backtop


Print 130 comment(s) - last by .. on Aug 30 at 8:42 AM


Nissan has announced that it is looking to deploy high-voltage solar charging stations to power its 2011 Leaf EV.  (Source: AutoBlog Green)

It is partnering with Showa Shell, whose thin film solar panel cells are shown here rolling off the line.  (Source: Renewable Energy World)
If Nissan's plans succeed, its EV may have zero grid impact

Next year Nissan is set to go head to head with GM, bringing electric vehicles to the masses.  Next year GM will release its 2011 Chevy Volt, while Nissan will let lose the 2011 Leaf EV  The bragging war has already begin, with both companies claiming to have the industry's best gas mileage.  Nissan, the first Japanese automaker to push an EV, has a tough road ahead, as its hype engine arrived late on the scene (the Volt has been talked about for a couple of years now).

Now Nissan has unveiled an ambitious plan to differentiate itself from its competitor.  Nissan's EV is a fully electric vehicle,w ith no "extended range" gas generator like the Chevy Volt.  The vehicle does boast reportedly quicker charge times on its 480 V charge stations.  However, many fear that building public charging stations at such high voltage will put too much drain on the U.S. and Japanese grids.

So Nissan has partnered with Showa Shell to create solar-powered charging stations.  Raising the green bar higher than the Volt perhaps, the new charging stations use Showa's CIS, a thin-film panel composed of copper indium diselenide, which boasts higher performance than traditional polycrystalline silicon designs.  The stations also use Nissan's advanced lithium batteries to store power for nighttime recharges.

The pair, also apparently plans on taking the system to the energy market, writing in the press release, "In addition, a quick charging system using the next-generation CIS solar panels and lithium ion batteries is expected to be utilized in houses and large-scale solar power plants (mega solar plants)."

Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry is commissioning trial deployments of the stations in Japan, which may be starting within a few months.  It is unknown if the five test markets for the Leaf in the U.S. will jump onboard the trial.

One major concern is cost.  Lithium batteries remain relatively expensive, as do thin film solar panels.  If the charging stations can break even in costs versus traditional coal-based electricity, that would be somewhat of a miracle.  Further if the charging stations became commonplace, they might put a strain on the lithium industry, which is already having to boost production to keep up with EV battery demand.  Lastly, the deployment window is also a concern.  Nissan has to decide whether to go with grid connected stations or solar stations -- and fast -- as its vehicle launches next year.

On the other hand, the technology is young and ambitious and has room to grow and improve.  Even if it can't beat coal power in costs, the solar charging stations may compare favorably to the cost of overhauling grids worldwide that are already struggling to meet the demands of a high-tech society.


Comments     Threshold


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

This much power, from solar?
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 10:00:34 AM , Rating: 4
I think somebody at Nissan is not paying attention. Solar is only even close to cost competitive in a few key locations. And charging a car that runs fully on battery is going to need a ton of power - something that will be difficult to provide from a small solar source alone. They also are going to doubledown on battery requirements by putting a battery in these stations. They are making GM look thoughtful.




RE: This much power, from solar?
By Spivonious on 8/21/2009 10:07:14 AM , Rating: 3
Hmm, but if it's sitting out in the parking lot all day, I wonder if it would charge enough to get you home.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 10:30:40 AM , Rating: 4
Well, lets do some math and count some money. Check http://www.altersystems.com/catalog/32-kw-gridtie-...

That is a 3.2Kw charger and it costs well over $20k. It is pretty big (16 panels), but it could charge the 90Kw Leaf in just under 30 hours of sunshine. So it will take 3 days to recharge your car.

Want to drop the charging time to 4 hours - you will need 7 or 8 of these units - using almost 100 panels and costing nearly $200k. TF Solar is not the answer.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By invidious on 8/21/2009 10:52:18 AM , Rating: 4
Your speed figures aren't quite right. The idea is that the solar station would charge batteries at the station and then you would plug your car into those stationary batteries and they would charge your car batteries. This way the sun's energy can be harvested all day and stored, and you can get a quicker charge when you get there.

You are right that the cost implications are astronomical. Its certainly possible grid charging with solar, but doing so cost effectively is a lofty goal. But while this is what the article suggests I think it must be out of context. It's no good business sense to gamble your first EV car's future on the not quite mature solar industry.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 11:02:55 AM , Rating: 3
I thought these would be charging stations that were constantly serving many customers?

The whole idea doesn't make much sense. Charging takes time, especially to fill all the way up. So plugging the car in overnight (when the grid actually has more available capacity) is the obvious choice. These solar stations would be installed near business centers. In fact, unless you had one in the parking lot of your office and you were the only electric car there, it wouldn't work at all.
The more I think about it, the Volt is the answer.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By quiksilvr on 8/22/2009 1:02:21 PM , Rating: 3
The problem with the Volt is that its going to cost alot more than the LEAF. The LEAF may have less range, but doesn't use gas and costs 10 to 15 thousand dollars less.

IMO, it would make more sense for Nissan to put these solar panels on the CAR ITSELF. They can say "Fill up your tank without spending a dime." It would be cheesy but it would make more sense than this...


RE: This much power, from solar?
By FITCamaro on 8/23/2009 9:58:05 AM , Rating: 1
There isn't enough space on the body of a car to make it worthwhile. Sure the Prius has an optional solar cell available to power the AC fans. But that's it. A blower fan. And hell it might not enough have enough juice to run it on its own.

Not to mention look at a large number of cars today. They're not clean. How do you think that's going to impact a car with solar cells all over it. You'd have to have a somewhat thick, transparent coating over the cells to protect them from the elements which is going to get dirty and thus, the solar cells aren't going to work as well.

Solar cells on a car itself are a dumb idea.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By ianweck on 8/23/2009 7:13:51 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Solar cells on a car itself are a dumb idea.


I agree. You could repeat that line a million times, somebody will always bring that idea up. You'd be better off just sinking that money into a bigger battery.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By ianweck on 8/23/2009 7:11:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem with the Volt is that its going to cost alot more than the LEAF. The LEAF may have less range, but doesn't use gas and costs 10 to 15 thousand dollars less.


How does that work? If the single biggest contributor to the Volt's cost is the battery, and the Leaf has a bigger battery? ICE's don't cost that much.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By Keeir on 8/23/2009 9:33:12 PM , Rating: 3
It works like this

because the Volt is a PHEV, CARB requires it to maintain the same emission rating over 10 year/150,000 mile ("useful life of car"). Since the Volt's emission profile is heavily dependent on its battery, Volt must have a 10 year/150,00 mile warranty to ensure the battery acts the same at year 10 and 150,000 mile as it does on day 1.

The Leaf, as a BEV has no such restriction. CARB doesn't care if the car is nearly inoperable, it only cars how much emissions per mile it puts out. A BEV with 10 mile range is the same as one with a 100 mile range in their eye.

Thus Nissan will likely have a much shorter warranty (less costs) and allow for a certain percentage of range to disappear before the battery is out of warranty (less costs).

This leads to the whole "gotcha" concept of comparing the Volt to the Leaf. The Leaf is not really comparable. For most, it will be a second/commuter only car. The Volt pretty much replace any C class car on the road.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By quiksilvr on 8/27/2009 4:12:19 AM , Rating: 2
Replaces any C class car on the road for nearly twice the price.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By ffakr on 8/25/2009 1:26:54 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, I'm not sure how pure electric cars fit in with charging stations. You have to be immobal, like at a resturaunt or a movie theater.

They did mention 480V charging which IS way faster than the overnight 120V wall charging that's typically discussed.
It's conceiveable they could top the car off in an hour.. but that still doesn't make for a gas station like experience.

I certainly don't see how they're going to provide 480V from solar cells that don't take up a football field.

OTOH, perhaps this would be an interesting arrangement for parking lots in urban areas. This will, by necessity, be a short trip vehicle.. best for urban envornments and maybe suburbs. No one is going to use it to drive across the country.
If I had one in the city.. a charge fee on top of a parking fee would just be like filling up every time I parked. Meter by consumption and it might be a very nominal charge.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By nafhan on 8/21/2009 11:52:31 AM , Rating: 5
They should go ahead and get together with Toshiba and widely deploy some mini nuclear reactors instead.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Toshiba's_H...


RE: This much power, from solar?
By quiksilvr on 8/22/2009 1:03:27 PM , Rating: 2
Dude, that's AWESOME! The last person I would have thought of working on nuclear reactors would be Toshiba.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By Durrr on 8/23/2009 3:53:11 PM , Rating: 2
Toshiba bought Westinghouse, which has been doing nuclear work for >50 yrs


RE: This much power, from solar?
By FITCamaro on 8/23/2009 9:59:49 AM , Rating: 2
This would be a far better solution. Too bad environmental groups will never let it happen. I doubt the current administration would support it either.


By DigitalFreak on 8/21/2009 1:13:23 PM , Rating: 2
Well.. if you found the right spot, you could charge one with solar, wind, geothermal and hydroelectric all at the same time! Imagine the environmental savings!


RE: This much power, from solar?
By lne937s on 8/21/2009 4:45:26 PM , Rating: 4
You are off on your numbers. The Leaf charges 20kWh of capacity at a time (some of the capacity is not used to improve reliability). Its max power output is 90kW, which should also be approximately equivalent to charge acceptance (charging off max DC in less than 15 minutes). As solar cells are DC and batteries are DC, there is no reason for that inverter, unless you want to connect to the grid as well. At 3.2 kW, it would take 7 hours of daylight to charge the batteries, that would then charge the car- potentially in a matter of minutes.

You can also get more solar generating capacity for less than $8000

http://www.atensolar.com/m5_view_item.html?m5:item...


RE: This much power, from solar?
By drmo on 8/21/2009 5:01:03 PM , Rating: 2
Also, that calculation is based on the entire 20 kWh being charged (100 miles), so if you go much less, the car would be needed to be charged less. How many people live 100 miles (or even 50 miles) from work? They probably wouldn't buy one of these anyway.

On the negative, one thing to point out is that PVs are rated at maximum output with 1000 W/m^2 of sunlight, so the actual amount of power output will generally be less than the rated number.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By lne937s on 8/21/2009 5:22:17 PM , Rating: 2
Realistically, figuring a typical 1000 miles a month, this car will only consume about 200 kWh a month- or about 7 kWh a day. If you conservatively figure 8 hours of rated capacity from solar panels on an average per day, you would need less than a kilowatt of output to charge the batteries or offset the electricity consumption. For a home, you would be better off using the solar cells to offset the electrical usage during the daytime and charge at night (off peak). The one benefit of the solar-battery-battery is DC electricity. Solar panels generate DC and batteries all charge off of DC. You have to convert AC to DC to charge a battery (part of why 3 phase AC works much better). A battery discharging DC to another battery could charge it quickly without creating any real fluctuation to the grid. You could have the station battery charging the EV in less than 20 minutes, charge the station battery slowly off-peak or off solar during peak and sell any surplus back to the utilities... without special electrical connections.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mindless1 on 8/21/2009 10:37:01 PM , Rating: 3
You've obviously never worked with solar cells. Few if anyone on earth will get 8 hours of rated capacity per day from solar cells, not in the best climates and cloudless summer days.

It is rather trivial whether the solar battery combination is DC or not, we're talking about losses in the dozen percent range at most contrasted with multiple times as many solar cells to do what you are suggesting.

Further, it's highly irrelevant that batteries charge off DC as it still goes through a regulation circuit... aforementioned losses don't even apply anymore due to this.

The one case where it will have a slight efficiency gain is charging from battery to battery but not so much actually, you aren't just going to hook one empty battery directly up to the other one there has to be an intermediary current control circuit, at the very least the pack protection circuit would cut out of you hook one flat pack to one charged pack.

You can't charge the station battery slowly off-peak because this would require orders of magnitude more batteries than cards being changed, an extreme expense. Further, cars are used all day and night and will come in needing charged all day and night.

Sell surplus back? LOL there will never be any surplus there will always be a shortage unless some millionaire decides to throw away a ton of cash to put one in a rural area.

I didn't even mention rainy days yet. I don't suppose anyone drives during the several day stretches that many areas have rain, let alone snow-covered panels.

Realistically, what is possible in theory given unlimited money and land for solar cell arrays, is not remotely plausible for widescale deployment. It'd be more like a PR stunt a large corporation would undertake. A large corporation with a huge roof on their building, these stations won't be desirable littering up the landscape even if they make them artsy shapes and colors.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By lne937s on 8/22/2009 12:25:55 PM , Rating: 2
I have personally never worked with solar... I looked at some sites. I guess my 8 hours was optimistic- lets go with half that. Based on the de-rating for here in NYC, where it rains a lot (not the ideal location), in order to offset the entire 200kWh per month of electricity consumption, with inverter losses, then you would need a little less than 2kW of output. In thin-film panels, that can cost $4-6,000, with full-on grid tied systems (mounts, inverters, wiring, etc.) starting around $10,000- state/utility incentives would cut that down a lot in many places. Not cheap, but not "millionaire" territory- cheaper than custom kitchen cabinets.

However, if you figure $.14 per kWh average for the US(electicity is almost twice as much here), it will only cost $28 to run an electric car 1000 miles (what the average American drives per month). ROI may take a while...


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mindless1 on 8/21/2009 10:24:34 PM , Rating: 2
It will not potentially charge the car in a matter of minutes. Do the calculations for how many amps that is!


RE: This much power, from solar?
By lne937s on 8/22/2009 12:25:35 AM , Rating: 2
240V, 3 phase, 60 Amp, less than 30 minutes to get 20kWh.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mindless1 on 8/27/2009 3:35:26 PM , Rating: 2
Umm, that's not the math. You have a charge controller and regulator, line losses, battery charging inefficiency, and whatever limit is inherent in the design of the car's charging for practical budgetary reasons.

Then you have margins... suppose it was only 60A, you don't run 60A circuits, wiring and components to handle their max in any sane design. I won't even go into the fact that the electric grid can't handle everyone charging their car at 2C rates, I mean even the percentage that would at any given time of day in many areas.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By invidious on 8/21/2009 10:53:44 AM , Rating: 2
I think the charging station would be at your house, not on the car.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 11:08:15 AM , Rating: 2
If the charging station is at the home than the power source is really none of Nissan's concern. Maybe Arizona residents might consider solar, but the panels are just not cost effective in most locations. In addition, charging a car pulls a lot of power off of the grid. Trying to create the same flexibility in the home through panels and another set of batteries is just not going to work. Panels just don't make enought power and they only run for about 10 useful hours a day. That cannot compete against commercial power plants designed to supply megawatts 24/7.

And also, the TF panels require the use of some VERY rare materials. And don't see how panel production could ever scale that way.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By therealnickdanger on 8/21/2009 11:50:03 AM , Rating: 2
If you want to take advantage of the ~30 minute "quick charge" then you need to have a special charging station professionally installed. The station costs about $500 and who knows how much installation might be...

Otherwise, you can use standard 110/220 to get down to a 4 hour recharge (best amperage @ 220v).

Keep in mind that you will likely never wear the battery down to 0% unless your commute is 100 miles, so it's possible that 8 hours (work shift) in a sunny parking lot might give you another 2 miles of range or something... LOL


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 1:07:41 PM , Rating: 2
You mean the tiny Leaf gets only 1 mile to the KW/h?

That is terrible. The best EV1s from 6 years ago got 4 times that.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By lne937s on 8/21/2009 4:52:20 PM , Rating: 2
The LEAF doesn't use all of its capacity 24 kWh. It is estimated to go more than 100 miles on less than 20 kWh, so more than 5 miles per kilowatt/hour.

People are confusing max power output with energy consumption.

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/08/14/at-witz-end-t...


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mindless1 on 8/21/2009 10:26:08 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind you are talking about the capacity of a NEW battery in IDEAL conditions. IOW, the moment you drive it off the lot the figures are no longer valid.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mattclary on 8/22/2009 2:30:53 PM , Rating: 2
You made the same mistake I did when i first read the article. They have no plans to put solar cells on the car, they want to build charging stations with solar cells.

It makes more sense to put solar cells on the roof and get a constant trickle.

Fail.


By monkeyman1140 on 8/24/2009 2:22:14 PM , Rating: 2
Well most worker bees like me park the car for 8 hours while we are busy shuffling papers for the man, so thats a pretty good charge time. Maybe not enough for a "full tank" but enough to extend the range a bit, and for free.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By Samus on 8/21/2009 10:19:37 AM , Rating: 5
What they need to do is completely DITCH the idea of bundling lithium reserve cells with the solar panel charge stations. They should be hooking the solar charge stations directly into the grid to feed power back to the utility, much like how people with solar power in their homes sell their reserve power back to utilities.

That's the only truely efficient way to use the power generated, as storing it is a complete waste of resources.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 10:41:46 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know why Nissan thinks that American cars wander far from the grid. Maybe they think America looks like Wyoming or something.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By lightfoot on 8/21/2009 5:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
Technically speaking, parts of America look exactly like Wyoming.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By 41A on 8/22/2009 9:25:30 PM , Rating: 2
Well... at least all of Wyoming.


By MamiyaOtaru on 8/29/2009 9:28:38 AM , Rating: 2
/waves


RE: This much power, from solar?
By kaoken on 8/21/2009 2:42:52 PM , Rating: 2
This however is not very efficient, you lose something like up to 80% of the power traveling from the solar farm to the charging station.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By lightfoot on 8/21/2009 5:07:10 PM , Rating: 2
How do you figure? Average line loss in the US is only 7-8%

Even if the power had to travel 10 times further than average you still wouldn't see an 80% power loss.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By Samus on 8/21/2009 8:04:30 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe long distance DC power could lose close to 80%, but AC power can travel very efficiently along the grid. Most modern grids have <5% loss. I know here in San Diego (where the grids are terrible) there is upward of a 15% loss because the closest power plant is 100 miles away and being on the coast requires some pretty creative grid design. And we pay for it. It costs as much to have electricity DELIVERED as it does per kilowatt!


RE: This much power, from solar?
By The0ne on 8/21/2009 11:09:47 AM , Rating: 2
Solar is just marketing. It's not cost efficient enough to be beneficial. What I'm concern about here in San Diego where Leaf is expected to sell well is how well the power grids will hold. Granted here you have sunshine 95% of the time so at least the panels will get its usage :)

quote:
However, many fear that building public charging stations at such high voltage will put too much drain on the U.S. and Japanese grids.


Many forget that CA, San Diego included, has been suffering and still suffers from the lack of power and often will have rolling black outs during hot summers. What's the plan when electric vehicles do pick up? Hmm, more blackouts I wold assume as I've heard of no concrete plans to support vehicles and homes. So no power and no water...hmm, sounds like back home!


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 11:10:44 AM , Rating: 2
If charging takes place at night there will not be too many problems. There is plenty of spare capacity at night.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mindless1 on 8/21/2009 10:42:07 PM , Rating: 2
... until everyone keeps increasing their energy usage, population density increases, and let's not forget about everyone charging cars. There is spare capacity because we aren't all charging cars. Yet.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By monkeyman1140 on 8/24/2009 2:12:24 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure the free market will adapt to take in the additional demand. After all there's money to be made from electricity.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By mindless1 on 8/27/2009 3:39:22 PM , Rating: 2
... which makes the ROI of owning an electric car even more dubious, since these ventures into addt'l 'lectricity won't come without a price.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By omnicronx on 8/21/2009 11:34:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Many forget that CA, San Diego included, has been suffering and still suffers from the lack of power and often will have rolling black outs during hot summers. What's the plan when electric vehicles do pick up? Hmm, more blackouts I wold assume as I've heard of no concrete plans to support vehicles and homes. So no power and no water...hmm, sounds like back home!
Thats easy, Arnold will just tell everyone to get a gas generator.. oh wait..

As long as it looks like you are being green..


RE: This much power, from solar?
By drmo on 8/21/2009 5:08:24 PM , Rating: 2
Well, if you own your home you can get a 20 year low cost financing on the PV, allowing you to spread out your payments over that time. This might mean you are actually paying less than if you just paid your normal electric bills. It depends on how much you pay currently for electricity.

San Diego is apparently already rolling out this program:
http://www.renewfund.com/node/49


RE: This much power, from solar?
By Hare on 8/21/2009 4:48:50 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, so you leave the car in the sunshine only to put the AC on full power for the trip home/work instead of driving it to a cool garage in the first place and maybe waste those watts on less AC :)

Seriously. I have to question the viability of solar panels as you get very little power even if the whole car was covered with them.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By scrapsma54 on 8/22/2009 11:14:34 AM , Rating: 2
The Idea is to let them worry about that and see when and how they deliver the goods.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By HayYaAll on 8/23/2009 2:53:09 PM , Rating: 2
Now I freely admit that I know little about solar panels or charging rates or things like that.

What I do know is that I like to stay warm in my car during the winter and have the defroster running so I can see the road.

I also know I like to be cool in the summer with the AC running full blast to keep the sweat from running down my face.

And I know that the rechargeable batteries in my radio and other devices, deteriorate and must be replaced periodically.

So I ask myself, how long will these marvelous cars run with the heater and defrosters running. Worse still, I ask myself how long those massive batteries in these cars last and how much will it cost me every few years (at best) to replace them. None of these questions obviously having anything to do with solar charging rates in the shade or cloudy days but still of some interest.


RE: This much power, from solar?
By Starcub on 8/23/2009 3:39:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think somebody at Nissan is not paying attention. Solar is only even close to cost competitive in a few key locations.

I think the people at Nissan are probably more invested in the issue than your average Dailytech commentator.

First of all, if these things are used to charge cars during the day (like a gas station), and the batteries are large enough, then they will aleviate peak load demand, which means they will be providing electricity during the day and, if they are grid tied, charging at night too. So the number of states this will be cost competitive in would be larger than the ~20% that solar is already cost competitive in, since they will be deployed in places where the existing infrastructure is weak such that peak load demand (and thus expense) would be an issue for PV owners.

These stations will likely be grid tied to insure that power will always be available, so they won't be replacing grid power, mearly supplementing it. A large battery ensures that the cars that hook up during the day don't have to wait for the sun to provide enough power to 'fill their tank'. A large battery would also ensure that the solar panels are constantly being used when they can be.

What's really interesting in this article is that it appears that someone has figured out a way to make thin film PV panel's that perform better than traditional silicon based home installations. "Performance" is probably a power vs. cost measurement. So while cheaper than traditional solar, it only remains to be seen how much of that power (solar) will actually be used to charge one these stations. However, you can put a whole lot of PV panels over an area the size of your average gas station.

If you assumed that one of these stations had about 3KW worth of PV panels, and that EV's like the Volt discharge at rate of about 4-5 miles/KWh, then 1 hour of noontime solar charging would be able to re-charge about 1 car back to full. Over the entire day, that's only about 3 cars: less than will visit the station most likely, but not much less given that EV's will likely suffer popularity given their expense (at least for the first few years). Keep in mind also that these stations would likely be used by EV owners sparingly, probably when they plan to be driving a lot and need extra range, or when they've been lazy and let it go too long, since EV owners can and probably will slow re-charge their cars over-night at home as it would be more convenient and maybe cheaper in some places.

So not much grid power would be used during the day, and that which is used, would be at night, when demand and thus rates are low. If they restrict their deployment to test markets where solar is readily available and electricity rates are high, then users might prefer to charge more at stations. However, the more people that use the stations, the less profitable the stations would become, since more of their power would come from the grid. The key is being able to match PV capacity to demand -- not so hard for a small test market, TF might work well in such a market -- maybe more difficult in an open and untested market where higher capacity/more expensive PV might be required.


Disappointed
By nvalhalla on 8/21/09, Rating: 0
RE: Disappointed
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 10:49:42 AM , Rating: 2
Covering the roof with solar cells might generate 400watts of power under ideal conditions. So after working for 8 hours you would have about 3KW of power - which might get you 12 miles if the Leaf can lead the industry with 4 miles per KWh.


RE: Disappointed
By nvalhalla on 8/21/2009 11:03:50 AM , Rating: 3
Well, that would be 12 more miles than it'll get sitting in the parking lot without them. Too bad, guess we'll have to wait until charging stations become the norm in parking lots.


RE: Disappointed
By jimbojimbo on 8/21/2009 11:46:42 AM , Rating: 3
For those that live in a city and only drive a couple of times a week all that time in the sun pays off big time. I guess I'll spend a part of the savings in car washes to keep those panels nice and clean.


RE: Disappointed
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 1:18:22 PM , Rating: 2
That is a good point. If you have a short commute, don't drive much in general, and live somewhere sunny. That could work.

But apparently the Leaf is horribly inefficient and only gets a bit more than 1 mile to the KW/h. So your commute couldn't be more than 2-3 miles. Maybe a bicycle would be better.


RE: Disappointed
By ZachDontScare on 8/21/2009 2:01:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That is a good point. If you have a short commute, don't drive much in general, and live somewhere sunny. That could work.

Though, if you have a short commute and dont drive much in general, you might as well stick with a small, cheap gasoline powered vehicle because you're not spending much on fuel anyways.


RE: Disappointed
By The0ne on 8/21/2009 2:25:45 PM , Rating: 2
Bicyle? Walk? hahahah nice one. While I would myself, I know people that live not 1 mile and they still drive! Talk about lazy. Heck, I use to walk more than a mile to get to elementary school :)


RE: Disappointed
By lne937s on 8/21/2009 5:05:52 PM , Rating: 2
Your numbers are off. You are looking at max power output (90 kW) rather than energy per charge (80% of 24 kWh for over a 100 mile charge)- it is over 5 miles per kWh.


RE: Disappointed
By namechamps on 8/23/2009 12:40:02 PM , Rating: 2
The engine is rated at the PEAK POWER.

Range is determined by AVERAGE POWER CONSUMPTION.

Unless the PEAK POWER = AVERAGE POWER CONSUMPTION then looking at the engine to determine range is useless.

The leaf has an 80KW engine.
The battery pack is 24KWH and the rated range is 100 miles.

So it goes 100 miles for every 24KWH or about 4 miles per KWH.

Your numbers are off by a factor of 4.


RE: Disappointed
By mcnabney on 8/23/2009 7:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
From the article about the Leaf linked in the article.

As with most next generation electric vehicles, the LEAF uses an advanced lithium-ion battery pack (48 modules, 90kW) and has electric motors which deliver 80kW (107 HP). The combo allows the LEAF to have a driving range of 100 miles and a top speed of 87 mph according to Nissan.

So it is talking about a 90kw battery, not a 24.


RE: Disappointed
By drmo on 8/24/2009 9:59:43 AM , Rating: 2
I think the max battery output (90 kW) is being confused with the battery storage capacity (24 kWh). The battery would not use the total output for an hour (90 kw x 1h = 90 kWh) because it does not store that much energy. The full 90 kW would probably not be used except in extreme acceleration for a few seconds.


RE: Disappointed
By mindless1 on 8/21/2009 10:49:12 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't "pay off" at all. The solar cells would be costly enough it takes several years to recoup their cost through saved electric bills.

Put simply, any sane person who needs to drive 60 miles one way to work cannot buy a car with a 100 mile range. Cannot buy a car with 140 mile range either. Why do people keep forgetting the BEST figure is with a new battery which has most of it's lifespan remaining, not a single-digit # of years later.

Solar power depends on nice bright sunny days and angling the panels as the sun's path moves it's angle. Putting panels on a car is a marketing ploy aimed at environmentalist-wannabes, at least until the cost of panels drops four-fold.


RE: Disappointed
By namechamps on 8/23/2009 12:36:42 PM , Rating: 2
Actually EV often have a set nominal capacity and higher actual capacity.

Take the Volt for example it is a 16KWH pack but the car sees it as 8.8KWH. It gets its 40mile range from the 8.8KWH.

So when the car sees the pack as "empty" is actually isn't. This serves 2 purposes

1)As the battery ages the useful range doesn't decrease. In 5 years the 16KWH pack will likely have degraded to 12KWH however since the car only "uses" 8.8KWH it still gets the same miles per charge.

2)By not allowing the battery to discharge completely you reduce the reduction in capacity. The charger on the Volt keeps the battery in the "sweet spot" to prolong the life of the pack.


RE: Disappointed
By drmo on 8/24/2009 10:07:18 AM , Rating: 2
As I understand it, the 40 miles that the Volt can drive under battery power alone is supposed to be what it should get at the end of the battery pack's useful life (10 years?).

Also, you are correct that solar cells on a car do not pay off, partly because the amount of area on the car is limited. But solar cells on a house can pay-off immediately, because your electric bills can be reduced by more than your monthly payments on the panels (see the link I put in another post). This depends on the tax rebates (federal and possibly state) and power company rebates ($3 per rated watt of the panel here, so $3000 per kW). In a few years, those rebates probably won't be necessary, if panel costs come down significantly.


RE: Disappointed
By mindless1 on 8/27/2009 3:28:22 PM , Rating: 2
... but I am against using rebates (taking other people's tax money) to pay for such a losing technology.

Our future is nuclear, I really wish all the distractions from the inevitable, all these costly mistakes were gone.

It doesn't really save money even to the owner of the panels, keeping in mind that owner is paying for everyone's panels in their taxes too, and ultimately facing a higher cost of living because the buck has to stop somewhere, nobody else is volunteering to make due with less except the real(ly nutso) environmentalists.


Off the grid in the wrong way
By Dap on 8/21/2009 10:03:17 AM , Rating: 2
All this noise about EVs, and everyone is missing the point. Batteries will never be the way forward, the only sensible thing to do is carry around fuel that you can refill. Lithium Ion batteries do more harm than good in the long haul, and the clearest answer is running around Tokyo and Los Angeles as we speak: Hydrogen. You can electrolyze water with your solar cells, and then stick it in your car. No distribution network needed.




RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By mcnabney on 8/21/09, Rating: 0
By lamerz4391 on 8/21/2009 11:52:16 AM , Rating: 2
Right, because we've heard reports of hydrogen fuel cell cars blowing up right and left. Clearly they are unsafe. Stop fear-mongering.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By 91TTZ on 8/21/2009 12:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
While gasoline vapors burn quite nicely, hydrogen can be even more scary since it can detonate.


Wrong.

Hydrogen is not known to detonate. It may deflagrate (burn) like gasoline vapors, but it isn't known to detonate. Also, since hydrogen is lighter than air and dissipates easily, it won't tend to accumulate and flare up if there's a spark.

The downside to hydrogen is that you can't easily store it like gasoline, since gasoline is a liquid at normal outside temperatures while hydrogen is a gas. It's not practical to store liquid hydrogen in a gas tank since it would need to be refrigerated at a very low temp.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By mcnabney on 8/21/2009 1:12:41 PM , Rating: 1
Nobody stores hydrogen as hydrogen. They use CNG and pull the hydrogen off of the carbon as it is needed in the fuel cell.

Which is missing the point. What a great idea? Change from depending on imported petroleum to depending on imported CNG (from Russia and Iran, the two biggest sources)

And don't bring up using electricity to make H2 through electrolysis. That is horribly inefficient.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By JediJeb on 8/21/2009 2:55:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The downside to hydrogen is that you can't easily store it like gasoline, since gasoline is a liquid at normal outside temperatures while hydrogen is a gas. It's not practical to store liquid hydrogen in a gas tank since it would need to be refrigerated at a very low temp.


We buy Liquid H2 in a Dewar, which is like a big thermos bottle. You see them all the time on TV shows with labs and stuff, the stainless steel tanks about 5 feet tall with a large ring welded around the top.

The new Honda Clarity fuel cell car runs off compressed H2 which is dispensed at stations just like a gas station from a large Liquid H2 storage tank. It takes about 3 minutes to top off the tank in the car, much like filling up with gasoline, and runs about as far on a fillup.

As for safety, really H2 is safer than gasoline because in a rear end collision if the gasoline tank is ruptured you will have flamable gasoline spilling under the car and if it ignites you are roasting like a steak on a grill, if a H2 tank ruptures the H2 being lighter than air drifts upward and if ignited would burn in the air above the vehicle but would most likely be quickly dissapated in the air. Also since the H2 tank will be designed to operate at very high pressure it is made of a much thicker steel and less prone to rupture than a plastic or thin steel gasoline tank.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By darkhawk1980 on 8/21/2009 12:52:17 PM , Rating: 2
So simply because enough time hasn't been spent determining how to deal with transfering hydrogen and storing it, we should just forget about it? Any good scientist or engineer is rolling around in their grave at that remark....

Tell ya what, you can spread all the fear you want about hydrogen, and you can spread all the 'good' things about EV that you want, it won't change the fact that EV has many more limitations than a hydrogen car ever will.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By rcc on 8/21/2009 3:58:33 PM , Rating: 2
Transfering and storing aren't nearly the problem generation is. Untill they can perfect a method of generating hydrogen that doesn't take more energy than you get back out of it, it's not really practical for widespread use.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By drmo on 8/21/2009 5:12:30 PM , Rating: 2
Don't forget, it also takes more energy to store energy in a battery than you get back out too. Hydrogen is more like a storage medium, but has the benefit of fast-charging, unlike a battery.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By lightfoot on 8/21/2009 5:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
And it also takes energy to compress the Hydrogen.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By lightfoot on 8/21/2009 5:22:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed

You will NEVER be able to get MORE energy out of hydrogen than it takes to create it. However, if we could simply utilize most of the energy that we put into generating it, it might make a decent vehicle fuel.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By xmichaelx on 8/21/2009 7:59:18 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm, you know that no one is actually CREATING the hydrogen, right? They are simply removing it from another compound, like water.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/22/2009 4:59:48 PM , Rating: 2
It takes a considerable amount of electricity to separate Hydrogen from Water. I support Hydrogen as the fuel of the future but we need to come up with a better way to separate it. I think an engineered membrane of some sort will be the answer, but not positive.


RE: Off the grid in the wrong way
By nafhan on 8/21/2009 1:58:29 PM , Rating: 2
I'm fairly certain that we will move beyond lithium battery technology at some point. So using that as a reason for batteries not being the way to go is a bit rediculous. However, electric cars need to move into the same price range as normal gas cars before they become predominant.
Solar powered hydrogen generation really isn't that great of an idea, either, for a lot of the same reasons that solar powered electric cars are a bad idea. Also, I'd guess that it would be quite a bit less efficient than straight solar powered electric as you would go through several conversion and storage steps in order to generate and store the hydrogen before you could use the energy.
Regardless, we have the infrastructure for electric cars in place NOW. A hydrogen economy would still need the distribution network whether it's public filling stations or individual solar powered filling stations.


Universal charger
By FITCamaro on 8/21/2009 10:03:00 AM , Rating: 2
I would like to see the auto industry adopt a universal standard plug for charging an electric car.

Then have companies offer a solar charging station you can keep at home. This way you can recharge your car off the grid. Granted this thing would also need the ability to pull from the electric grid for the cases of a rainy day. Obviously this would take time to recoup costs for, but in the end it might come out ahead. Wouldn't be as much an issue of course if we just massively expanded our nuclear power generating abilities and had abundant flat cost, cheap, clean energy.

Of course I still want a car like the Volt that can go wherever I want it to with the aid of a gas generator.




RE: Universal charger
By KingofL337 on 8/21/2009 10:11:15 AM , Rating: 2
They have, so if they implement these charging stations it should work for the volt also.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_J1772


RE: Universal charger
By FITCamaro on 8/23/2009 10:03:49 AM , Rating: 2
Good to know.


RE: Universal charger
By DigitalFreak on 8/21/2009 1:17:04 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't think you'd be interested unless it had torque equivelant to a 500hp engine and did 0-60 in 2 seconds.


RE: Universal charger
By lightfoot on 8/21/2009 5:43:41 PM , Rating: 2
You mean like the Tesla Roadster? Who wouldn't be interested in one, I just don't have a $100K in my sofa cushions.


RE: Universal charger
By FITCamaro on 8/23/2009 10:06:56 AM , Rating: 2
Electric motors have tons of torque.

I am a realist. I will accept anything that is practical, cost efficient, and doesn't rely on government subsidies to be so.

Solar power and electric cars aren't there yet. Doesn't mean I can't support initiatives to make them be so. I don't mind research. I encourage it.


This sounds like simply PR bs from Nissan
By AngryNJ on 8/21/2009 11:32:05 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds like everyone realizes that these "power stations" to charge these things will use a TON of power. So to try to alleviate the valid concern that the grid can't handle this sort of drain, Nissan has decided to slap some solar panels on that would help provide some of the output power to the station.

The power station will still draw most of it's power from the grid. This is just PR BS.

The volt is still a better plan with it's backup gasoline engine.




RE: This sounds like simply PR bs from Nissan
By SpaceJumper on 8/21/2009 3:24:50 PM , Rating: 1
The back up gasoline generator can not pull the car and it does not produce enough power for 5 minutes of driving after an hours of charging from the infant engine.
The solar panel is not a bad idea given that the vehicle will be parked under the sun during work.
GM should also slap on the solar panel.


RE: This sounds like simply PR bs from Nissan
By lightfoot on 8/21/2009 5:59:38 PM , Rating: 2
The "infant engine" in the Volt will easily be able to generate more than enough power to move the vehicle. 8 Hours of charging with solar panels will generate about 12-15 minutes of drive time. 1 Hour of running the Volt's engine will generate enough power for 90-120 minutes of driving.

Solar isn't even in the same league as internal combustion. To get equal power generation from solar, the panels would need to be the size of a large house, not a small car.


RE: This sounds like simply PR bs from Nissan
By SpaceJumper on 8/22/2009 8:15:23 AM , Rating: 2
"1 Hour of running the Volt's engine will generate enough power for 90-120 minutes of driving." Actually, the math does not add up. The infant engine will have to be at least a 200 horsepower engine for the Volt to do that. Another problem is the battery can not charged that fast.


By namechamps on 8/23/2009 12:31:28 PM , Rating: 2
NOOB mistake confusing enigne peak output with average output.

Volt has 16kwh battery pack but only 8.8kwh nominal.

8.8kwh / 40 mile range = 0.22kwh per mile on average.

One hour of driving at 60mph = 60 min * 0.22kwh = 13KW.

So a 13KW motor would have enough power to charge the batteries at the same rate it is being discharged.

Chevy went with a 53KW motor for a couple reasons
1)the motor charges briefly the pack to upper limit and cuts off (so while driving for 4 hours the motor will cut on and off as needed in 15-20 minute "bursts".

2)53KW provides a safety margin to avoid a situation where you need to stop the car and wait for motor to charge battery pack up enough.

Also not sure where you get 200HP from. The engine on the Volt is 111KW or 149HP. However that is the peak output not the average usage. Engine average output is substantially lower.


DailyCar
By axias41 on 8/21/2009 10:12:34 AM , Rating: 2
Over the last days DailyTech has become DailyCar...




RE: DailyCar
By jmke on 8/21/2009 10:25:19 AM , Rating: 5
because cars don't have tech.

AMIRITE?


PR stunt
By Kakao on 8/21/2009 10:51:38 AM , Rating: 2
Solar powered recharging stations are just a PR stunt.

Having grid hooked recharging points (not necessarily stations) in many parking lots would certainly make pure EVs much more attractive. That requires a standard connector so all models can charge from the same points.




RE: PR stunt
By drmo on 8/21/2009 5:42:05 PM , Rating: 2
But if businesses are puting these in for employees, then they will save money (over paying for the electricity) because they pay higher rates for electricity than residential users. Example: http://www.heritagesolar.com/sce.htm

It just depends on the costs of the systems, tax incentives, financing, etc. In very sunny areas (>300 days of sunshine/yr), these systems may make sense.


RE: PR stunt
By drmo on 8/21/2009 5:51:03 PM , Rating: 2
Here is a calculator for Orange County. Of course, this site is trying to sell solar, but it seems legit.

http://www.heritagesolar.com/solarcalculator.htm


Apples and Leafs
By djc208 on 8/21/2009 11:32:29 AM , Rating: 2
I think Nissan is pulling an Apple with this marketing plan. By poking at GM and the Volt they're getting more press than with just the car alone. Despite the fact that they don't compete as much as Nissan likes to say they do.

Price aside the Leaf can never be your only car. At some point you'll need a gas powered vehicle because you need more range, it will probably just be a rental car, but that's still an important distinction. You may not need the gas engine in the Volt day-to-day, but it's always there ready to go for those times when you do.

I'd consider the Leaf as a second car, but at an estimated $30k its still almost as expensive as my primary vehicle.

Same way:
quote:
The vehicle does boast reportedly quicker charge times on its 480 V charge stations.
Which would be great, except that 99% of US houses are wired for 220V max, and it's still not fast enough for a road side "refilling station".

Bottom line they're both niche vehicles, the Volt due to price and the Leaf due to it's range limitation. The problem for Nissan is I see the Volt coming down in price long before we see the Leaf's batteries provide comparable capabilites to a gas vehicle.




RE: Apples and Leafs
By The0ne on 8/21/2009 2:28:10 PM , Rating: 2
They will have charging stations around the city like what's being plan here in San Diego. So you have the option of charging at home and while you're out and about.


RE: Apples and Leafs
By SpaceJumper on 8/21/2009 3:10:53 PM , Rating: 2
Leaves


By Codeman03xx on 8/21/2009 5:01:12 PM , Rating: 2
Now you just need to convince the power company to put 480 at a residence... O.o Not likely though.




By lightfoot on 8/21/2009 5:48:13 PM , Rating: 2
Or you could just hire an electrician...

Step-up transformers aren't particularly complicated. The lines to a residence should easily be able to handle the increased amperage.


By mindless1 on 8/21/2009 10:56:47 PM , Rating: 2
That won't work. The electrician can at most install that transformer on your premises after the supply line to the premises has become the bottleneck. It is not able to handle the increased amperage, the amperage from the grid to the home is still the same because it's converted LATER with the transformer. Actually the amperage is higher since there is no 100% efficient transformer.

The key is to convert/reconvert the power as few times as possible to retain max efficiency. Moving to 480VAC might be a solution but again it requires retrofitting every house on the grid.

What do we really need to do? Absolutely nothing. Buy an electric car if your travels allow for it to recharge using available infrastructure. That need not be 100% of one's travels, just as one type of automobile won't handle 100% of all possible transportation needs regardless of whether it's electric.


Batteries
By arkcom on 8/21/2009 11:55:32 PM , Rating: 2
Why couldn't this just use regular old-school lead acid batteries? The whole point of lithium is the high energy density. (portability)




RE: Batteries
By Durrr on 8/23/2009 4:18:38 PM , Rating: 2
Hydrogen production during quick charges would be a problem, as well as weight. Another issue is the complex maintenance cycles required on lead acid batteries if they are to last > 4 yrs.


RE: Batteries
By arkcom on 8/23/2009 7:51:52 PM , Rating: 2
Lithium is only good for ~1000 charges. That's less than 3 years.


This is sure to work
By AMcA on 8/21/2009 11:50:43 AM , Rating: 5
I think this plan will work so long as they can find enough unicorns to man the stations.




PR stunt
By Masospaghetti on 8/21/2009 1:26:59 PM , Rating: 1
If GM had come up with this idea, they would get their the doors blown off the RenCen with mockery.

How can anyone think this is a good idea? There is NO way this will be cost efficient and in fact will be an enormous drain on resources, especially using "advanced lithium batteries" to hold charge at night. Cheap, plentiful Ni-MH batteries would serve much better in this setting because size and weight aren't really a concern.

But more importantly, having batteries at ALL is a stupid idea. At night, there's a massive glut of overcapacity from the existing grid since usage is so much lower. Simply using the grid would have essentially no impact on emissions and wouldn't require a battery bank.

The whole idea is a stunt, just like the Prius's "Solar powered roof"




RE: PR stunt
By Sazar on 8/21/2009 2:56:39 PM , Rating: 2
The prius uses it's solar panel roof much like Fisker, who introduced the concept in their Karma vehicle, to power the climate control systems and use the power from solar to keep the vehicle somewhat cooler while it sits in the parking lot.

The Prius does NOT use it's roof to augment it's power capacity, simply to assist with cooling. Considering we have had 60 plus days of 100F weather here in Austin and by the time I get to my car in the afternoon, it is scorching hot even with the windows cracked open and the roof raised, I can definitely appreciate a simple technology like this which does not use batteries or gasoline power.

To summarize, it is not a PR stunt and if you think it is, you obviously don't know what you are talking about.


RE: PR stunt
By RU482 on 8/22/2009 2:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
it would be ridiculous to try to use a solar panel to charge the propulsion systems. How many solar cells in series would you need to charge a 300V battery?


By invidious on 8/21/2009 10:39:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nissan has to decide whether to go with grid connected stations or solar stations
Why? I don't see any reason not to utilize both. Solar charging would be a great thing to introduce to the industry but it is not going to replace the grid. Most climates are not sunny year round. This is same reason why home solar panels do not replace the grid, they suppliment it.

PS: We occationally get up to a month straight and sometimes more of cloudy rainy weather here in Connecticut




errors
By cruisin3style on 8/21/2009 3:51:35 PM , Rating: 2
I have barely started the article and already i can see you are successfully reaching your monthly J.M. Error Quota.

Bravo, sir.




By lne937s on 8/21/2009 4:59:53 PM , Rating: 2
In terms of the electricity impact, based on Nissan's numbers, the LEAF (which does not use all of its battery capacity for endurance purposes)will go more than 5 miles per kWh- let's use 5 for a round number. If you figure 12,000 miles per year (or 1000 per month), that is 200 kWh per month or 2400 kWh per year for each car. Based on energy consumed per mile driven, electric vehicles are dramatically more efficient than gasoline cars.

In this country, we use 3.8 Trillion kWh (3.8 Billion MWh) per year or about 13,000 kWh per year, per person (includes industrial and personal use). If 3 Million new electric vehicles are sold every year (~20% of typical new car sales) and none go off the road, for an additional ~7.2 billion kWh per year, it will increase electricity consumption by less than 0.2% per year. Hopefully, we can adjust for that, maybe by buying more efficient appliances and HVAC systems- maybe better insulated houses and fewer McMansions- or maybe by adjusting generating capacity (preferrably to renewables). If we were to replace 200,000,000 cars (basically equivalent to every privately owned vehicle), it will increase our consumption ~480 Billion kwh or ~12.6%, which is less electricity than lighting and dramatically less than what we use for heating and cooling. If every man woman and child would get an electric car (300 Million) and drive it 12,000 miles a year, it would increase our consumption by 18.9%.

In Germany, they use about half as much electricity per person as we do here (and much of that comes from renewables). So the difference between us and an industrial (but progressive and efficient) county like Germany in terms of electricity consumption is basically 2.5 electric cars worth per person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...

Electric cars are not going to put an undue burdeon on our electrical grid. Even under the most optimistic assumptions, it will take decades before the majority of the vehicles on the road are electric. We can adapt for that. Add in that the cars will probably charge at night (when we tend to have surplus electricity production), and it will make even less of a dent.

Read more: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090811/CARNEWS/9...




By on 8/22/2009 11:37:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 11:37:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 11:56:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 11:56:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 11:56:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 11:56:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 11:57:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 11:57:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/22/2009 1:16:19 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.streetcandy.org

The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan,prada,adidas,

also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations. All the products are free

shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept Credit card payment.,after

the payment, can ship within short time.

free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the Credit card

our price:
jordan air max oakland raiders $34--39;
Ed Hardy AF JUICY POLO Bikini $25;
Christan Audigier BIKINI JACKET $25;
gstar coogi evisu true jeans $35;
coach chanel gucci LV handbags $36;
coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $18;
CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $32;
jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes $37;
EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $16;
coach okely Adidas CHANEL DG Sunglass $18;

We do wholesale and retail! All are extremely CHEAP, please visit:

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s10 (JERSEY)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s1 (ED HARDY)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s11 (JEANS)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s6 (TSHIRTS)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s28 (JORDAN SHOES)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s58 (SANDAL)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s65 (HANDBAGS)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s69 (sunglass)

http://www.streetcandy.org/productlist.asp?id=s5 (bikini)




By on 8/27/2009 9:08:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com
(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




By on 8/27/2009 11:22:28 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.ebuyings.com

the website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan,prama,****, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time.

free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the paypal

our price:
gstar coogi evisu true jeans $36;
coach chanel gucci LV handbags $32;
coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15;
CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $35;
jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes $33;
EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15;
coach okely **** CHANEL DG Sunglass $16;

http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s28 (JORDAN SHOES)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s1 (ED HARDY)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s11<... (JEANS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (TSHIRTS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s5 (Bikini)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s65 (HANDBAGS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s21 (Air_max_man)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s29 (Nike shox)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (Polo tshirt)




By on 8/27/2009 11:22:29 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.ebuyings.com

the website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan,prama,****, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time.

free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the paypal

our price:
gstar coogi evisu true jeans $36;
coach chanel gucci LV handbags $32;
coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15;
CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $35;
jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes $33;
EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15;
coach okely **** CHANEL DG Sunglass $16;

http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s28 (JORDAN SHOES)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s1 (ED HARDY)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s11<... (JEANS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (TSHIRTS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s5 (Bikini)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s65 (HANDBAGS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s21 (Air_max_man)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s29 (Nike shox)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (Polo tshirt)




By on 8/27/2009 11:23:50 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.ebuyings.com

the website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan,prama,****, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time.

free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the paypal

our price:
gstar coogi evisu true jeans $36;
coach chanel gucci LV handbags $32;
coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15;
CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $35;
jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes $33;
EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15;
coach okely **** CHANEL DG Sunglass $16;

http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s28 (JORDAN SHOES)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s1 (ED HARDY)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s11<... (JEANS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (TSHIRTS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s5 (Bikini)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s65 (HANDBAGS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s21 (Air_max_man)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s29 (Nike shox)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (Polo tshirt)




By on 8/30/2009 8:42:45 AM , Rating: 2
http://www.crispstyle.com

bikini$25

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas)

nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32

lv, coach, chane bag $35

COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30

christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13

edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25

Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24

AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

http://www.crispstyle.com




By ipay on 8/24/2009 5:11:37 PM , Rating: 1
I love it how on these forums everyone seems to know it all. Everyone is either Electrical Engineer or a Rocket Scientist. You all know better and are smarter than professionals actually working at these companies, that's why you're here, bitching at this forum instead of coming up with solutions on your own, right? Neither of these cars is the TOTAL solution, and the technology is just emerging but its a start!! It's better than nothing.




"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki