Re: On project "Better Place"
Bruce England
other members of the transit and transportation working group, as
this is a much bigger topic than I feel equipped to tackle on my own,
and personal time constraints limit me as well. My hope is that some
others from the working group might get together with you and me to
look further into this.
In general, I'm very excited at the prospects of some kind of
recharging and battery exchange station infrastructure (and other
infrastructures that support ZEVs) getting implemented, not only in
our area, but across the country. Naturally, we in MV wouldn't want
to move forward on any plan half cocked, so ongoing discussion and
evaluation is essential. I believe that the more we can do
independently re this to avoid hampering or bogging down the Council
Environmental Sustainability Committee is best for all concerned, so
let's see what we can do.
I'm hoping as well that Palo Alto can be engaged in this process, so
that neither City is compelled to reinvent the wheel unnecessarily.
Accordingly, I am actively in touch with them through the CEAP to get
the discussion rolling.
Bye for now!
Bruce
>Hello Bruce,
>
>Peter Holoyda here from Renewably First. I have been asked to give
>a review on Better Place by several people now.
>
>Here are my comments.
>*
>Choice and the Danger of Picking a Winner too Quickly: * At the
>present time, it would be very difficult to pick a winner.
>Certainly electric vehicles are very efficient. ($0.75 per
>equivalent gallon). Renewably First
>is positive on the Better Place concept, however, it makes sense to
>have all the major auto manufacturers show their "wares". Indeed,
>we think it is prudent to evaluating all zero emission
>technologies. This includes BEVs, PHEVs and hydrogen ICV and FCVs.
>It also includes how they are powered. Natural gas based hydrogen
>IS NOT a good idea. Coal fired electric vehicles, though
>calculated to be better than gasoline, is not an optimal choice
>either. While many vehicles have been deployed in small volumes we
>need to deploy 100's of vehicles to test infrastucture. Will the
>charging
>infrastructure of Better Place be compatible with Toyota? With any one else?
>Battery types will follow form and function requirements of vehicle
>(see battery aisle at Fry's). For example, a pick-up truck may
>require a few more batteries to serve its owner. A two seat
>commuter car
>would require fewer batteries.
>At this time there are only two manufacturers of vehicles for this
>project. As we know, the market demands more variety based on
>performance and function to name a few parameters. Though Better
>Place uses an off peak charging scheme, it also relies on the
>concept of swappable batteries. It has been shown, that battery
>packs often fail with a "bad" cell or get abused in the
>charge/discharge cycle. This might lead a consumer to get a bad
>"swap".
>*
>Timeframe:* Renault and Nissan will not have cars on the road until
>2012. Testing for safety and function will be required before
>their deployment. We can deploy a plug-in fleet to "test" charging
>infrastructure in the next year. This will give data on the
>electrics deployment practicality.
>Toyota Prii" are on the road now! There may even be funding
>available now too (first bail out bill).
>
>*Better Place is a For Profit:* Would a city be doing the right
>thing (ethically) by promoting a single solution? Yes, we need to
>bring in industry, but what happened to the RFP process to
>purchases/installing of equipment
>on public land? Do the cities want to cement the 20% profitability
>into the infrastructure or auto program right now?
>
>*Possible Flaws in the Concept:* The Better Place concept of
>swapping batteries has been tried. I offer the case of the
>forklifts in bonded warehouses. There, propane powered forklifts
>poisoned the workers with CO2 in enclosed buildings (Bonded
>Warehouses). Swappable batteries were then used to power electric
>forklifts, but the 24/7 nature of the business required a three hour
>charge time or a very clumsy and dangerous swapping operation.
>Depending on the battery technology, an auto battery could weigh
>anywhere between 1,000 to 1,500 pounds. Finally, a hydrogen fuel
>cell was used because the cell could be refueled in the typical
>manner of a natural gas refill (a few minutes). The fuel cell
>approach is now being used even though it has higher initial costs.
>Of course, the "exhaust" of the hydrogen fuel cell is water vapor.
>
>*Charging Infrastructure:* Along with green electrons (instead of
>fossil fuel electrons), standards need to be derived. What is the
>charging curve of the Lithium batteries? What does the plug look
>like? Will the light post charging idea from Coulombe handle three
>cars? Will the parking limits of Mountain View allow three hour
>parking instead of the 1 hour parking limit? Similarly, should a
>community build charging stations that follow a standard or are
>proprietary? Renewably First bases its efforts on getting many
>cities to formulate standards for charging stations so that a
>traveler could expect
>to find a way to recharge or refuel in any of many cities.
>
>Generally speaking, I applaud all efforts to displace fossil fuels
>from the transportation equation. For this reason, I must voice
>support for the effort. Fleets may like the Better Place concept
>where the vehicles always return
>to the same place at the end of the day. But they too should be
>offered other zero emission choices. For example, the Summer
>Olympics featured hydrogen buses. The Winter Olympics coming up in
>Vancouver will do the same. Should we leverage this experiment?
>
>Renewably First casts a wider net for zero emission solutions which
>would include Better Place. It is our intention to invite all zero
>emission vehicle vendors to "show their wares" to the general public
>and city members. All major vehicle manufacturers have shown
>electric and hydrogen prototypes. We have structured the non-profit
>to include Universities and Community Colleges to evaluate these
>technologies as the pilot programs are deployed.
>This would allow usability data to be public and build upon the
>successes of the previous years' choices.
>
>Bruce, my hope is to get zero emission vehicles out on the road
>right away. There are lots of choices, but we need to evaluate
>them. Please let me know if you have any questions. I would VERY
>much like to talk in more
>detail about our programs with you. Your work is greatly
>appreciated. Indeed, we need to honor it with some programs to make
>it happen. I know you have our presentation-lets talk about it.
>
>Respectfully yours,
>
>Peter Holoyda
>Renewably First
>415-794-8280
Bruce England
to be made by Mountain View anytime soon, so we can afford to move
ahead without haste. Due to the holidays, I haven't heard from others
yet in the working group, and I'd like to see who might join the
discussion first off.
One thought that occurs to me, though, is for us to arrange for a
public panel discussion with Renewably First, Better Place, and other
experts and stakeholders (if they can be identified and if they agree
to participate) for Mountain View, Palo Alto, and, perhaps, other
local jurisdictions. Have you explored doing this through the Silicon
Valley Leadership Group or other civic organizations?
Bye for now!
Bruce
>Hi Bruce,
>
>Your work and efforts are greatly appreciated. Many thanks to you
>for your leadership on these issues.
>and for your guidance in addressing the Mountain View CESC.
>Bruce, I have tried to put together a plan that would be overseen by
>community representatives. As a non-profit, we try to get government
>together is industry, academia to name a few. Renewably First's
>plan is to deploy pilot programs that we can
>all participate in. By monitoring the performance of these
>programs, we can converge on well reviewrd policy and responsible
>technology development. By working together
>we can save money while limiting risk.
>Lets get together to talk in some detail. It would be extremely
>useful to us to have your perspective on the process going forward.
>
>Please feel free to call me at 415-794-8280.
>
>Thanks
>
>Peter Holoyda