
Electric cars are a nice thought, but I think it's too little, too late. Coal fired power plants will need to increase their output to make up for the energy demand lost to crude oil. Consumers will be more extravagant with their travel choices because "it's Ok, I have an electric car and not polluting". Meanwhile Big Energy reaps more dollars. There needs to be an alternative fuel source that is environmentally friendly and can produce a greater amount of energy than it takes to produce it. Would you spend 10 pounds of uranium to generate enough electricity to produce 8 pounds of hydrogen? In essence, electric cars are just a trade off that makes the consumer feel good. People need to start using less energy or things are going to get very difficult in the near future.
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
First, efficiency of generating electricity (work done/energy produced) is 60% tops. Then there is attenuation loss while its delivered to the consumer. Then it has to be stored in batteries which lose energy over time. Assuming that you get (and this is very optimistic) 55% efficiency at this point, you now have to spend this energy in an electric engine. Electric engine has THEORETICAL top efficiency of around 45%. Assume the engine actually works at 40%. So now you have .4*.55=22% efficiency. The theoretical efficiency of gasoline engine (which I don't remember at the moment) is 2-3 times that. So for every calory of heat we burn (and release into atmoshere) with a gasoline engine we'd get 2-3 as much work. Assuming that the energy is generated with coal or diesel power plants, this also means that that we release 2-3 times as much greenhouse gases while using electric engines. So the reason for this is what? Nuclear power plants and hydro plants? How much of the electric energy is produced using those? 20% using nuclear and about 10% using hydro. About 55% is produced using coal. These cars will just end up burning more coal and release massive amount of greenhouse gases. But hey, it's cool to be green.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Apparently you can buy and operate one in the US today; in Canada, you can only operate it in British Columbia, as LSVs (Low Speed Vehicles) are regulated by the provinces, and today only BC has regulations in place for them. If it was legal to sell them in Canada, they'd go for about $12K.
Thank you Rick Mercer!
you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
So the cost of the energy ranges from $3 a gallon (cheap in the West) for gas to $0.30 gallon equivalent for electricity in coal states to $0.04 gallon equivalent for electricity in the Northwest.
Math kitty sees what you've done there.
1 gallon-o-gas ~ 131 MJ
1 KWh = 3.6 MJ
In gasoline, you get $0.0229 per MJ.
In green energy:
1. $0.07/KWh = $0.0194 per MJ
2. $0.04 = gallon equivalent
3. ???
4. $0.0011/KWh ($0.04/gallon == $0.04/131 MJ == $0.04/131 MJ*3.6 MJ/KWh)
3 is either a free battery pack that continually prints money or a quantum device that redefines the Dollar-Joule.
Math like that buried the electric car. People were promised these huge savings and instead got a hulking over priced POS that was good for a maximum distance of 30 miles per day 5 days a week and required $15,000 in battery disposal and replacement fees every other year.
The electric car may happen one day, but it will have to at least be economically reasonable. Currently, I expect hybrids to be an economically reasonable purchase in 3-5 years (or at $5/gallon). You can't ask a family to drop $25% more on a car and not see some sort of fiscal benefit, and you can't call it mainstream until you can find a family vehicle sporting it for under $20,000 -- used.
Supercap energy storage has manyh benefits over battery: no memory effect, possible to charge very quickly without energy loss and a practically infinite lifetime.
And best of all, supercaps exist - today!
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Electric cars need energy and where does it come from? In a large part of America, that is from coal-fired power plants. But do you understand how much coal it takes to do this? How many power plants consume how much coal over how many years?
The Appalachian mountain range with their mountain top removal has the same problem as here in the west...Wyoming has several HUGE open pit coal mines and, for example, Colorado has a moderate sized coal fired power plant near Pueblo. The Commanche Power Generating Plant was built when I was at the University in the mid '70s. The power plant consumes coal -- LOTS OF IT! They're expanding it by 50% and adding another power unit now.
* Trains have been running to the Commanche Power station since 1976
* There are a minimum of 8 trains of coal each day to the power plant. Often 12 or more.
* Each Train has between 100 and 125 cars of coal
* Each car holds between 286,000 - 315,000 pounds of coal
30 Years = 10950 days
8 trains x 100 cars x 10950 days yields 8,760,000 cars of coal
8,760,000 cars x 286,000 lbs per car = 2,505,360,000,000 Pounds of coal
One could assume that 2.5 trillion pounds of coal have been burned.
That's 1,211,753,400 tons!
Now there's 45 cu ft per ton for hard coal
So just this one power plant has consumed 54,528,903,000 cu ft of coal.
That's just one power plant. That's one hell of a big hole! That's also only for one small power plant. Almost 7 times that number of trains run through here and who knows how many in other directions from the mines. That same mine in Wyoming is also sending about the same amount of coal to Utah and other states. The hole above is just to keep one power plant running. Wyoming Some day I'm going to head up there because I want to see the hole that has produced over a trillion cubic feet of coal..
27 trains a day come through here (and 27 empty trains return through here) every day.
Each of the 54 trains has six engines smoking away as they go back and forth for hundreds of miles.
If North, East, West and SouthWest all have comparable train volumes from just this one mine, and there are many similar mines in Wyoming, we are consuming coal in mass quantities and stripping the land of its features in the process.
So, now what does it cost to run your little green car?
Banjo - The more I know about Windoze, the more I love *nix
A Mazda 3 can be had for well under 20k A Ford Fusion for around 24k. 30K is about aveage for a big car or medium to small SUV.
I think the average car price is probably around $23k give or take.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
In large portions of the US, we use this new-fangled thing called hydro-electric power,
The problem with hydro which is often overlooked is the fixed capacity of the system. Many are under the illusion that all you need to do is dam a river with a new dam and wow, free power. Often overlooked is that hydro is gravity power from falling water. That is water moving from one elevation to another. Many people have no clue as to why there is no major (or minor) hydro plants on the mighty Mississippi River. The sad fact is Chicago Illinois is at an elevation of only 700 feet. Just how many 80 foot drop dams are you going to put between the gulf and Iowa? If you put in a dam and let the water back-up.. how much land would be under water? The river is over 2,000 miles long, but most of the elevation is below 1,000 feet. There isn't much falling water in there.
http://www.42explore2.com/missriv.htm
The river does have a system of Dams and Locks, but they are for Navigation, not power generation
"Twenty-nine locks and dams on the Mississippi and eight on the Illinois replaced rapids and falls with a stairway of water for commercial and recreational traffic."
They connected it to one of the Great lakes with a canal.
"The history of navigation on the Upper Mississippi River System goes back to the 1820's, when Congress authorized construction of a canal connecting Lake Michigan and the Illinois River and also authorized removal of snags and other obstructions in several reaches of the Mississippi River."
Remember that water flows downhill. Lake Michigan is at elevation 577 feet above sea level. The canal connects to the Illinois river which than empties into the Mississippi river. Let's face it, there just isn't a lot of elevation drop in the river to supoort power generation. There is barely enough elevation drop to drain a heavy rain.
Here is some stats on a couple of the dams. Both of them have a drop of less than 20 feet. These are not suited for commercial power generation.
http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA105334
http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA104703
Move on to the mighty Columbia, known for it's hydro. There are many dams in Oregon.
The Columbia River has the water from most of Montana, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. It enters Oregon near the Idaho border. One of the major dams is the McNary dam near Hermiston Oregon. The dam has a nominal pool level of 340 feet above sea level. That dam dumps right into the pool of the next dam which has a pool elevation of 265 feet. This stair step drop from pool to pool continues all the way down to the Boniville dam near Hood river. From there the river has very little drop all the way to the Pacific Ocean. Any more dams along there would simply flood out the powerhouse of the next dam upstream. The last dam the bonivile dam has a pool elevation of 74 feet. It discharges into the lower river near Portland Oregon. The river in Portland is at a nominal elevation of about 9 feet above sea level. That is why there are no dams on the Columbia between Portland and Astoria on the coast 80 miles away. If you put in a dam and allowed the pool to fill, all of downtown Portland would be under water.
Hydro power is cheap to produce, but there just isn't any more places with a good head of water to feed the demand for hydro power. There are a few creeks which can support some small hydro, but these are backyard projects. The environmentalists and outdoors men also resist the damming of every little stream. The lower Deschutes river is known for it's white water rafting. Damming that up would be a major legal battle.
The truth shall set you free!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA thanks! I needed a good clownpost to lift my spirits today.
Its brochure says the ZENN car's maximum speed is 25 mph. Although the reasoning behind that is fairly sound — it's designed for traffic-choked urban areas and slow-speed-zone residential areas — but, still... 25 mph...
Discussion System prefs link: http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editcomm
> Electric engine is less efficient (~40%) than internal combustin engine (~55%).
do you enjoy spreading FUD?
http://www.energyexperts.org/energy_solutions/res_details.cfm?resourceID=3823&keyword=cheap§or=All
"A 250 hp standard efficiency motor has a pretty good efficiency--on the order of 94.2%"
We're talking about CARS here, not over-priced golf carts like the ZENN.
I compared my 2006 F250 Crew Cab Long Bed with a 5.4L Gas engine to the Tesla Motors Tesla Roadster Electric car ( http://www.teslamotors.com/ ). I wanted to see what was the breakeven point for the Tesla (how many miles I had to drive before the Tesla would make sense).
In my estimates, I am not counting Insurance, Maintenance, Taxes or Cost of Financing. I am also making the assumption, that I will never go to Home Depot, haul something or plan anything with my family.
I am also assuming that both vehicles will last forever.
My truck cost me about $32,500 and gets about 13.8 MPG.
The Tesla Roadster cost $100,000 and gets about 50 miles on a buck.
I am assuming that Gas prices are $4.00 per gallon and the mileage on both vehicles are the same rate (i.e. average cost of City/Highway).
The Answer:
I would have to drive 250,000 miles before the cost benefit of owning the Tesla Roadster.
Now the I must admit that the Tesla Roadster is more of a babe magnet than my F250, but I will not factor in the cost of a divorce from my wife.
Well, I've been struggling to get my ideas through many EV manufacturers, but no one seems to be interested in increasing the range of electric vehicles in efficient ways. Here is my point: Instead of having to wait 'til the next power outlet to refuel a fully electric car every 120 miles running exclusively on the power stored in batteries, why not "help" it by generating some power with what is available along the way? I mean, some people tried solar powered vehicles, others tried power generation while you coast, but what about a combination of it all, and more! You have a lot of forces interacting while you drive, and one could use everything available! Imagine an electric vehicle, with solar panels on top, one motor in each wheel which generates power while you coast, power generating shock absorbers (and here in Quebec, Canada, roads are bumpy!), and why not a set of fans, which would be hidden while accelerating or cruising, but showing up while coasting and breaking to generate some extra power? Only one of these is not enough to make a significant difference, but all of them combined, if it does make a 20% to 30% difference, would get pretty interesting... I've seen a concept not that far from this, but not using efficiently everything available. It's called the Venturi Eclectic, made by Venturi (www.venturi.fr). Not too bad, but the windmill on the top looks awful, and is a little prone to vandalism...
Lots of coverage on AutoBlogGreen and some videos up on YouTube ( more tubiness)
The skinny: based on popular I car ( selling very well in Europe ) Mitsubishi is planning to market a fully electric version. About 120 miles range, a bit better acceleration performance than gas version and same top speed. Announced pricetag: $24K.
Fully crashtested to european standards at least, performs as well as gas counterpart.
The prototypes are in fleet testing by Tokyo Electric Power Company ( TEPCO ) right now.
There is some competition from Subaru in the form of R1E and Nissan with the Mixim.
I guess the reviewer does not subscribe to ABG electric vehicle news.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
I think this is a valuable lesson for you. I often post as myself and get replies and engage in good discussion here on /.
/. I take the time to click the Post Anonymously button. I know, I know.... but you know what? I still have my voice. So instead of complaining that someone doesn't know how to mod properly..... perhaps you should learn to post properly.
Sometimes, when I know what I am going to post is gonna bother some retards on
I'm just waiting for the extended life batteries for these rides to show up on ebay. If the concept is anything like the "super batteries" for phones, these cars will need wheelie bars in the back because of the new growth that has been added for extended range.
> Electric engine has THEORETICAL top efficiency of around 45%
NO, they have ACTUAL efficiencies over 90%
http://www.energyexperts.org/energy_solutions/res_details.cfm?resourceID=3823&keyword=cheap§or=All
"A 250 hp standard efficiency motor has a pretty good efficiency--on the order of 94.2%"
In the 2007 World Solar Challenge which was held last month there were cars with engines that are 95-97% efficient [1]. Why should mass-market models have to settle for a 22% efficiency?
;)
Electrical motors constructed according NEMA Design B must meet the efficiencies as mentioned on this page [2].
Also, gasoline vehicles have faar more moving parts than electric vehicles. In a video about the Tesla roadster I believe a 1000-ish vs 12 moving parts was mentioned. Skipping all the pulleys, shafts, transmission, etc. really really helps to get a more efficient 'energy down to the wheels on the road' score.
I believe it's more efficient to generate electricity in a central location and charge the batteries in a car than it is to load an amount of petrol in a car. I believe a 'well to wheel' efficiency percentage for a gasoline car is somewhere in the 15-20% range.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuna4
[2] http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/electrical-motor-efficiency-d_655.html
[3] http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/askpablo-well-to-wheel-efficie-002467.php
Finally: just to move away from the polluted air I would rather see electric cars than gasoline vehicles. Since I've seen a demonstration of the former, I'm completely sold... even though I absolutely loved the big V8 blocks before, I barely stand them anymore.
And the sound? Well.. I bet there's enough power in a Tesla roadster to drive a good set of speakers.
One of the problems I've noticed with electrics is that they don't seem well-suited, ironically, to urban drivers in many cases. In many cases if you live in the city you rent and you park on the street (and, in my case, my neighbors with houses and garages even park on the street and fill their garages with crap). If you don't have a garage to house the car in at night and thus, easy access to recharge it this is going to be a serious problem. Prices for commercial charging are likely to be vastly higher than charging it yourself at home and with the short power life it would seem to be necessary to charge on an almost daily basis.
Likewise, the stated mileage doesn't sound like it takes into account things like being stuck on the freeway for hours while your engine is still idling and consuming power or being stuck in downtown traffic so, while you're unlikely to be driving your full range daily, it seems just as likely that with greater urban congestion you'll be running through a lot of power while you don't manage to actually go very far making the need for frequent recharging necessary.
Likely solutions will arise, but problems seem to be significant (what about jackasses just unplugging your car if it's somehow charging on the street?) regardless. It's a shame too because the urban environment is the ideal place for an electric car where it would help reduce both air and noise pollution and where trips are generally much shorter and infrequent. I can really see a car share program being able to make excellent use of electrics, but that's about it.
2. they need a range of more then 300km. many people commute close to that much each day, they don't want to run out of power making that late night dash to the shops. it's retarded to claim "but city people don't drive far" when city people use public transport a lot of the time ayway
everything else about battery powered cars is ok, the speed is great, they require less servicing. i'd buy one if they meet the above criteria.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Ok, so the prices you give are not relevant to the us except for the high range prices.
I'm keenly interested in electric power. I live in the US, in the northeast, so it gets cold. I have to be able to drive 30 miles at a whack.. NO less, under any circumstances.. to make it worthwhile to have a particular car (until I sell my house, unfortunately, I'm stuck commuting). while Driving, I will need heat for part of the year and I have to be able to drive at least 45 miles per hour unless I want to be "that asshole" from my house to my office.
Lucky for me, I get fairly green electricity at my home simply by choosing who I pay to generate it, so that's nice. Unfortunately, it's 0.13/kwh and up, but hey, I'll pay it. at 26kBTUs per $1 vs gasoline's 41kBTUs per $1 (at current $3/gallon gas), it's hardly "1/10th" gas costs though.
But, the car I need does not appear to exist yet, in the US, for a price I can afford, being someone who has never owned a car worth more than $10k in my life. Which also includes nearly every other car I see on the road in my region. Dropping $15k on top of the cost of a car (for its body) is just plain not feasible, no matter how much I want it.
You're right to raise awareness, but you've got the language and the attitude of a zealot. Be careful you don't sour more people to your cause than you convert.
do you enjoy spreading FUD?
http://www.energyexperts.org/energy_solutions/res_details.cfm?resourceID=3823&keyword=cheap§or=All
"A 250 hp standard efficiency motor has a pretty good efficiency--on the order of 94.2%" There is also the efficiency of the battery in storing and generating electricity to consider, but this too is quite high.
Also, IC engines are more like 20% efficient, according to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engine#Engine_Efficiency
a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
Complain to your city council for the lack of infrastructure. Complain to your state government that they need to do more to take away the licenses of people who refuse to drive safely (you have to nearly kill someone to lose your license in most states). Ride slowly in the summer, spend just a little money on some gear to ride in the winter. I've been cycling to work for a few years now, and even when it's -7F outside, it's still a lot nicer than dealing with vehicle maintenance and traffic.
Electric cars simply solve the wrong problem. It's never going to be possible to produce a 2,000lb vehicle to move a 200lb payload.
But it's not that simple.
For car's a rough estimate is just shy of 20%, a 80% factor for refining of gasoline, another 80% for shipping and you get a efficiency number of about 12.8%.
For an electric car your electric generation is 35% (real world number in the USA today), drive engine is 80%, battery charge is 65% (assume a quick charge circuit, use 80% if you prefer slower charging), discharge is 80%, and transmission is 95% your final efficiency number for electric is about 14.5%. Better, but still abysmal.
But even that is not the whole picture. Extracting the resource itself is a process that can be roughly expressed as a thermal efficiency. How much oil is burnt by the drilling process, running tanks around the desert, getting people killed, empowering the dirt stupidest people on the planet (yes I'm talking about Arabs) vs digging up coal. Granted oil is one of the cheapest resource to extract, but because of where much of it is the money becomes a destabilizing factor with very high potential costs.
In the end switching to local sources is not solely about money. It's about denying the money to the enemies of the 'western world'.
I won't be buying an electric car to save money. I'll buy it to stick it to the Arabs and because it will help make hippie chicks puddle (and who can put a dollar value on that).
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I just hope that all these manufactures have the fun driver in mind. That means, - Available with an 5-6 speed stick shift - No traction control, or, the ability to permantly turn it off - RWD
Unlike you, I understand these radical concepts called population density, market usage, and population distribution.
Repeat after me: large numbers of PEOPLE in the US have access to cheap hydro-electric and wind energy. And nuclear.
Much of the US has very low population density - I am not doing a comparison based on acreage, I am doing a comparison based on CONSUMERS - people.
People drive cars.
Not empty plots of land, yearning to be free.
As I stated, even places like New Mexico and Nevada have access to such sources.
Please wake up and realize that the population distribution of the US has changed since 1900, when most people lived along the Eastern seaboard. Now up to 40 percent of the US market is in just the Western states - California, Oregan, and Washington being the largest.
And much of the Northeast uses Hydro from Quebec.
Reality is something that changes over time.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The Big Auto Lobby will never buy in to a vehicle with zero mass.
However, they are just fine with vehicles that use 2-3 times the energy of the Sun.
Write your Congressman today!
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
Thats all nice, but largely irrelevant. Oil and gas are transported by tanker trucks which are certainly less efficient than rail. As an example, rail gets to move large quantities on dedicated right-of-way lines, whereas the tanker trucks need to service a million gas stations, and therefore get to sit in traffic and wait at red lights.
In addition, the distributed nature of millions of polluting car engines means the only effective way of controlling emissions is to replace the engines with more efficient ones (buying new cars) - a process that takes decades for the whole population. Power plants have the advantages of at least concentrating the pollution at a single point, allowing controls to be put in place.
People always equate electric cars with coal power plants, as if it were the only fuel available. Lets think about this - suppose I took all the gas from all the vehicles in the country and converted all said vehicles to electric, then I took all that gas and put it off to the side. What do you think a good fuel might be for a power station to use if that were the case? Now what do you think is more efficient, a gas powered turbine in a power station, or the 6-cylinder in a car? Which one of the two has higher operational efficiency, the turbine running at capacity or the 6-cylinder waiting at the red light?
Power stations will eventually convert to better fuel types anyway (biofuels, wind, solar, tidal, whatever), but even if all the power stations ran on the same gas you put in your car it would be a vastly more efficient setup. A lot of the infrastructure inefficiencies also go away - you don't need to gas up a tanker truck to move electricity across the grid. In fact build a pipeline from a refinery to a power station and you don't even need trains or trucks to fuel it.
So, now what does it cost to run your little green car?
Well, when you take into account the vast infrastructure, how much does it really cost to run your little gas-powered car?
and we don't like each other. Seriously, "getting away from it all" is code for "getting away from all of you bastards".
Snark aside, you have no goddamn clue about the geographical, cultural and population make up of the US if you think there are many places where one can combine a commute of 6 people into one trip consistently. Stop thinking about it, it won't freaking happen.
Only when small suburbs served by trains to the metro area are Americans traveling together to get to and from work.
Anyway, you are right in spirit, if people really felt the hurt in gas prices they:
- would check tire air pressure more than once a year
- not accelerate like maniacs only to wait at a red light
- take the stupid roof-rack off when it's not being used
- ditto for the bike/bike rack (some people want it to be SEEN, not to use it)
- clean the extra crap out of the trunk
- stop driving in ways that force them to brake a lot; tailgating, speeding, driving too closely, not in the appropriate lane, etc. (Braking removes energy from the moving car system that you don't get to use to go forward.)
- turn off air conditioning
Once I started doing these practices, my mileage increased considerably with no other changes to the car. (From about 20 mpg to about 28 mpg the "sticker max" for my car)
Remember, MPG says nothing about how fast, how cool, how elite and if you got there before the other dork on the highway. It's just how much gas you used to get there.
Source:
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/internat.htm
The only people that can claim they never lose are pussies that never race anybody competitive.
The fast end of the spectrum is a traction contest not a power contest anyhow. I suspect they are running backwards because RWD produces better traction and they have not yet encountered the down side of rear wheel steering.
In any case I've yet to see anybody with a sub 10 quarter with an electric car. 'Plasmaboy' is currently running 11s, which is respectable. Four bangers routinely run two seconds faster.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I see. I did not account for the deliver cost of electricity vs delivery cost of gas. The 22% efficiency figure was after you factored in the 55% efficiency of production. They must have a different electric engine design from the one I was taught if they get 95% efficiency out it.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
For about 12 grand you can do this. Get a used ford ranger or chevy S-10 pickup. Pull the engine, sell it. If you can get one really cheap because the engine is junk, save money that way, you just want a good frame and body really. Buy a conversion kit for 7 grand (google for those specific kits), add 3 grand worth of AGM storage batteries in the back, you don't need 50 grand worth of lithium ions. . That still leaves room for cargo (or see next). Now you have an electric vehicle with some legs. Go on trips, get a gas generator of sufficient size, say around 15 to 20 KW, throw that in the back, or pull a small trailer with it, plug it in to your electric truck, now you have unlimited range. That's extra of course, but you'll still come in under 20 grand for a modular electric vehicle plus range extender "hybrid" module.
Regenerative braking can be done via the same motor/alternator that powers the thing.
Putting a windmill on top is just stupid. Mind bogglingly, head up their ass stupid. They should hire an adviser that passed high school physics then try again.
Those people should be taken out and shot before they make others in the same industry look equally dumb.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
First generation hybrids are hyped a little too much for me. While they do improve on "in town" and stop and go mileage, their combined hi way and city mileage isn't all that impressive when compared with other economy vehicles. Right now, for single passenger commuting, motorcycles and scooters rein supreme in the mileage game. I really like the idea of the Volt and other plug in hybrids. The engine powers a generator, which drives an electric motor. This is actually a proven technology as it has been used to power freight trains for a few decades. My largest problems with Electric Only vehicles is the huge load that is needed to run things like climate control. I don't know about you, but many of us live in areas where we need heat for at least part of the year. A/C is an even larger drain. How far can a car that can drive 300 miles on a full charge make it when its below freezing and a heater needs to going full blast just to stay comfortable? How much do things like loads from radios and GPS systems and other electronic devices that we use on a daily basis shorten the range? My other problem with EO vehicles is the recharge time. I mostly drive 20 miles one way, but do go on long road trips. I hate the hassle of flying. I've driven coast to coast before, sometimes going 18 hours or more at a stretch. Having to be stopped for longer than I would be driving really limits the appeal of an EO vehicle.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Very funny.
Most electricity is shaped. When I was a Power Engineer at Tek-Cominco in Trail, BC, we shaped the power from one of the hydro dams with additional power from other sources - hydro however does not need much shaping, as you can kick in additional generators as demand increases.
Most dams in the Pacific Northwest (hint, ever hear a song called Roll On Columbia) have very large drops. We have these things called Mountains here, specifically the Rocky Mountains. Even the dams that provide electricity for Seattle along our Coastal mountain chains have very large drops. It's not like the small teeny dams you have in the rest of the US. Most such dams have many turbines, with variable generation capabilities.
Please realize energy sources and shaping may differ depending where you live.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Many people in California drive more than 1-2 hours each way for their commute. As I stated, it depends on the cost of energy where you live, the cost of gas or diesel where you live, and the cost of other alternatives (ethanol, bio-diesel, etc) all of which have different energy densities and storage requirements. Bio-diesel is not highly recommended in very cold regions, so using a higher grade non-bio diesel is a wiser choice (except in the summer months). However, the battery power can still be used for some or all of the commute, depending on the battery capacity of the vehicle, the power consumption, and the cost of electricity.
In general, as a rule of thumb, electricity in most regions of the US costs one-tenth as much as gasoline does to propel your car a similar distance. As distance increases, the increased battery capacity makes the use of electric-diesel hybrids a wiser choice, due to the storage density of fuel to battery and relative weight. As battery power discharges, the mass does not decrease (well, from a gross viewpoint), but the same is not true of liquid or solid fuel sources.
In general, for most Americans, a switch to plug-in electric bio-diesel engine systems gets significantly better mileage at lower cost - but it depends on the total cost of battery packs, fuel, electricity, and usage.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Why did they not mention the V1 from Venture Vehicles? Here is the latest update from them that has some of the sketches of their design proposals. They are still targeting a 2009Q2 release (I hope they hit it), which is before 4 of the 6 vehicles listed.
It could just be me as that is about the only electric vehicle that I follow or care about, but I have a sneaking suspicion that TFA didn't do as much homework as they should have (I know, I know...and no I'm not new here, relatively speaking).
When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Anthony_Falls
XJS*C4JDBQADN1.NSBN3*2IDNEN*GTUBE-STANDARD-ANTI-U
Actually, I think you've got it backwards. I think there is a large part of the cyclist crowd (critical-mass-cough-cough) think people who drive cars are worthless pieces of trash...
It's actually surprising that people are advocating behavior modification to save energy...
When most people think about behavioral modification, they often have images of getting people to stop racism, stop prostitution, stop drinking, stop smoking, stop sharing needles, stop having babies when you can't afford them, getting off the dole and getting a job, etc... At some level it seems everyone has some push-buttons that change rights and victimless vices into something that needs to be done for either to protect the common good or for the protection of the ignorant masses.
People are creatures of habit. It's amazing how the same people that want to outlaw cars or guns are the same people that lament outlawing drugs or laziness in the name of behavior modification (as if any of these utopian laws would work). What most people need is negative reinforcment to get them to change their habits.
Just like the drug addict or alcoholic often needing to hit rock bottom before changing their ways, perhaps we just need to accelerate this for other vices. Perhaps we say ban the sale of tires used by SUVs except those deemed "medically-necessary" so people need a special prescription to buy SUV tires. Those that couldn't qualify for the prescription would need to go underground to buy SUV tires whose safety could be questionable (thus nullifying their SUVs are safer argument). Just imaging the soccer mom going into an alley to score some tires and they'll look at themselves in the mirror one day and perhaps you'll get some behavioral modification. Or the person dealing out unneccssary "SUV-tire" prescriptions geting busted for getting some tires to Arnold and it hitting the tabloids or Ms Lohan checking herself into Promises for SUV tire addiction...
Yeah, those efforts at behavioral modification are gonna work really well.... NOT!
.."Solar panels are bad for then environment because they put out more crap when they're made than they'll ever save by producing "clean" energy during their useful lifetime."..hasn't been true for around 20 years now or so. Manufacturing payback is now around 2 years with lot cleaner fabs and manufacturing facilities, owners payback is around 7 at average US kwh rates, estimated lifetime of most modern PV panels is at 30 years (warranties to this effect) and still have 80% rated output. As to battery tech, heck, jay leno owns a baker electric that is 100 years old, he drives it a lot, and it still has the original alkaline batteries in it (yes, they made them back then). My own personal normal flooded lead acid batteries on my small solar rig are 9 years old now and still work perfectly fine, modern desulphators hooked to the battery bank help keep the plates really clean, and you can buy deep cycle flooded lead acid with very long warranties now, rolls-surrette have ten years for example, and telco batteries are still out there now decades old being used after purchase used from the telcos on any number of peoples home solar rigs.
Now, wind power. Very efficient, people are making money with it *now*, around a 2 year payback, after that, making money.
And both of the above you can own outright as joe homeowner. And you get a fixed upfront price good for decades. Until the local power company can give you a fixed price 20 year contract for power, you have no idea what they will charge you, nuclear or whatever. It might be ten times higher per kwh in 20 years, you just don't know so it is hard to cost compare right now.
The other reason people want electrics or hybrids is because major urban areas are heat and pollution islands "clean engines" or not, it all gets concentrated there and causes a lot of health problems. the more that the energy can be outsourced out of the cities where it can be made cleaner on an efficient big scale the better. They are also quite nice in stop and go and creep urban traffic, much better than any direct drive ICE only vehicle.
many times more moneyu to guild then they leased it for, and because a large percentage of the population wasn't interested at that time..
Sure, I guess you could say selling a car for substantially less then it costs to build is only a failure in GM's eyes.
I thought about leasing one, but it was 30K lease.
120 miles on a charge is HORRIBLE. People want to own a vehicle they can 'go to the mountains' in. They don't want to incur the expense of another vehicle.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
If they are beating anybody of the same 'class' that just proves the class rules are broken in the electrics favor. (Class? WTF are you talking about.) I suspect it's hopped up electrics vs. bone stock gasoline you are talking about.
Besides you said 'all the other drag racers' which is clearly bullshit. As I've said before the quarter mile is about traction more then power anyhow.
You have now moved the goalposts, I'll drop this question.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Gives you more time to meditate
What's the value of information that you don't know?
What is with you and the hostility?
...
Heck, I just did a Slashdot search and found a link from an article on Slashdot.
One of many.
Stop asking others to do searches when the info is already on slashdot and you just haven't been paying attention
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I've been wanting an electric car forever. The environment? meh, whatever, I'm just sick of funneling billions of dollars towards countries that hate us just so that I can get from A to B. Hydrogen, E85, etc, those are all just ways for the existing fuel companies to continue raking in the bucks. There's no reason to use those when we can use electricity. Electricity is everywhere - you don't have to worry about waiting for your small town to get a hydrogen / E85 / whatever station. You just get the necessary hook-up at your house and you're done. Additionally, I still haven't seen any evidence that power generated locally by an engine in a car is more efficient than power generated at a massive power plant.
You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
First, efficiency of generating electricity (work done/energy produced) is 60% tops.
This is roughly correct for state of the art gas-fired plants. Efficiently numbers like the above don't even make sense, though, for the large (and growing) fraction of our power mix that is nuclear, and the growing portion that is wind-powered.
Then there is attenuation loss while its delivered to the consumer.
The power grid is over 90% efficient overall. Locally generated energy (say, from PV panels on your roof) is even better in this regard.
Then it has to be stored in batteries which lose energy over time.
It's starting to sound like you're outside your area of expertise. IAAEVE (I am an electric vehicle engineer.) Are you?
Electric engine has THEORETICAL top efficiency of around 45%.
This is total BS. Are you spreading misinformation deliberately or do you actually believe this? AC Propulsion's AC-150 drive system is about 90% efficient over a typical driving cycle. Follow the link to a spec sheet with the detailed efficiency map. Tesla Motors' propulsion system is based heavily on ACP's, and will be roughly the same in terms of efficiency.
The theoretical efficiency of gasoline engine (which I don't remember at the moment) is 2-3 times that.
The BS is flying thick, now. I don't know what you mean by "theoretical efficiency", but it's clear that you don't, either. Gasoline engines in the real-world cars I drive are around 15-18% efficient. (Did you really think they were 3 * 45 or 135% efficient?)
So for every calory [sic] of heat we burn (and release into atmoshere) with a gasoline engine we'd get 2-3 as much work.
Somehow you managed to get your conclusion in the right ballpark, but you have it backwards. Most modern EV propulsion systems are at least 3x as efficient as gasoline cars in a real-world, fair, wells-to-wheels energy comparison, making them about equivalent to 120-140 miles per gallon. You can do your own homework on this -- it's well documented. Tesla Motors' website has some interesting whitepapers and other material on the subject that's pretty easy to understand.
These cars will just end up burning more coal and release massive amount of greenhouse gases. But hey, it's cool to be green.
Spreading FUD when you don't know what you're talking about isn't cool at all. Even from coal, EVs are substantially more efficient and clean. This. Is. Well. Documented. And coal is just part of the power mix. Electricity is the ultimate flex fuel. And EV charging is biased towards off-peak times, when baseline (e.g. nuclear) energy is a larger part of the grid mix.
All of your numbers are wrong! I don't mean a little bit off, I mean blatantly dead wrong.
For example: "Electric engine has THEORETICAL top efficiency of around 45%."
Most electric motors are about 90% efficient.
"The theoretical efficiency of gasoline engine (which I don't remember at the moment) is 2-3 times that."
So that would make gas engines up to 135% efficient? Heh. . . AS best I can recall, the maximum for gas engines is roughly 33%. Most typical ones run about 20% efficient.
Many studies have been done on this subject, and they all concluded that electric cars are very significantly more energy-efficient than gas cars. IN FACT, that's the primary motivation behind electric cars. If they weren't more efficient, nobody would be interested in them. All it takes is about five minutes with Google or Wikipedia to dig up this info, it's no secret.
What, No Tango from Commuter Cars? That is the one I'm looking for. I've got no room in my garage for my car (bicycle stuff and other crap) and the Tango is just what i need for small commuting (98% of my driving).
Heh, of course if I had a Tango I would bicycle to work less......
The new generation of EVs and PHEVs are going with Li-ion cells. They are considered non-toxic by the EPA. You can dump them into a landfill, although it makes more sense to recycle them and recover the lithium metal.
You cannot (legally) dump used motor oil into a landfill, it's toxic waste.
Has any electric car ever burst into flames? I mean literally, has this ever been observed to happen? Gasoline cars have been known to catch fire.
Nuclear fission is A-OK with me, but it's *not* the only option for our future. Solar has potential (don't overlook solar-thermal systems, by the way), geothermal energy has huge untapped potential -- and with a bit of luck Dr. Bussard's fusion reactor just might work and make everything else obsolete. But here's the point. . . There are lots of ways to make electricity, lots of clean ways even, but none of them will get you down the highway without an ELECTRIC CAR.
I travel to work everyday on an electrically powered vehicle. It's called a tram, or a streetcar if you're of the American persuasion. 100 or so passengers travelling on a zero (local) emissions vehicle which takes up the same space as about, oh, 100 cars and the cost to the passenger is next to nothing.
The problem with cars in our cities is not that they run on petrol, gas, diesel or supergreen pie-in-the-sky imaginary fuel, it's that there are cars in our cities. Sure, if you live in the remote wilderness I might understand the need for wheels, but most of us live in urban areas or within commuting distances of them. Cars are a horribly inefficient and outdated mode of transportation, not just with energy but with space and the social ramifications that poor land usage entails.
Sure, the car was a good alternative to horses and given a choice I'd rather step in tarmac than horseshit, but that's about the only advantage the car has bought as far as I can see. It's time to remodel and redesign our cities. Higher density and better public transport. Nothing new about it, that's how cities like Paris, London and New York grew so big in the first place. Or you could look at the alternative, LA. I know where I'd rather live.
Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe!
Now all we need is to run a pipeline from Jupiter. . .
Even cooler than being green, is the ability to avoid questionable forays into the affairs of foreign countries - all to quash "terrorism" - or at least inasmuch at it impedes the flow of oil. Green is nice. Preserving polar ice caps is nice. But, keeping young men and women in uniform out of harm's way seems well worth the initial inefficiencies of electric engine technology. Maybe we can spend half-a-trillion dollars on improving such inefficiencies, rather than on bullets.
That's pretty sweet, but I'm not sure I'd want to try splitting lanes in that thing. Still, it's cool to know that you could.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
Someone has to correct such blatant fud.
"Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
With today's soaring gas prices and oil decreasing in availability we need to find and use alternative sources of energy. As such we need to create hybrid cars that have the same attractive look and operation as normal gas powered cars, for a while this did not seem like it would happen however that is now changing and that is great. The more seamless the transition to alternative sources of energy the better and quicker it'll likely happen.
Hydro power is cheap to produce, but there just isn't any more places with a good head of water to feed the demand for hydro power.
True, which is why most of the new hydro projects aren't "build more dams" but "make them more efficient". The generators can be significantly more efficient.
Also, did you know it takes petroleum to run a hydroelectric dam? With all the turbines, you need some pretty serious lubrication, which means you also need a bunch of huge pumps to push that oil around, and so you tend to have big ICEs running pumps. I know of projects attacking this problem, too -- one dam (I forget where) is apparently petroleum-neutral.
So, yeah, we can't just build more dams in the Columbia. But we can make them a *lot* better. Just as electronics technology in 1935 made electric cars like these infeasible, it made hydroelectric dams inefficient. We can do much better today.
"You could easily mod a Prius to outdrag almost any car on the road without even trying. Heck, you could take an econo box and still out drag a gas engine."
Need to see some time slips to believe that one.:)
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Aptera still hasn't actually let anybody drive one of their cars. The CEO is 100% full of it. He is still trying to get funding for manufacturing. And this car is supposed to ship in a few months? The fact that he can't get funding should be a red flag. Silicon Valley VC would love to fund something like this, but the fact that they are not means something is amiss.
Due to many bad years and the biggest quarterly loss in history in Q3 2007, GM's book value is currently NEGATIVE $73.82 per share. With little hope of a turnaround before cash on hand runs out, junk bond credit ratings, and the implosion of ResCap due to huge sub-prime losses, the GM Chevy Volt and GM Opel Flextreme aren't likely to see the light of day.
However, GM is currently making excellent deals on their obesemobiles, so there's that to look forward to...
OK, I didn't realize that there was a minor hydro plant on the upper Mississippi. Thanks for filling me in.
It is a minor plant by comparisonl
http://www.xcelenergy.com/XLWEB/CDA/0,3080,1-1-1_1875_4797_4014-16651-2_171_256-0,00.html
"Power production capability (in-service dates): 12 Mw total
Units 1,2, 3 and 4 (1954); Unit 5 (1955)
The five units produce 2.4 Mw each."
"The dam and falls create 49 feet of "head," or the height from the water surface to the turbines. The amount of electricity generated is determined by the amount of head and volume of water flow. "
This dam is less than 50 feet high and has a total of 5 generators.
How much power is this?
Even a few windmills scattered cross the Eastern side of the state out producte the Mighty Mississippi.
"The Stateline project straddles the Washington-Oregon border between Pasco and Walla Walla. Its first windmills began turning out power in July 2001. When complete later this decade, the wind farm's 400 turbines will be able to generate about 270 megawatts of power at peak capacity, with an average yield of about 100 megawatts."
http://www.pnl.gov/news/2002/02-32.htm
For a comparison of just one of the hydro plants on the Columbia, the largest is the Grand Coulee;
http://dams.org/kbase/studies/us/us_finalscope_sect2.htm
"The Grand Coulee Dam is over five thousand feet long, stands 550 feet tall"
"Grand Coulee Dam's hydroelectric generating facilities include four powerhouses"
"with a total of 24 main generators, three station service generators and six pump/generators. These provide a combined generating capacity of 6,480 megawatts."
At 12 MW to 6,480 MW, it would take 540 dams of the same capacity of the entire generating capacity of the Mississippi river to equal the capacity of just Grand Coulee on the Columbia. We need to work on wind power near the windy city, not build dams.
There is no more water sources to feed any major hydro left in the USA. There are a few places where some very minor plants could be built, but they would be just that, minor.
The truth shall set you free!
I drive the Toyonda Pious myself. Isn't it great!?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
The median wage in Australia is $50k, roughly. SO why are you septics so poor? septic tank = yank, btw. Could it possibly be that you are distorting the meaning of the words "typical american"?
I earn $200 000 a year, between shares and pay, and my car is worth $2000 or less, I bought it for $5k when it was 10 years old, it is now older than you (probably), at 23.
So, quit whining. Usless lazy incompetent people whine. Everybody else decides on their priorities.
well, for the blind ones anyway...
this is 3 miles for the one country in the world not using metric.
Wait, the US has gone metric too now? Back here in old Blighty, we're still using miles (and stones, and feet and inches, and pints...). I guess we should get with the times.
As I just posted, the UK does not use kilometres at all. Everything is done in miles. From the link you posted :
The one significant aspect of measurement on which the UK and Ireland negotiated a derogation for which no date has yet been set is in the use of miles, yards, feet and inches for road traffic purposes.
Electric cars need energy and where does it come from?
From large scale, centralized power generation facilities that are far more efficient than millions of individual little ICEs, while being far *far* easier to upgrade to new technologies for reducing emissions or further enhancing efficiency. Furthermore, vehicles powered by grid electricity benefit from new generation technologies, meaning you can suddenly run your vehicle on solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, nuclear, etc. And unlike a gasoline powered car, you can make the shift to other more cost effective generation technologies as existing methods become prohibitively expense due to resource scarcity.
So, what was your point, again?
All this depends on your situation, so you're going to have to run the numbers for yourself, but -- since bigger batteries are one of the things that make electric cars more expensive -- you're going to want to take the all-electric range of the vehicle into account when considering the cost. The Aptera has a 120 mile all-electric range, but it's only forty miles for the Volt. If you only have a twenty mile commute, the Aptera might not be worth it, but might be if you're dealing with a sixty mile commute.
Like I said: YMMV.
===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
Your link doesn't support your earlier claim. Nor did Google return your results (as you had suggested in the GP post).
I repeat, anybody who claims they don't lose hasn't raced much. It's a claim typical of kids. It deserves a skeptical response.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
True, which is why most of the new hydro projects aren't "build more dams" but "make them more efficient". The generators can be significantly more efficient.
This is true, but it is a case of diminishing returns. Winn friction, not heat is the biggest loss in some hydro plants. When Ice Harbor dam was built, they had some Westinghouse and some General Electric generators. Using the same water turbins, it was easy to compare the output capacity of each. One was conservatively rated and easily met performance standards. The other barely met spec. Two generators with the same specifications can be as much as 10% different in performance.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:OrJTCRPTx2cJ:www.nww.usace.army.mil/html/offices/pa/FactSheets/ICH2005.pdf+Ice+Harbor+dam+generators&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
Most of this type info is not public. Expansion by replacing generators is possible in some cases, but often the improvement margin is under 10%.
Also, did you know it takes petroleum to run a hydroelectric dam? With all the turbines, you need some pretty serious lubrication, which means you also need a bunch of huge pumps to push that oil around, and so you tend to have big ICEs running pumps. I know of projects attacking this problem, too -- one dam (I forget where) is apparently petroleum-neutral.
Reference please..
My dad was a power house operator on McNary dam and moved to Ice Harbor dam. When the powerhouse noise became a problem with his hearing and he moved to BPA as a substation operator. This big gas engine needed to pump tons of oil is news to me. I've never seen it even though I have had the cooks tour of the generator deck. They do have a gas back-up generator, but that is to provide control power to bring up the dam from a standstill. All the water gates are electric. Once the dam is operational, it isn't used. I've never seen it operate.
http://www.nww.usace.army.mil/html/pub/pertdata/ihpert.htm
http://www.ee.washington.edu/energy/apt/nsf/previous/powimage.htm
I've been on this deck and the one below.
http://www.ee.washington.edu/energy/apt/nsf/previous/mcnary2.jpg
For all you back to the future fans, take note.. McNary dam produces 1,200 Megawatts of power. (Hint, convert to GigaWatts)
The truth shall set you free!
When I was a Power Engineer at Tek-Cominco in Trail, BC, we shaped the power from one of the hydro dams with additional power from other sources - hydro however does not need much shaping, as you can kick in additional generators as demand increases.
Not true in the pacific NW. Often on the late summer and early fall, the pond levels are drawn way down. You can kick in additional generators as long as you have additional water to feed them.
On the second page of this report is the schedule of shutdowns due to low pond level for several dams.
The water needed to run extra generators isn't always there and non-hydro alternatives need to come online.
www.srbc.net/docs/Publication_242%20%20Conowingo_Mngt_Plan/ConowingoMngmtRpt_LR.pdf
The truth shall set you free!
And unlike you, I understand what "large" means, and I don't make shit up to pretend I have all the facts.
The numbers don't lie. You did.
That is awesome. With over 100 power plants just using the minimum, that is over 3 QUADRILLION Cubic Feet of Earth! Don't you guys saying this is bad realize just how much of the planet that is? This is an ecological disaster!!! Thanks BanjoBob for the insight. Besides, my car doesn't run on geo-thermal or tidal energy. The nut who said that needs to quit smoking something. Bill the Cat /|
\`oO'
( ) Aachk! Phft!
U
Please re-read my post.
In case you didn't know, most of the hydro-electric power along the Columbia has large draws and large reservoirs - so this statement is still true even in summer. As a matter of fact, it's late summer and early fall where the draws are lowest, as glaciers stop melting as much.
Again, more than 90 percent of electricity in the Puget Sound and in most of Washington and BC is from hydro. This is from official federal statistics.
I'm sure you can dig up an industry quote from a competing utility power source, but it doesn't change the reality of the power.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
When you've worked in power generation for a few years and invested in utilities for three decades, I'll listen to your advice on this matter.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Most electricity is shaped. When I was a Power Engineer at Tek-Cominco in Trail, BC, we shaped the power from one of the hydro dams with additional power from other sources - hydro however does not need much shaping, as you can kick in additional generators as demand increases.
Sorry for the late reply on this portion of your post. I have been looking for any training I could find on this "Most electricity is shaped" and drawing a blank. Other than some mentions of shaping policy and antenna design regarding beam shape, I have found nothing. Please provide some references.
I come from a family in the Hydro (Army Corps of Engineers) who later transitioned into distribution (Bonneville Power Administration). This concept of shaped electricity is unfamiliar to me. I understand generation, distribution and their issues of line twist, power factor correction, sources of reactive power, regulation problems from reactive power on long transmission lines, and even the DC Intertie. I know of the limitations of breakers and disconnects and problems when a system is upgraded and the breakers are not up to the new available fault current.
For your enjoyment, here is a disconnect opening hot. The load is a power factor correction reactor on a 500 KV transmission line. A set of SF6 (Sulfur Hexa-Florine) opens in series connected pairs. One failed to open. The other one of the pair flashed over while the disconnect opens. The breakers then re-close and the established arc on the disconnect heads skyward. Enjoy. The arc current is about 100 Amps.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEDqmVaamSY
The truth shall set you free!
In case you didn't know, most of the hydro-electric power along the Columbia has large draws and large reservoirs - so this statement is still true even in summer. As a matter of fact, it's late summer and early fall where the draws are lowest, as glaciers stop melting as much.
True.. However we have had several years where the water was less than normal. At that time the AC use and irrigation diversion and pumping is above normal. I can remember being asked to not use Christmas lights in years past.
http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/nationalassessment/overviewpnw.htm
Look at the streamflow graph..
"Relative to present flows (dashed), the wetter winters and drier summers simulated by climate models are very likely to shift peak streamflow earlier in the year, increasing the risk of late-summer shortages. Though the Columbia system is only moderately sensitive to climate change, allocation conflicts and a cumbersome network of interlocking authorities restrict its ability to adapt, producing substantial vulnerability to these shortages."
The streamflow doesn't vary all that much overall. But the local population has changed.. Demand on the system is causing problems. Here is mention of the Seattle area, known for it's wet weather.
"Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) experienced summer droughts and potential shortages in 1987, 1992, and 1998. Their responses to the three events illustrate institutional flexibility and learning. Summer 1987 began with full reservoirs, but a hot dry summer and a late return of autumn rains created a serious shortage in which water quality declined, inadequate flows were maintained for fish, and the main reservoir fell so low that an emergency pumping station had to be installed."
When the pond is low and the fall rains are late, the big pond is useless when it is empty.
The capacity of the ponds on the Columbia has grown little since the 1960's. In the meantime the population has more than doubled.
"The region has seen several decades of population and economic growth nearly twice the national rate, with population nearly doubling since 1970. "
The population has doubled, but hydro capacity has not. The Pacific NW's 80% of the power from hydro will continue to shrink as demand continues to outgrow the fixed capacity of the hydro system.
The truth shall set you free!
ArcherB, excellent post.
:0)
One of the challenges with an electricity grid is distribution (power lines), another generation (power plants/sources), another is storage (capacitor or battery banks).
The demand on a grid is fluctuating. You can fire up or turn down a coal plant reasonably quickly to moderate with demand. The same is probably true of hydro as you can just control how much water you let freeflow and not generate power. That, unfortunately, does not work with nuclear plants - bringing one up or down is not a trivial effort and I'm told they have a very limited ability to moderate their output.
So where do you maintain massive battery banks to allow charging of cars that take 220V drops, presumably at a fair amperage, over 3-5 hours to charge every night for every car?
If I'm in a 2-3 car household, the draw only gets worse.
Our grids already have trouble keeping up with demand (not enough generation) and maintaining integrity (transmission).
Electric cars strike me as a solution to move your pollution from the city's streets to the power generating plants. They also strike me as something which would require *massive* infrastructure changes to support and massive increases in generating capacity. If we add the cost of revamping the grid, adding a lot of storage capacity into the grid, and maintaining all of this into the per unit cost of electric cars, even amortizing it over 20 years, we'd still find that the cost per unit would go up by thousands of dollars (possibly tens).
Everyone has spent a long time understanding electric autos vs. conventional autos from the perspectives of car performance, gas mileage, and car emissions. How about we go off and spend some time researching the electricity grid, what's involved in large scale changes to that grid, the technical limitations in generation, transmission and mass storage, etc? Then revisit the electric car idea armed with the full picture.
Of course, this *is* Slashdot
-- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."