Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
1586 messages, Last post on Oct 23, 2009 at 4:19 PM
You are in the Electric Vehicles Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 05, 2008 1:06 pm) I disagree. There may not be less expensive alternatives but there will be better alternatives. I believe CA is already transitioning away from using electricity generated from coal. Hawaii generates very little of their electricity from coal. The same is taking place in many European countries. I don't see this trend reversing itself. Is it your opinion that since coal is the cheapest source we should be maximizing it's use? As far as EVs, I am not optimistic. I think other alternatives will come along and steal the show. The current direction of battery development is not very promising. Just about every major auto manufacturer has an ongoing EV program. Their CEOs are pretty much in agreement when it comes to the eventual electrification of the fleet. Maybe these EVs won't use batteries, maybe it will be hydrogen, ultra-capacitors or some yet to be discovered storage device. However they will be EVs, not ICE powered vehicles. I'm not sure why you are so pessimistic when it comes to battery development. It seems to me that development here is taking place at a rapid pace. Today's best Li-ion batteries have over twice the energy density of the best NiMH batteries from 10 years ago. The only remaining hurdle is cost. From what I'm reading that will largely be overcome through mass production. The battery packs may never be cheap but they don't need to be in order for battery powered EVs to make financial sense. One of the things GM is considering for the Volt is leasing the battery packs. I think this would be a good idea given that the battery pack will represent the biggest area of uncertainty for most buyers. Some people are fundamentally opposed to leasing because they want to own something. In this particular case I don't see the issue. You are leasing a battery pack as opposed to buying gasoline. At the end of the year how much of the gasoline that you purchased do you still own? |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 05, 2008 1:06 pm) Few moving parts, no ugly metals or chemicals. Safe, cheap, and an infinite supply. This is about twice as efficient as the other engine/design. http://www.engineair.com.au/ That air car they are selling in France isn't half bad, either. Same range as an electric vehicle, but none of the upkeep or cost. http://www.mdi.lu/eng/affiche_eng.php?page=accueil |
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Apr 07, 2008 10:43 am) I am not arguing the capacity of Li-Ion batteries. I am skeptical of the heat and longevity issues surrounding the technology. A battery without a 10 year life span is of NO value to me in an EV. I do not drive a lot of miles. I want my car ready to go when I do decide to drive it. That was one reason I dropped the Prius. You leave for a month and the car will likely be dead on your return. My experience with NiMH in laptops is better than with Li-Ion. A couple years and they are junk and hard to find a place to dispose of them. Hawaii generates very little of their electricity from coal. They may not be the case in the future with the high price of diesel. Most of their electricity comes from Diesel. Coal is MUCH cheaper for generation. There has been a lot of hype about wind & solar generation in Hawaii. It is less tahn 2% at present. Geothermal would be Ok except it is running up against pagan religious beliefs. Coal is the cheapest electric for most of America. Unless you go Nuclear on a very large scale. I don't see us dropping below 50% coal generation for a Long time.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 07, 2008 7:59 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: reddroverr (Apr 11, 2008 1:50 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Apr 11, 2008 2:30 pm) According to this: http://www.efcf.com/reports/E14.pdf a 300 L (that is about 80 gallons) tank of compressed air contains only 51 MJ of energy. For comparison a single gallon of gas contains 121 MJ. So even if it is more efficient, how far am I going to get with even 80 gallons of air in a real car? |
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Apr 12, 2008 3:36 am) Note - the air car is also several hundred lbs lighter than the IC design as most of what's under a typical car's hood is gone. So: Two tanks, 50-60MJ total useable. More if you have any sort of regenerative system or solar panels or whatnot to run the on-board compressor. So figuring in those factors, the efficiency may be closer to 50%. Gasoline, 121MJ per gallon, about 30MJ useable. So roughly the range of 2 gallons of gas. Maybe 90-100 miles in actual driving. Not great for long-distance, but good enough for daily commuting and whatnot. Certainly a viable alternative to electric vehicles, as there would be no costly batteries to replace. People complain that it moves the pollution elsewhere, and that the compressors are not efficient, but when you add in the cost of making the batteries or obtaining and refining the oil, it's a clear win-win situation for this technology. We will eventually run out of oil and can't make enough biofuel anyways, so eventually it's going to be either steam, air, or electric.(SteamPunk fans rejoice!) http://auto.howstuffworks.com/air-car1.htm Note the three minute high pressure charge. This is comparable to gasoline. Filling stations can easily add a large air tank and a compressor. Much easier than silly fuel cell or battery swapping proposals. They claim 120 miles range as well, which is moderately close considering typical manufacturer hype, to my napkin-math.  It's a short-range city commuter. And you'd just plug it in once you get home to fill it up for the next day. Much safer as well than CNG, which requires an expensive filling device and an inspection from the utility company. And a garage. Since the compressor is on the vehicle, you would plug it in at work, even, or in a typical parking garage/space.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Apr 14, 2008 1:42 pm) Pop Mech sums it up..."We'll believe it when we drive it" Zero Pollution Motors (ZPM) confirmed to PopularMechanics.com on Thursday that it expects to produce the world’s first air-powered car for the United States by late 2009 or early 2010. As the U.S. licensee for Luxembourg-based MDI, which developed the Air Car as a compression-based alternative to the internal combustion engine, ZPM has attained rights to build the first of several modular plants, which are likely to begin manufacturing in the Northeast and grow for regional production around the country, at a clip of up to 10,000 Air Cars per year. And while ZPM is also licensed to build MDI’s two-seater OneCAT economy model (the one headed for India) and three-seat MiniCAT (like a SmartForTwo without the gas), the New Paltz, N.Y., startup is aiming bigger: Company officials want to make the first air-powered car to hit U.S. roads a $17,800, 75-hp equivalent, six-seat modified version of MDI’s CityCAT (pictured above) that, thanks to an even more radical engine, is said to travel as far as 1000 miles at up to 96 mph with each tiny fill-up. http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4251491.html?series=19 |
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Apr 14, 2008 1:42 pm) I agree that this battery swapping idea doesn't make much sense. However there are batteries being developed that will allow an 85% charge in under 10 minutes with a special charging station. Given the early reviews on Honda's FCX Clarity I do believe that fuel cell vehicles have some potential, albeit in the distant future. It would be interesting to see them crash test one of these compressed air vehicles and see what happens should a full tank rupture. Obviously it wouldn't catch on fire but that doesn't mean there wouldn't be an explosion.
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Apr 17, 2008 4:35 am) But MDI really is trying to make this work. They already sell the vehicles in France. They actually have the cars on the road, unlike Zap and the rest. The technology is simple, straightforward, and 100% off the shelf/ready to go. I'd consider them to be more akin to Tesla Motors. Small, but a real company. Of course, their design is far from optimal. That goes to the rotary air engine that guy in Australia made. Why he can't put that in a car I just don't know. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
