Car of The Future ?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SoopahMan @ Sep 22 2006, 02:48 AM) [snapback]323307[/snapback]</div>

It is hard to know how the future will really happen and what shape an emerging technology will take. Many of the issues you mention could be addressed. The concern with *all that steam* is not an issue. The steam would find its way back into the oceans and they would not be depleted.

The big issue with FC cars is the huge amount of energy required to prepare the fuel for them which energy could be used directly for fuel.

Some say batteries are so expensive that they undo the possibility of the BEV. If you add the lifetime cost of gasoline to the cost of a car you roughly equal the cost of a battery plus the electricity to run the car. That is just an estimate of what the future might be, of course. At least one oil company (Chevron-Texico) is already in the battery business (NiMH) so the transfer of profits should not be a problem.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Sep 21 2006, 04:58 PM) [snapback]323153[/snapback]</div>

I'm not sure I follow. An FC stack *could* be cheap compared to batteries?

Today, a FCV that can travel as far as a $100k battery vehicle would cost $1 million to build. When you say a batter car has 1/4 of the car's weight in batteries, are we missing the part where a FCV will also have at least 1/4 of its weight in the FC system... and the batteries that are required to make the car actually run?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Sep 21 2006, 04:58 PM) [snapback]323153[/snapback]</div>

I'm definitely interested in the source of this information - especially considering the practical evidence to the contrary. We have RavEV owners who commute somewhat lenghty freeway distances in sub-freezing temps....without issue. Yes, range can drop by as much as 20%, but there is no danger of slow acceleration or maximum speed issues that I've yet heard. NiMH is an exothermic chemistry. The problem I have is keeping them cool enough!

 

Hey Darell, the chilipepper thingy, what kind of plumbing do I need? It won't work with one directional plumbing, correct?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Sep 25 2006, 06:49 PM) [snapback]324943[/snapback]</div>

Hi Darrelldd,

FC's have not been mass-produced yet. Vehicle batteries have, and still cost allot.

Are you cold-soaking the RAV 4? Over time, the Prius batteries get quite cold in normal Chicagoland service. Because, the cold just does not let up for a month, at least. I read the spec on the Panasonic vehicle battery web site. I have refound the link: http://www.peve.panasonic.co.jp/catalog/e_kaku.html . There is a technical error. Each module has 200 watts at cold temps (versus 1300 at room temp) , not the whole pack. So, the 28 module Prius pack would drop to 5.6 kw, from 36KW. The Prius must be holding back the top end of the power, as I believe the Prius Spec rates the battery at 21 KW. Its also a 201.6 volt pack, which would be 28 modules with 7.2 volts each. Overnight the batteries are going to get down to 0 F.

I read this spec carefully, because I was dusted (or should I say Salted) by a Taurus wagon in 0 degree weather, after driving for 1/2 hour, with the heater set at 65 F. And it was like the Prius had no pickup. In this 60 degree weather a Taurus wagon would not have a chance.

The clean room comment is based on the "The Prius that Shook the World" text.

So in 0 degree weather, instead of the 106 hp, one has more like 74.5 hp in a Prius. Still, not a problem to use the car, but something to be aware of. Parking the car in the sun helps some too. Of course overnight, and in cloudy weather there is no sun. Which was the situation I inadvertently was in for a few days when the Taurus salted me. Next time, I might take the mileage hit, and run the heater up at 75 if the sun is not out for a few days, below 10 degrees F.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(maggieddd @ Sep 25 2006, 03:02 PM) [snapback]324946[/snapback]</div>

It is designed to work with normal household sink plumbing. It works by using your existing "loop" by pulling from the hot side, and pumping the cold back down to the water heater. So it *creates* a two-direction system from your one-direction system. The pump just spins the loop when activated, and just sits there doing nothing the rest of the time.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Sep 25 2006, 03:56 PM) [snapback]324982[/snapback]</div>

Quite true. Turns out that there are several practical reasons why FCs haven't yet been mass produced... While viable battery cars were made ten years ago. And today we have independent car makers producing awesome high-performance battery cars in very low production (meaning less than the pre-production numbers that FCVs are being made today) and the price of these vehicles is still 10x less than the FC cars.

Yes. We have Ravs that commute through the winter in Virginia, Washington DC, Greenbay, Colorado, and even some of the snowy parts of CA. While there is certainly a loss of range in the very cold (down to about 80 miles in some cases) the performance of the vehicle is not compromised in any discernable way.

I shouldn't comment on why there is a difference between the two battery packs performance-wise, since all I can do as guess. Especially considering that the Rav just hangs them out in the breeze - and doesn't keep them in the cabin. The cars have the same chemistry, but not the same configuration. The Rav batteries are biased toward energy, while the Prius pack is biased toward power.... that right there is the most likely reason for the difference noted.

And a final point on battery cars and battery chemistry - Li-ion is even LESS suseptible to cold weather problems.

 

The modular design, with drive-by-wire, is a great concept. With one base being used for many different chassis models, production efficiency would be much improved.

But in their effort to look "futuristic" they've hampered the driver in two, totally unnecessary ways: eliminating the pedals will make the car harder to drive as the hands must steer the car, operate the accelerator, and operate the brake, by movements in several different modes; and by requiring the hands to be always in exactly the same place on the wheel, they've guaranteed rapid fatigue. A conventional steering wheel allows the hands to be moved, which reduces fatigue, and pedals allow different functions to be performed by different limbs.

And the clip ends with an outright lie: Contrary to their statement, the car is not powered by seawater. Seawater only provides the substrate for the conversion of some actual energy source into the energy carrier hydrogen.

But as Darell says, put batteries in that base, instead of fuel cells, and you'll have a car that can be manufactured today. (And give it a conventional steering wheel and pedals, still operated by wire, and you'll have a car people can drive today.)

One concern is whether computer control technology has come far enough to safely let go of mechanical safeguards: When a Prius computer suffers a brain stone and the car dies, the driver can still steer the car, and the brakes still operate via the backup mechanical system. What happens when this GM car's computer dies on the freeway?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Sep 21 2006, 04:58 PM) [snapback]323153[/snapback]</div>

Hmmm. If this is true, it would explain why I only got 30 mpg with my short commute in Fargo in wintertime.

 

FC stack question.. has any company manufacturing them managed to get the MTBF much above 1000 hours? This is the real problem with FC as I see it, even averaging 35 miles an hour the life expectancy is only about 35,000 miles , even averaging 50 miles an hour it's still only 50,000 miles. So to put it in a different light 2 stacks in a hundred thousand miles. Prius battery is guarantied for 150,000 miles in CA and those states the have the same standards. Begs the question, without a refueling infrastructure and the need for a couple of stack changes.... where's the $$ benefit in the purchase of a FC car. Yes I came to the same conclusion.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Frank Hudon @ Sep 28 2006, 10:13 AM) [snapback]325111[/snapback]</div>

Definitely not in a "portable" situation such as an automobile. MTBF has been improved dramatically (I just heard testimony on this on Tuesday in front of the CARB) and it is nowhere near where it has to be to "last the life of the vehicle" as we expect from our batteries.

Ah.. just one of many.
Cost
Reliability
Durability
Complication
Cold weather performance
Inefficiency (If H2 is so good, just burn it directly in an ICE and be done with it - that's what BMW is doing.
Safety, weight and placement of tanks.
And Cost.
And Cost.

So far, GM is promising 300 miles of FCV range. Right now that means taking an SUV and turning it into a two-seater as the rest of the interior is taken up with tanks.

There's little wonder why the car makers could come out with a battery car that they decidedly did NOT want to build... and yet are having a hell of a time coming out with a FCV that they say they *want* to build. Kinda makes you pause and go, "hmmm."

 

well you pretty much touched on all the thoughts that go thru my head every time I see Hydrogen touted as the answer to all our problems.
definatley makes one go "hmmmm"
I started to read all about hydrogen in the early 70's and here we are at 2k6 and still nothing for sale at a price the average person would pay for vehicular transportation. And still no re-fueling infrastructure, other than at Ballard in Burnaby. I see the fuel cell Focus on my drive home from work almost every day but you still can't buy one. BMW got their PZEV rating in an agreement with CARB in the promise for H2 useage. Not because their cars were.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Frank Hudon @ Sep 28 2006, 11:05 AM) [snapback]325150[/snapback]</div>

The BMW story is an interesting one. Yesterday I saw their H2/gasoline (switchable) V12 engine.... along with the monstrous H2 tank that goes along with it. Holds about enough H2 to drive the thing 25 miles. The're calling it a dual-fuel hybrid.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Sep 28 2006, 11:42 AM) [snapback]325165[/snapback]</div>

are they supplying the re-fueling stations as well?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Frank Hudon @ Sep 28 2006, 01:15 PM) [snapback]325215[/snapback]</div>

Ha! They're take is that the H2 infrastructure will just materialize.... eventually. And in the meantime - good news! The car works on gasoline too!

 

Whoopie!
opps I forgot that that allows them to keep the PZEV rating.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Sep 28 2006, 11:38 AM) [snapback]325018[/snapback]</div>

Hi Darrelldd,

Only Greenbay gets cold for a long time. Colorado gets cold for a few days, then the snow comes in, and then the sun for a week. This is why its such a skiing paradise. Its a unique climate. Its possible to have a 45 + degree day on the east range, at least, in Febuary or March, according to relatives I have living there, and still be able to go out skiing.

Virgina and Washington DC do not get below freezing below 2000 feet AMSL most of the winter. You know about the Cherry Blossom time in Washington ? Its still below freezing here then.

And you know we have guys in Manitoba on here, which is about twice as cold as Chicagoland is from Washington DC. Its stays in the 20 below F daytime high range there for protracted periods, just like it will stay around 5 F daytime high here.

I still say that is no reason for Car companies not to make electric cars, however. On a world wide basis there are allot of LARGE cities that never get below 40 F. Probably about half the driviers in the world live in these cities. This is a HUGE market.

 

Quote: "And in fact today comes mostly from fossil fuels, of course."

Which are hydrocarbons and when you pull out the hydrogen, you are left with carbon dioxide, so no improvement on global warming.

I do recall back in 2001 or 2002 seeing a study by a California state agency that reviewed the emmission profile of the 2001 Prius against power plants and reached the conclusion that for the electric grid power that came on line under peak demand, the Prius had a cleaner emmission profile, such that it would be better to idle a Prius and plug it into the grid than to have some dirty coal fired plant coming on line.

Anyone else ever see this study?

Personally, having the plug-in Prius without making sure our power plants are cleaned up concerns me.

George

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Sep 30 2006, 02:09 PM) [snapback]326182[/snapback]</div>

Having lived in California all my life, I won't argue this point! I honestly do NOT know what cold is. I consider anything below 30F cold! I can still report with confidence that in areas where ICE cars won't start without a block heater, EVs will start and run instantly and with excellent performance. If we're comparing places that require block heaters for ICE vehicles, there is no reason not to use warming blankets for EV batteries as well. Personally, if I found my self living in a place that was too cold for EVs, I'd move!


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mardikes @ Sep 30 2006, 05:10 PM) [snapback]326234[/snapback]</div>

Nope. I have trouble figuring out why a state agency would study such a thing, actually. The state studies I've seen, that I DO have information on, show that a BEV powered by the national electricity mix is far cleaner than our cleanest ICE vehicles.

Cleaning up the grid should concern all of us. It should NOT concern you when comparing a BEV powered from today's grid with a Prius. In operation the BEV is always cleaner, and in upstream pollutions (we're counting the pollution created to make the gasoline for the Prius and the electricity for the BEV here) the BEV wins again. Every study that I've ever seen has demonstrated this. Please don't forget how much electricity is used to make gasoline when you ponder this situation!

Then throw into the mix the whole "foreign oil" argument, and suddenly electricity (made from almost 100% domestic fuel) looks way the hell better.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Sep 30 2006, 07:07 PM) [snapback]326274[/snapback]</div>

Mardikes specifically said the Prius was better than bringing a "dirty coal-fired power plant" on line, so there's a bit of apples/oranges here. You are averaging the national power grid. He is talking about bringing more old-technology coal into the mix.

Since I live in Washington State, where most of the elctricity comes from hydro, I'd love to have a BEV, or perhaps more practical for a one-person, one-car household, a plug-in hybrid which would be a BEV up to 30 miles a day or so but would still let me take long road trips up to Canada for hiking.

 

In norway , we got 4 Prius hydrogen hybrids in the Stavanger city total of 15 ordered i think).Mazda had a RX8 hydrogen democar there. This is more like a test of the hydrogen part .
The Priuses are made Hydrogen usable by "Quantum(or Quantem?) in Lake Forest i California"

so far the cars havent been used too much , some newspapers say there have already been problems with the hydrogen part of the system due to cold weather , and its not really cold here yet........there was some critical writing about it in som newspaper and th Q company reacted agressive lol.....
another challenge is the making of hydrogen from naturalgass from the bottom layers under the northsea (cause is that its the cheapest way of doing it ), this causes alot of CO2 so you basically dont reduce the CO2 but move it instead.


actually the test taxis we have here that runs on Hytan looks good so far. could be and interesting part of the evolution,,, but I suspect the hydrogen spirit is the selling and political correct/smart atm.....

else we have the Think company here that makes small Evs and they are now working on a hydrogen-electric version. hydrogen and el plugin, hydrogen fuelcell.. expected 250km range (think the demo version already been used)

http://www.think.no/ ive tested the "old" Think city car and it was a positive suprise even that it is a small car... so if the new Think city is better , then it should be a fun small car. Range of these cars are limitied by the battery thech tho... and for the pollution part most of the el power in Norway are made by Hydro electric powerplants...

happy sunday All

Andreas

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 30 2006, 09:37 PM) [snapback]326364[/snapback]</div>

Quite true. I missed the mark a bit I realize. Here's the deal: We don't add dirty old-tech coal plants for peakers, however. Those are the ones that run all the time and provide our base-line power for the most part. So that dirty generation is happening for your TV, 'fridge, AC, pool pumps, lights, etc. And those do need to be cleaned up. Has nothing to do with charging battery cars though! Peaker plants are often the dirtiest ones, but not coal. And the beauty of PHEVs and BEVs is that we can dismantle most of the peaker plants when the battery cars come on line. With V2G, battery cars can shave peaks instantly and locally. Yes, battery cars can make our grid cleaner, and far more efficient if used properly as off-peak storage vessels. Think of it is pushing water uphill at night and generating with it during peak times. There are places that are literally still doing this!


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(andreaswin @ Oct 1 2006, 04:54 AM) [snapback]326414[/snapback]</div>

The Th!ink is a fantastic little car that I'd love to own! In fact, here's me in one that was shipped back to Norway instead of being crushed by Ford here. Way better than the GEM NEVs.