Battery developments
aekaaet5
lithium-ion and new designs for Ni-Cad are very impressive.We are on
the way to quickly ramp up the hybrid and full electric vehicles. Look
out gasoline price jabbers!
Robert Price
An old engineer
http://MyHybridCarGuide.com
Al Bundy
> Have you noticed the recent advances in battery development. The
> lithium-ion and new designs for Ni-Cad are very impressive.We are on
> the way to quickly ramp up the hybrid and full electric vehicles. Look
> out gasoline price jabbers!
>
> Robert Price
>
decades and it stinks!
GM (Lutz the putz) is all gigity over their Volt to come out in 2010
for somewhere in the mid $30's (read $38K). The range with their
latest batteries is only 40 miles, same as the high school kid here
did with golf card lead batteries for $6,000.
Whatever they come up with or improve, the big companies will screw
the customer over one way or another.
Jeff
> Have you noticed the recent advances in battery development. The
> lithium-ion and new designs for Ni-Cad are very impressive.We are on
> the way to quickly ramp up the hybrid and full electric vehicles. Look
> out gasoline price jabbers!
Everything Lonnie Johnson does is interesting. He's been working on
proton membrane stirlings, has quite an interest in solar and has this:
It seems to me that a combo of the stirling and thin film lithium would
make a super high mileage hybrid. The lithium batteries he's developing
seem to me aimed at small scale devices, but I would think he has
something up his sleeve. The Tesla, after all runs on hundreds of
notebook batteries.
Cheers,
Jeff
Lou
"Al Bundy" <MSfo...@mcpmail.com> wrote in message
news:1f70bb70-ae96-46b2...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
I think that's a little harsh. How long did that kid's car take to charge?
The Volt is supposed to be a hybrid, with an onboard gasoline engine to
recharge the battery. As such, it should have a range comparable to any
"normal" car. And sure you can plug it in to recharge it overnight, but you
can also pull up to any gasoline pump and fillerup in a few minutes.
Mileage when running on gas is supposed to be in the 50 mpg range. Since
most cars are driven less than 40 miles a day, it offers the possibility
that many people would almost never have to buy a tank of gas.
The difference from current hybrids is that the gas engine doesn't drive the
wheels directly, it's there to charge the battery during use, and all motive
power is drawn from the battery. Think of a diesel-electric locomotive.
If putting batteries in cars can reduce overall energy use while maintaining
performance (no, not jack rabbit starts, but 300-400 miles per fill
up/charging, recharge times of a few minutes, warm in winter and cool in
summer, etc.) that's great, but batteries aren't sources of energy - the
energy still has to come from somewhere. In the US, that most likely means
electricity generated from burning coal.
Al Bundy
> "Al Bundy" <MSfort...@mcpmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> If putting batteries in cars can reduce overall energy use while maintaining
> performance (no, not jack rabbit starts, but 300-400 miles per fill
> up/charging, recharge times of a few minutes, warm in winter and cool in
> summer, etc.) that's great, but batteries aren't sources of energy - the
> energy still has to come from somewhere. In the US, that most likely means
> electricity generated from burning coal.
The thing is we have lots of coal and maybe we can develop a cleaner
way of using it. If all cars were electric, there would be no power
for our lights.
I look at a gas engine and the fact that about 33% of the energy of
the fuel is used for propulsion while the rest is wasted. Meanwhile,
an electric motor is much more efficient, perhaps in the 90% range or
more. I have not researched the overall efficiency from power plant to
the road, but it could end up better than gasoline.
A solar powered car, which is only a school project and not a reality,
would obviate the coal use.
Rod Speed
>> If putting batteries in cars can reduce overall energy use while
>> maintaining performance (no, not jack rabbit starts, but 300-400
>> miles per fill up/charging, recharge times of a few minutes, warm
>> in winter and cool in summer, etc.) that's great, but batteries aren't
>> sources of energy - the energy still has to come from somewhere. In
>> the US, that most likely means electricity generated from burning coal.
> The thing is we have lots of coal and maybe we can develop a cleaner way of using it.
The point is that if nukes are used, you dont need to fart
around attempting to develop a cleaner way of using coal.
> If all cars were electric, there would be no power for our lights.
You just build more nukes. Not a shred of rocket science required.
> I look at a gas engine and the fact that about 33% of the energy of the
> fuel is used for propulsion while the rest is wasted. Meanwhile, an electric
> motor is much more efficient, perhaps in the 90% range or more. I have
> not researched the overall efficiency from power plant to the road,
Thats obvious.
> but it could end up better than gasoline.
Fraid not.
> A solar powered car, which is only a school project and not a reality, would obviate the coal use.
And so would nukes, and they have been a reality for decades now.
Lou
> On May 26, 7:04 pm, "Lou" <lpog...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > "Al Bundy" <MSfort...@mcpmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> >
> > If putting batteries in cars can reduce overall energy use while
maintaining
> > performance (no, not jack rabbit starts, but 300-400 miles per fill
> > up/charging, recharge times of a few minutes, warm in winter and cool in
> > summer, etc.) that's great, but batteries aren't sources of energy - the
> > energy still has to come from somewhere. In the US, that most likely
means
> > electricity generated from burning coal.
>
> The thing is we have lots of coal and maybe we can develop a cleaner
> way of using it. If all cars were electric, there would be no power
> for our lights.
True - if we could magically replace all gas/diesel vehicles with electric
vehicles with comparable performance, electricity consumption would more or
less double, all else being equal.
> I look at a gas engine and the fact that about 33% of the energy of
> the fuel is used for propulsion while the rest is wasted.
I think it would be more accurate to say that 67% of the energy isn't. Some
of that is waste in the thermodynamic sense - there's a theoretical limit to
how much useful work can a heat engine can develop given a temperature
difference in the first place. I'd hesitate to even call that waste - it's
inherent in the way the universe works and can't be circumvented, and the
theoretical maximum represents an ideal that doesn't take into account
things like friction and heat losses.
The best diesel engine I've ever heard about (far too large to fit in a car)
has nearly touched 52%. Large coal fired electrical generating stations are
around 36%.
Some of the mechanical energy developed by the auto engine is siphoned off
for things besides moving the car - generating electricity, running the air
conditioning, power steering, power brakes, automatic transmission, etc.
What we end up with is the typical auto engine is around 25% efficient,
while the "well to wheel" efficiency is maybe half that.
> Meanwhile,
> an electric motor is much more efficient, perhaps in the 90% range or
> more. I have not researched the overall efficiency from power plant to
> the road, but it could end up better than gasoline.
Because an onboard engine powering an something like the Chevy Volt won't be
used to drive the car but to charge the battery, it can be tuned to run at
maximum efficiency. Overall well to wheel efficiency might as much as
double.
> A solar powered car, which is only a school project and not a reality,
> would obviate the coal use.
The limitation here is that solar energy is pretty diffuse - being about a
horsepower per square yard, for maybe 6 - 8 hours a day on a good day. If
the solar panel is going to be carried by the car, it's hard to see how a
solar powered car could ever come close to the range and round the clock
availability of conventional cars.
