backtop


Print 73 comment(s) - last by Starcub.. on Jul 22 at 6:53 PM


Chevrolet Volt  (Source: Autoblog Green)
The electric future is changing everything

It might not be in 5 years, 10 years, or even 20 years, but within the next several decades plug-in electric vehicles look poised to seize a major chunk of automotive market share.  In the meantime, hybrids are climbing the sales charts and look to sustain their financial success.

The commonality is batteries -- both hybrids and plug-ins need faster releasing, higher capacity, and more mass-producible batteries.  What was once the horsepower war between automakers is now becoming the battery war, and the industry's key players are jockeying for position.

Some battery makers have the gusto to directly challenge the industry giants, making their own vehicles.  China's BYD Co, a battery maker-turned-plug-in manufacturer is among them.

Others are signing lucrative deals to jointly develop batteries with industry giants.  Toyota Motor Corp, Nissan Motor ,nd Mitsubishi Motors Corp have set up joint ventures to produce batteries with Panasonic, NEC and GS Yuasa Corp, respectively.  The pairings make for strange bedfellows -- Germany's Volkswagen AG has paired with Japan's Sanyo Electric Co and Toshiba Corp.  Germany's Daimler AG has paired with America's Tesla Motors.

Andy Palmer, senior vice president and head of product planning at Nissan, states, "When we were doing the research for electric vehicles (EVs), we believed we needed to have the core battery technology in-house.  That was a strategic decision we chose to make. If Nissan is right ... and zero-emissions is the future, then we've ensured that future by having that technology."

Nissan looks to launch its plug-in vehicles in 2012, and mass-produce them on a broader scale than competitors that will have entered the market by then, like GM, Ford, and Chrysler.  Nissan also is looking to launch its EVs at lower price points.

Pair ups aren't the only big deals in store, though -- Toyota is developing its own secret battery technology that it believes with make lithium-ion cells a thing of the past.  Honda meanwhile believes that fuel cells are the future and is, for now, ignoring plug-ins.  It has already started trial deployments of its FCX Clarity production fuel cell vehicle.

As for the domestic automakers -- Ford, GM, and Chrysler -- financial problems have held them back from major battery investment.  However, companies like A123 and LG Chem are looking to fuel the domestics' new EVs such as the Chrysler Electric Roadster and the 2011 Chevy Volt.  With hot models like these, the domestics are likely to move more deeply into the electric sector.  And this means increased ties with battery manufacturers and battery research expenditures.

In 20 or 30 years, battery companies that have played their hands right are poised to become the Microsofts and Intels of the auto industry.  It's a golden opportunity, and the battery makers are doing their best to seize it.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

good news for the France!
By superPC on 7/20/2009 7:57:26 AM , Rating: 5
it may be a good news for France (more than 70% of their electricity comes from nuclear power plant), but not so good for the rest of us. Tesla roadster has can go 4.6 mile per KWH, with 11c per KWH that's cheaper than the average car (you can go 46 mile with only 1$), too bad most of our electricity comes from fossil fuel so electric car is not that green (France is the exception here).




RE: good news for the France!
By superPC on 7/20/2009 8:01:27 AM , Rating: 2
sorry for the typo, what i meant was "Tesla roadster can go". DT needs an edit button.


RE: good news for the France!
By amanojaku on 7/20/2009 9:01:19 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
DT needs an edit button.
No, it doesn't. Putting one on the site will just lead to abuse as people will modify all of their comments to seem more intelligent or funny, with the few exceptions being the trolls aiming for -1 ratings. It's better to be more careful before posting, and to realize that some people can infer your meaning from the context of your statement. I say SOME because people, including myself, have misinterpreted the simplest and most obvious of statements. Anyway, posting something unclear or stupid on DT doesn't mean the world is coming to an e-

;-)


RE: good news for the France!
By RjBass on 7/20/2009 9:43:33 AM , Rating: 5
Actually I belong to a couple of sites where we can only edit a post for 5 minutes after making the post, then the edit button goes away. DT could use something like that for sure.


RE: good news for the France!
By quiksilvr on 7/21/2009 4:06:05 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. People (even some of the editors themselves) have been asking about this for years. It's like that time people were asking Apple for Copy and Paste and it took years for it to be implemented.


RE: good news for the France!
By ggordonliddy on 7/20/2009 11:23:51 PM , Rating: 2
You complete dumbass. You just allow the user to edit for a few minutes after posting.


RE: good news for the France!
By ebakke on 7/20/2009 8:52:23 AM , Rating: 3
Didn't you hear the news? We're going to tax the bejesus out of "polluters" so we can redistribute that wealth to other companies who will create "green collar jobs" by building new wind/solar power plants! [queue the "Yes we can!" chant in 3...2...1...]


RE: good news for the France!
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 9:05:53 AM , Rating: 3
While at the same time limiting companies ability to produce lots of energy at cheap prices by restricting nuclear plants from being built and only pushing more expensive solar and wind.


RE: good news for the France!
By TomZ on 7/20/2009 9:39:16 AM , Rating: 3
Hey, Americans voted for "change," and we're getting it...!

I was personally hoping for a positive change, but I guess that wasn't part of what was promised, or what is being delivered.

In my mind, having cheap energy is just as important as having green energy or having domestically-supplied energy. Cheap energy powers our economy and helps us have and raise our standard of living. Expensive "alternative energy" takes us in the opposite direction. That's fine for Europe (it's been their policy forever), but I think we should chart a better course for America.


RE: good news for the France!
By Chudilo on 7/20/09, Rating: -1
RE: good news for the France!
By porkpie on 7/20/2009 10:04:50 AM , Rating: 5
I'd MUCH rather live next to a nuclear plant than a coal plant. I could probably deal with a solar farm nearby, but too bad they're complely unable to power our country.

You've been seeing too many Hollywood movies. Nuclear power is the safest form of energy we have.


RE: good news for the France!
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 10:06:11 AM , Rating: 3
You keep asking this, and people keep saying yes. Yet your decision is more important than ours though.

Plenty of people in states with nuclear power plants live near them. And none of them suffer any ill effects. And the vast majority don't sit around thinking that the plant is going to randomly explode. Maybe an idiot like yourself does though.

People in France certainly don't seem to have a problem living near nuclear power plants.


RE: good news for the France!
By ClownPuncher on 7/20/2009 1:38:03 PM , Rating: 3
Most of them aren't exactly built at the end of the cul-de-sac anyway. I'm guessing here, but I think not too many people live right up next to the reactor. If it was literally in someones backyard, I could see some discontent, but a few miles away? Non-issue.


RE: good news for the France!
By TomZ on 7/20/2009 10:24:36 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
If you think nuclear power is so great, would you personally live next to a plant? I didn't think so. Well someone's gonna have to.
I wouldn't want to live near any kind of power generation plant, quite frankly. All involve some small chance of danger and most are eyesores as well. Nuclear is no different than the others in that regard.

But NIMBY is a poor way to set public energy policy anyway. I also don't like that our country has a military and that we have to fight in wars, but the reality is that these things are necessary whether I like them or not.


RE: good news for the France!
By DrKlahn on 7/20/2009 10:31:13 AM , Rating: 3
Honestly I wouldn't care, but with deserts, states like ND, SD, etc we have plenty open spaces. Just build them within an hour or so of a population center large enough to maintain them.


RE: good news for the France!
By TSS on 7/20/2009 2:03:18 PM , Rating: 2
heh, remember, the more you concentrate power generation in a single area, the better and high tech the grid needs to be to carry that power.

simply put, 1 amp uses a smaller wire then 100000 amps.

and so far i've heard alot about generating the power (and the massive costs that come with that), but very little about the horrible grid you already have that needs upgrading. which is about just as expensive as building additional capacity generated from solar. so creating a grid that can handle concentrated power generation....

well lets just say you might have to start by building a few more printing presses.


RE: good news for the France!
By teldar on 7/20/2009 5:02:50 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly.

That and I don't know how much water you need for one of the newer generation power plants, but all the previous generation plants needed a lot of water. Davis Besse in Ohio is built on Lake Erie. So is Enrico Fermes and Fermes 2 in Michigan. There was a picture of one on here being built in SA somewhere, on the ocean. And the one in Texas? being built by the NJ firm, or vice-versa is on the ocean as well.

In the middle of a desert state is not any good if you still need that quantity of water.


RE: good news for the France!
By ebakke on 7/20/2009 10:58:50 AM , Rating: 5
I currently live within a 35 mile radius of 3 nuclear reactors. I don't have cancer, our fish aren't mutated, and our crops still grow every year. Stop your fear mongering and give me more nukes!


RE: good news for the France!
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 12:32:42 PM , Rating: 2
My good friend works at the Savanna River Site. I assure you, he does not glow.

But given that he's 6'4" and his gf is like 6'2" (I'm 6'1" and she was wearing heels this weekend and I had to look up), if they ever had children, one would think they had a mutated super child destined to take over the world.


By Jabroney701020 on 7/20/2009 2:57:13 PM , Rating: 2
I have been trained on and worked at 3 different platforms of nuclear reactors in 3 different states. The closest houses were about 2 miles away atleast and knowing the built-in safety, care and precautions that are taken, including the types of waste that are generated and how it is dealt with I most certainly WOULD live next to a (as close as houses can get) nuclear facility in this country.


RE: good news for the France!
By MrX8503 on 7/20/2009 10:42:20 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
In my mind, having cheap energy is just as important as having green energy or having domestically-supplied energy. Cheap energy powers our economy and helps us have and raise our standard of living. Expensive "alternative energy" takes us in the opposite direction. That's fine for Europe (it's been their policy forever), but I think we should chart a better course for America.


Since when is new tech advancement cheap? Pay the upfront costs today, for a more prosperous tomorrow.


RE: good news for the France!
By ebakke on 7/20/2009 10:55:42 AM , Rating: 3
Or in the case of wind/solar - a less prosperous tomorrow. :(


RE: good news for the France!
By Starcub on 7/22/2009 5:19:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since when is new tech advancement cheap?

When wars fund its development through government subsidy, like nuclear, which is still expensive.


RE: good news for the France!
By DrKlahn on 7/20/2009 10:35:16 AM , Rating: 3
It's to bad solar and wind can't be counted on to feed the grid 100% of the time. So we'll need redundant, reliable, capacity to feed the grid when they aren't available. Which for the most part are fossil fuel power plants. But then why bother with the practical necessities, when we can feel so good about being green.


RE: good news for the France!
By Samus on 7/20/2009 7:20:13 PM , Rating: 2
Fit, realize restricting nuclear power plants makes sense because we have 50 years of usable Uranium left. If China keeps up building nuclear power plants at they pace they are (5 this year alone!) then we have substantially less than 50 years left.

So tell me, in less than 50 years, what do we do with all our nuclear power plants that can't operate and all the nuclear waste they generated?

All the mean while the winds still blowing and the suns still burning.


RE: good news for the France!
By TomZ on 7/20/2009 9:35:21 PM , Rating: 2
50 years of uranium - where did you get that from? Last I read, conservatively we had a few centuries left - and that assumed we never started re-processing spent fuel again.

Is there an eco-nut website where I can find your distorted statistics? Please give us links so we can have a good laugh!


RE: good news for the France!
By ayat101 on 7/21/2009 7:42:52 AM , Rating: 2
WHO said that Uranium is the only fuel source for nuclear reactors? Use thorium based nuclear reactors, and you can power the world for thousands or millions of years (nobody has really prospected for thorium so far, so we do not know where all the resources are, but that thorium is much common in the Earth than Uranium). Known reserves of thorium can already provide fuel for far longer than Uranium.


RE: good news for the France!
By rippleyaliens on 7/21/2009 3:00:50 AM , Rating: 2
Once Again, people....
Oil=Affordable to the masses..
OK, so next up is bio which = FOOD COSTING ARM AND LEG ATM..
OK, so there is wind, Yah right..
Ok, Hydrogen- Whatever.. myself i cant imagine the first accident with hydrogen.. /shutters...

So we have electric, and i actually like the concept, the idea, etc.. EXCEPT 1 little thing, that people fail to fully grasp.. COST!!!!!
Lets imagine that in the USA alone, the grid as it sits, can handle 20% Electric penetration... (not even close)
Lets say that gas stations 20% of them install electric chargers, (whatever)..

Electricity is not as cheap as people list.. Sure at .11 per KWH, BUT once you go over say 1kh, then the charge goes WAYYYY UP..Trust meh,, between my roommate and myself, that was 30+ computers in an apt.. >$250 a month, EASILY, (to give hint, just 1 pc ea, no servers, was $40 a month)..
So electricity is efficient, cheap, etc.. TO MAKE, but There is a limit to how much is avaliable, before the cost goes up. THEN we have to think of the other thingy.. 40miles?? YAH whatever,, is that included with stop/go traffic. So ya make it to work, then plug in? YAH RIGHT,,, WHAT EMPLOYER will allow their power to be utilized for free? AND or, pay to get the gear to charge ya car? Cables in the rain anyone, or better yet, Cables in the Snow anyone.. All the brainstorming in the world, cannot compare to REAL WORLD APPLICATION..

My biggest fear is the TONS daily produced in old batteries.. Where to put? Who to regulate??? What happens when ya buy the volt ver 1, and then a new batter comes out, that 3x the range. That first upgrade will create a MEGA mess of old batteries.

Charging your car at home,, oh great now ya want to make it so that I HAVE TO COME home, just to get car ready for the morning.. Cant have nice car stereo, Gadgets will go even worse.. Until they can get cars that can go 60+ miles stop/go, highway, between charges... High speed chargers, that wont damage the batteries. Guarantee of 1 charge station within every 30miles.. AS so we dont have cars just failing for lack of power.. Until the basics are normal.. What is the use..
Dont get me started on Recreation vehicles, Semi's, Mass Transit vehicles


RE: good news for the France!
By rippleyaliens on 7/21/2009 3:07:04 AM , Rating: 2
But cost... is still gonna be high.. It wont be a $1.00 for 30 miles for a WHILE!!!..I say Drill baby Drill.. YET also, Build Baby Bulid.. (nuke plants).. The usa inventory is aging rapidly..Build build build, the power infrastructure..(hard to believe that in the year 2009 we still have rolling blackouts..)

But with all the advances we have, and the thigns to come.. the simple thing, like A JOB that i can afford the 40k Plug in car, would help me more than having a green planet. I say make import/export 1:1. PERIOD!!!!.. stabalize... then focus on conservation..


RE: good news for the France!
By Starcub on 7/22/2009 5:56:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Once Again, people....
Oil=Affordable to the masses..

And a poor choice for use in generating electricity, which is why it's not really used for that. The future of the car is electricty.
quote:
OK, so next up is bio which

...is actually quite promising. There are already several companies developing test plants that use bio-matter of various kinds to produce fuel. They are projected to be cost competitive, even without subsidies, given the projections for oil. They say it is possible to engineer microbes that can convert just about anything bio-degradeable into a fuel source. However, while this type of fuel might be good as a holdover in the hybrid phase we are in now, this may also be a poor choice to use for electricity production.
quote:
OK, so there is wind,

Which is already used in many parts of the world, and is currently the fastest growing source in the US. Wind and solar will drive the requirements for an updated national grid in the not to distant future, if indeed, they are developed into centralized energy sources. However, smarter grids will be needed to redistribute energy efficiently even with local installations.
quote:
WHAT EMPLOYER will allow their power to be utilized for free? AND or, pay to get the gear to charge ya car?

None of course, but that doesn't mean they won't be able to resell that electricity.
quote:
Cables in the rain anyone, or better yet, Cables in the Snow anyone.. All the brainstorming in the world, cannot compare to REAL WORLD APPLICATION..

Auto manufacturers are already collaborating on the development of charge and interface standards.
quote:
That first upgrade will create a MEGA mess of old batteries.

No, batteries are highly recyclable. As battery tech advances, the cost to replace your old batteries with the same tech will decrease, or you might have the option to upgrade your old modules.
quote:
Charging your car at home,, oh great now ya want to make it so that I HAVE TO COME home, just to get car ready for the morning..

No, you can still pull all nighters at work if you want to. The Tesla Roadster, which is a full electric vehicle (not a hybrid) stores enough electricty for 200 miles. Hybrids (the volt is technically a hybrid since it uses a gasoline engine to charge its batteries) are inherently inefficient by comparison.


RE: good news for the France!
By TMV192 on 7/20/2009 9:32:17 AM , Rating: 3
One of the major advantages of EVs over other alternative fuels is that the electricity can come from anywhere. But even if it is from coal or oil, its much more efficiently made at power plants then when a car burns it on its own. I don't want to search up the numbers, but you can definitely find the numbers comparing CO_2 output from regular car versus that from a power plant charging a Tesla Roadster


RE: good news for the France!
By TSS on 7/20/2009 2:24:35 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
One of the major advantages of EVs over other alternative fuels is that the electricity can come from anywhere


if you fancy dragging extention cords yes.

it's storing electricity that's the problem. batteries have become very advanced but not advanced enough. their still a pretty big hazard to the enviroment when they die, and if a big share of the car market runs on batteries... well... that's going to be alot of dead batteries in another decade.

thats why i personally favor hydrogen, and improving that process. you have the benifits of generating it in a centrallized position, it won't put thousands of truck drivers out of work, and it works cheaply and safely off the grid . electricity is a bitch to work with off the grid it was generated on.

for the moment though i'd not choose any of both technologies. i'd just keep using oil while dumping resources into researching hydrogen, electric or both. then with another decade of advancement i'd pick the best one. this is simply not the time to take a leap of faith on a immature technology.


RE: good news for the France!
By S3anister on 7/20/2009 11:38:33 PM , Rating: 2
Where i live in Washington nearly three fourths of electricity comes from hydroelectric dams boasting a total capacity of 20,179 MW with the 5th largest dam in the world located at Grand Coulee, Washington.

I for one, welcome our new electric automobile overlords.


Ultra Capacitors
By SublimeSimplicity on 7/20/2009 8:54:00 AM , Rating: 2
The "battery wars" are just a warm up for the battle over the first viable ultra-capacitor technology.

A car with ultra-capacitors that can only go 100 miles is completely usable as a daily driver, because a recharge can happen as quickly as you can feed the watts to it.




RE: Ultra Capacitors
By onelittleindian on 7/20/2009 9:11:06 AM , Rating: 2
Err, you forgot one problem there Spanky. A normal house outlet can only supply 20 amps or so, which takes all night to charge a car.

Public recharging stations could possibly use 3-phase 220V to cut the time down, but they'd all need to be rewired from scratch themselves, as their own power lines dont supply 1/1000 the amount this would require.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By SublimeSimplicity on 7/20/2009 9:22:34 AM , Rating: 2
Household outlets are limited to 20amps because of the circuit breaker and wiring to the outlet. Your house uses way more than 20amps at any given moment I'm sure. Wiring one outlet off the house's main line should be possible. If these type of vehicles became common place, it would become a standard feature on new house construction and any electrician could do the work for under $500 on an existing house.

Private recharging centers (think gas stations) will easily be able to justify any capital expense needed to supply the current needed to recharge a car in under 5 minutes. This may be a large array of ultra capacitors below ground that can trickle charge at relatively low amperage rates at night and discharge to recharge cars during business hours.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By onelittleindian on 7/20/2009 9:36:08 AM , Rating: 2
"Your house uses way more than 20amps at any given moment I'm sure"

Well, hard to argue with the expert certainty of the phrase "way more". But how about some facts though? Your average house has a power drop rated for 200-300 amps. That still would take an hour to charge. But how would you get it there? A normal outlet is limited to 20amps, thats a limit of the receptable itself, not just the wiring and circuit breakers). A special 220V 40 amp outlet can be used (wiring that would be about $500, yes) but it'd still take a couple HOURS to charge the average car.

Talking about recharging centers, the idea of them charging multiple cars in a few minutes time is sheer fantasy, not without rebuilding our entire power grid from scratch. There's just no way you can supply that many amps to anything not standing right next to a power plant. The problem with your "trickle charge" idea is the duty cycle involved. Even if you trickle all night, having to charge all day means this only increases your charge factor by 2. You need ten times that to cut charge times down to the 5 minute range.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By SublimeSimplicity on 7/20/2009 10:02:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But how would you get it there? A normal outlet is limited to 20amps, thats a limit of the receptable itself, not just the wiring and circuit breakers).


Did you really think I was suggesting adding wiring off the main line and a new circuit breaker to a house in order to install a standard outlet? Obviously you would hardwire straight into a box that had an industry standard auto charging plug (whatever that becomes).

quote:
the idea of them charging multiple cars in a few minutes time is sheer fantasy, not without rebuilding our entire power grid from scratch.


Sections of the grid might need to updated and in the beginning only certain sites may be viable to get the current necessary. Power companies drag their feet on increasing power output and updating the grid because usually it's to cover spikes in peak usage. If there was a market for more power on a continuous draw basis, they'd be more than happy to lay down the capital to supply it, because they'd be guaranteed to recoup it 10 fold.

You don't seem to grasp how the free market works. We're not talking about a couple of bucks to be made here, we're talking about a good portion of our GDP (in oil) suddenly up for grabs to power companies. If that became a reality, the lobbyists would go to work and there would be nuclear power plants being built left and right (if that was the most economical solution)


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By dsraa on 7/20/2009 11:11:27 AM , Rating: 1
You guys are a bunch of freaking idiots!! You really think that with all the issues we have already every damn summer with the brownouts from people running their air-conditioners all night, that we are going to have enough capacity to charge a car???? Let alone, one car per household? Really? Wow......Seriously......I could just imagine the excuses that would pile up from the idiots. "I'm sorry I can't get to work on time, I forgot to CHARGE my car last night....LOL


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By ClownPuncher on 7/20/2009 1:47:50 PM , Rating: 2
Brownouts? Never had one. It must suck to live in a state that couldn't plan its way out of a wet paper bag.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By TomZ on 7/20/2009 3:55:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You really think that with all the issues we have already every damn summer with the brownouts...
What kind of FUD is that? The only place in the US that had widespread brownouts was back in California when Enron et al. were manipulating the energy market.

Running air conditioners all night? Peak demand is in the afternoon/evening, not at night. What are you talking about?


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By theapparition on 7/20/2009 10:20:01 AM , Rating: 2
You missed the part about the OP suggesting a special high current outlet wired directly from the main 220V line coming in the home.

Another solution would be to pull power from multiple NEMA 15 sockets, each one wired through it's own CB to the mains. So you'd have 10-15 standard extension cords to plug in, rather than just one. That also assumes you aren't running the dryer at the same time. :)

However, all told, I agree with you that home quick recharging directly from the outlet is impractical right now. There could be capacitive systems that trickle charge into temporary storage and then quick discharge into the car, but that is just shifting the timeline of the same problem and adds an extra inefficiency step.

However, I don't think for the majority of uses the overnight change is that big of a deal. I'd be far more concerned with public charging station times, since that's when it's necessary to charge and go. But you're still correct that massive grid and generation infrastructure needs to happen before this can be a reality.

Mass electric cars are a pipe dream at the moment.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By corduroygt on 7/20/2009 10:49:26 AM , Rating: 2
How about when the caps are advanced enough that you can have them removable into 2 25lb suitcases and then take them into your home to charge them. People living in apartments would be able to use these cars as well.
However, I'd much rather see huge algae farms being perfected and built, and keep using gasoline/diesel that's home grown without threatening our food supply.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By guacamojo on 7/20/2009 12:55:22 PM , Rating: 2
I'm with you; quick charge times at home are not going to happen anytime soon. Just run the numbers: 16 kWh battery (Chevy Volt) recharging at 240 VAC in 5 minutes = 800 amps.

Even if the car could handle the current (ultracaps instead of a battery, high voltage/high current charging system), the house wouldn't. You'd need a charging station to accumulate a charge and dump it into the car on demand. That's a system at least as expensive as the battery system in the car, wired into the house main. I'm thinking that $10,000 would be a low-side estimate.

However, the commercial charging station might not be so far-fetched. I was thinking it was, until I ran some numbers.

Figure an average-sized gas station sells somewhere around 100,000 gallons of gas per month. On average, that's 1.2 million gallons per year. At 17.1 mpg cars+light trucks fuel economy, that's 20.5 million miles of driving. If I use the Chevy Volt as the average EV (16 kWh = 40 miles of driving), that's 8.2 million kWh per year, per station.

That's a lot, about half the power usage of a 1 million sf skyscraper. But probably not impossible in terms of power density. At least, not in urban areas.

In my mind, the real problem is the overall power problem. When you look at replacing all 117,100 gas stations in the U.S. that problem looks pretty big.

That's 960 billion kWh per year, or about 110 GW of new generation. That's a lot, no matter how you slice it.

Consider:
Grand Coulee Dam is only 6.8 GW
Susquehanna (nuclear) is 2.3 GW
The total installed wind power in the U.S. (2008) is 21 GW. (but of course that's not available 24/7.)

And of course, even if you built the new generation capacity, you still need to account for how you transmit that much power to point of use.

Anyone care to point out where I goofed up in my calculations?


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By teldar on 7/20/2009 5:09:56 PM , Rating: 2
Then we damn well better get started on the nuclear plants, right?
Since there isn't any other option that could possibly create the kind of power we need.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By teldar on 7/20/2009 5:09:58 PM , Rating: 2
Then we damn well better get started on the nuclear plants, right?
Since there isn't any other option that could possibly create the kind of power we need.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By Spuke on 7/20/2009 1:58:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Your average house has a power drop rated for 200-300 amps.
A newer house is rated for about 200 amps. Older homes can be as low as 100 amps (which is not out of the ordinary). Old homes would need to be upgraded to at least 200 amp service which could cost as much as $4000 (could also be as low as $600 depending on your area). Those prices don't include upgrading your in house wiring.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By guacamojo on 7/20/2009 10:49:15 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, residential outlet wiring is usually limited to 15 amps, not 20, and at 120 VAC. I don't think you'd want to recharge your car out of one of those circuits unless you had a charging station that could do some more load averaging.

If you could draw the full 15 amps out of the circuit (which wouldn't happen over long duration due to heating, but just go with me), it would take almost 9 hours to fully recharge the Chevy Volt's 16 kWh battery.

Okay, the battery only really charges to 85%, but I'm leaving out charging system efficiency and the heating effect too. The point is, you'd probably want a dedicated high-capacity circuit for the car. Your bigger circuits (like electric dryers) can handle quite a bit more power.

Unless you have a 3ph 480 VAC drop for your arc welder or home machine shop, you probably only have a typical residential electrical service, which usually tops out around 200 amps, 240 VAC. A good chunk of that is already accounted for, so is not available to use for charging the car.

At 240 VAC, you could recharge the 16 kWh battery in an hour at 67 amps. Not impossible, if the battery construction and internal wiring would allow it. Overnight would be very doable - 8 hours @ 8.3 amps... probably less than running your central A/C.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By Starcub on 7/22/2009 6:30:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Err, you forgot one problem there Spanky. A normal house outlet can only supply 20 amps or so, which takes all night to charge a car.

In reality though, you won't need to charge your car all night long. The average person probably won't be driving their car more than 20 miles per day. Power consumption for a Tesla Roadster is about .23 KWh/mile. Twenty miles of travel would use up 4.6 KWh of energy. Assuming you max out the charging capacity of your existing line, you would charge at a rate of 2.2 KWh/h. Therefore, you would only need to leave your car plugged in for a little over 2 hours to make up for the lost charge. However, to recharge a completely dead Tesla Roadster battery, you would need to leave it plugged in for about 23 hours.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 9:37:42 AM , Rating: 2
No offense but even if it could be recharged instantly, if taking a long trip, I really wouldn't want to stop every 100 miles. Yes for a commuter vehicle that would be fine though.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By theapparition on 7/20/09, Rating: -1
RE: Ultra Capacitors
By porkpie on 7/20/09, Rating: -1
RE: Ultra Capacitors
By theapparition on 7/20/2009 12:31:33 PM , Rating: 2
Lol, I could care less if every one of my posts was rated down. I say what I feel needs to be said.

Every time there is an article about SUVs, it degenerates towards a "You don't need a big vehicle" tirade. Even some of the DT contributers (Brandon???) like to brag how when moving apartments, he rented a truck for the day. And that's great. I'm happy that works for him.

But one day he, and many here, will grow up (no disrespect intended) and get a family. When that happens, you'll quickly realize the necessity for a larger car/SUV/minivan.

How about some with actual homes where home improvements are necessary? Try fitting 2 kids and 3 dogs and a load full of luggage for a weekend trip and you'll quickly understand. Time becomes a precious commodity and is well worth the loss of fuel economy for a large vehicle.

I'm absolutely not against small cars, or any car for that matter. I'm against someone telling me which car I'm allowed to get. That impinges directly on my personal freedoms.

While I personally drive primarily smaller 2 seat sports cars, I recongnize the need for a large SUV, and that's why we have one in the family. With the amount of casual, around the town driving she does (very little, mostly food, shopping, kid shuffling), we'd save maybe a few hundred $$$.

Assuming she does 5000 miles/year casual driving. That's going to use 500 gallons at 10mpg (guessing on the low end). 500 gallons at $2.50/gal will cost $1250/year. If we were to buy something that got 30mpg, we'd save a whopping $833/year. Not a whole lot considering people flock to $100/month cell phones. It's the added convienence that makes it worth while. Try adding up all the money necessary for renting out a specialized vehicle and that extra gets eaten up quickly.

I've kind of gone off on a tangent, but with the reguard to plug-in electrics....I'm exited about the future possibilites, but we are no where near them being practical. I can't stand how they are being forced down our throats through subsidies and legislation. The market will determine when they will become reality.

In the end, however, it really doesn't matter to me what kinds of cars will be offered from manufacturers. I'll always have the option to upgrade it way past factory specs.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 12:36:37 PM , Rating: 2
If nothing else, all the dependent, entitlement loving, welfare taking people out there who love what's going on should look at electric vehicles like this:

Are they gonna be able to put 24" spinners and a 3000 watt sound system on their electric scooter of a car they'll be driving?

Lord I apologize for that.....not really.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By guacamojo on 7/20/2009 2:52:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are they gonna be able to put 24" spinners and a 3000 watt sound system on their electric scooter of a car they'll be driving?


You know, the 3 kW sound system might work better in the electric car. Even a little dinky electric car would have a power supply larger than all but the biggest custom rigs. Gas engines are more powerful, but they drive, you know, the wheels, not the amps.

The spinners shouldn't be a problem, either. Well, depending on your taste.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 3:32:17 PM , Rating: 2
Larger wheels take more energy to turn when accelerating. And as far as the stereo, it would drain the battery extremely quickly.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By Starcub on 7/22/2009 6:48:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But one day he, and many here, will grow up (no disrespect intended) and get a family. When that happens, you'll quickly realize the necessity for a larger car/SUV/minivan.

When I was growing up I think the national average was 2.5 children per household. In our family, there were 2 children and we managed just fine with one small sedan and one mid-sized stationwagon. In fact, I think jeep and some other company were the only SUV producers at that time, but very few people owned them, or even minivan's for that matter. SUV's are designed with beefy raised suspensions and huge tires for recreational purposes. Minivan's are for people with much larger than average families. Most people are convinced that they need a truck or SUV when in fact they don't.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By Starcub on 7/22/2009 6:53:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've kind of gone off on a tangent, but with the reguard to plug-in electrics....I'm exited about the future possibilites, but we are no where near them being practical.

That's BS, they would be practical right now if the auto manufactures got their acts together and finalized their charging and cable/interface standards.


RE: Ultra Capacitors
By SublimeSimplicity on 7/20/2009 10:04:41 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. When I said viable option, I meant as one car in my house (mine). The minivan would still be gas powered in my house until 300 miles in range was possible.


More Of Mick's Fantasies.
By onelittleindian on 7/20/2009 9:00:42 AM , Rating: 3
Hybrids are "climbing the sales charts"? Does no one fact check these articles? Total hybrid sales have dropped off sharply in 2008 and 2009, even worse than normal automobiles. Maybe they'll go back up one day, but this statement is just wishful thinking on Mick's part.




RE: More Of Mick's Fantasies.
By TomZ on 7/20/2009 9:32:24 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. I think he should stop covering the automotive industry. He doesn't seem to know anything about it.

Hybrid sales are in the crapper probably because of low gas prices and the recession making it more difficult for consumers to justify or afford the price difference for hybrids.

Hybrids are, in fact, towards the bottom of the sales charts. The top-selling vehicle in the US is still the Ford F-Series truck. Sorry to rain on libtard parades...


RE: More Of Mick's Fantasies.
By TheFace on 7/20/2009 11:56:01 AM , Rating: 3
Hybrid sales are topping the charts in Japan. Of course, that doesn't matter much in the USA. That is why the big three (broke 2 +1?) will probably have hybrid versions of their whole line-up. I'm visiting Florence right now and am amazed at the size of their vehicles, and how they make my '00 Accord (US) look massive. When I'm at home my car feels small compared to all the trucks and SUVs on the road. We Americans have never wanted to compromise on the size of our vehicles, and why should we?

As an aside, Italian drivers are crazy and surprisingly good.


RE: More Of Mick's Fantasies.
By Spuke on 7/20/2009 2:08:36 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
That is why the big three (broke 2 +1?) will probably have hybrid versions of their whole line-up
They're going to have more hybrids because of the upcoming CAFE standards that have to be met. Fortunately, they're all prepared for it BUT our cars will increase in cost accordingly. No biggie to me but it might prevent some from buying new cars in the future.


For GM and Chrysler
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 9:04:44 AM , Rating: 1
What financial woes? They have the full power of the US Treasure department and its ability to print money on their side now. Who cares how much it costs tax payers. Government Motors and Chrysler will forge ahead with the current administrations goals of getting rid of gas powered cars.




RE: For GM and Chrysler
By wuZheng on 7/20/2009 9:54:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
getting rid of gas powered cars.

You say this like its a bad thing in general.

True, its bad if the citizens are not given a choice about what kind of car they can drive. /negativity

However, for whats its worth, from a tech-is-cool-stuff standpoint... electric motors bring large gains in efficiency and performance over their combustion powered counterparts. So why wouldn't you want your modern vehicle (of any form factor) powered by a fundamentally better type of motor?

Granted, the technology isn't there yet... but is pushing it forward a bit such a bad thing?


RE: For GM and Chrysler
By onelittleindian on 7/20/2009 10:01:50 AM , Rating: 3
"why wouldn't you want your modern vehicle (of any form factor) powered by a fundamentally better type of motor?"

Because they cost much more, have limited range, and take forever to charge. And all that extra weight makes them handle like pigs, even when their straight-line acceleration is a bit better.

People seem to forget electric cars aren't "new". We had electric cars in the 1890s. When the more practical gas-powered cars came along, no one bought electric any more.

If the government wants to "push the tech forward" by funding basic research into battery technology, I'm all for it. But funding the production of electric cars at this point is an expensive boondoggle that taxpayers should have no part of.


RE: For GM and Chrysler
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 10:08:20 AM , Rating: 2
Because maybe I don't care as much about efficiency as you do? I like my gas powered car. What I don't like is someone else telling me I shouldn't be allowed to drive it.


RE: For GM and Chrysler
By corduroygt on 7/20/2009 4:11:55 PM , Rating: 1
Bullshit :) Show me another gas engine that gives as much hp/tq as the LS2 and consumes less, while being lightweight, simple, reliable, and cheap. There is none, the LSx small block is the most efficient engine in its category.


RE: For GM and Chrysler
By TomZ on 7/20/2009 10:30:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You say this like its a bad thing in general.
Well, it would be a bad thing, considering that none of the "advanced technology" vehicles available or being developed can come close to meeting all the requirements that are easily met by cars with internal combustion engines. For example, low cost, long distance before refueling, small size, good torque/power, etc.

I'm not against advanced technology vehicles in general, but I'm not going to be pressured into buying one until they are better, more convenient, and no more expensive (TCO) than current technology. That's the criteria for upgrade, not the "green zombie" mentality that dominates today.


Stepping stones...
By SirKronan on 7/20/2009 12:17:34 PM , Rating: 3
You know, anything we can do to progress is a step in the right direction. Anything we can do to harvest electricity that is normally wasted is also a wise move on our part. Take Toyota's approach with the Prius: instead of wasting all that breaking energy, it recharges the batteries. Instead of making a vehicle that looks "sporty" or aggressive, they make it look like a spaceship, but with the drag coefficient of a Corvette. And the vehicle is affordable. You get practically the same amount of room as a Camry for about the same price as a 4 cyl. Camry would cost, but with much better mileage and even a little more "zing."

The Volt is another step in the right direction. A high efficiency gas motor to recharge the battery, and a plugin system that harvests the cheaper electricity available during the night time. This is going to be a very practical vehicle in big cities for people with fairly short commutes.

Obviously electric motors, such as found on the Volt, Prius, Insight, etc. shut off when at red lights, another small waste of gasoline. With torque instantly available in an electric motor, you don't need to waste energy while the car is not moving. These are just small steps in the right direction.

Better batteries? Another advancement we need. Let's make them last longer, recharge more quickly, have more recharge cycles, be recyclable (such as nickel - it's now recyclable for use in new cells), and be produced more cost-effectively as mass production increases.

This is actually good news for all of us, even if it's not a perfect solution yet.




RE: Stepping stones...
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 12:43:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is actually good news for all of us


According to you. Nevermind the amount of toxic pollution from making all those batteries and the amount of shipping, processing, and transportation costs (and pollution) required to make them.

All those things sound great. How about we use batteries when they're completed. Not before. And why use them at all if we can produce clean fuel (bio-fuels) that doesn't require trillions of dollars worth of changes to our existing infrastructure.


The color of money...
By IcePickFreak on 7/20/2009 9:51:49 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, because a domestic monopoly is the answer to our problems. At least were I live there's only one power provider, you don't think they would raise rates?

So in the future we can look forward to power prices with wildly swinging prices like gas has a tendency to do, with the wilder ones always in the up direction.

The power company already has me by one ball, allow me to put the other one in their hands and ask them to squeeze.




RE: The color of money...
By FITCamaro on 7/20/2009 12:44:06 PM , Rating: 1
Pretty much what cap and trade will do.


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki