$1b electric car infrastructure deal

[Eeyore]

Actually it's far from that good and may even be the reverse. What do you think
those cooling towers are for at power plants. Half the energy gets 'thrown
away'.

Typical electricity generation averages around 30-33% from power plant energy
input to wall socket. Losses in battery charging may lose another 10-20% of it
too. It's not like refilling a pail of water, it's like refilling a leaky pail
of water. so you could easily be in 25% efficiency territory (not dissinilar to
a modern petrol engine) and worse as you factor in electrical losses in the
vehicle itself.

In comparison, modern diesel engine efficiency targets for new technology
engines such as ones that eliminate the traditional camshaft are in the 40%
range and large marine diesels already exceed 50% thermal efficiency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wärtsilä-Sulzer_RTA96-C
"With a 42.7 MJ/kg fuel, the efficiency is 22.1 MJ/kg / 42.7 MJ/kg = 51.7%."

Apparently MAN make one with ~ 57% efficiency.

And I forgo this bit too. Another guy in another group wondered about reclaiming
exhaust heat. They DO !

"High-efficiency waste heat recovery

An important feature of the first ship installation of the 14RT-flex96C is the
high-efficiency waste heat recovery system. It contributes major savings in fuel
consumption and reductions in exhaust gas emissions.

Exhaust gases of the ship’s main engine pass through an exhaust-gas economiser to
generate steam for a turbine-driven generator. The turbogenerator set also includes
an exhaust-gas power turbine driven by a portion of the exhaust gases diverted from
the main flow through the engine’s turbochargers.

This high-efficiency waste heat recovery plant can provide an electrical output of
up to about 12% of the main engine power. The generated electricity is supplied to
the ship’s main switchboard and employed in a shaft motor to assist in ship
propulsion. A portion of the steam from the exhaust economiser is utilised in
shipboard heating services.

Energy recovery is maximised by adapting the engine to the lower air intake
temperatures that are available by drawing intake air from outside the ship
(ambient air) instead of from the ship’s engine room. The engine turbochargers are
matched for the lower air intake temperatures thereby increasing the exhaust energy
without affecting the air flow through the engine. There is thus no increase in the
thermal loading of the engine and there is no adverse effect on engine
reliability."

http://www.wartsila.com/,en,press,0...1B,26EE6684-06C9-48B3-920A-3B238B7C302A,,.htm

So we're into ~ 58% efficiency territory here.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

BTW, for those that haven't seen it, the movie "Who killed the
electric car" is well worth a watch.

Apart from the fact it's a load of garbage.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

There is already some existing renewable capacity on the grid, but not
enough for a mass change overnight change of course.
But as the demand for renewable energy increases, more plants will be
built, and options increase as technology improves.

The technology is fairly mature and 'green' energy is EXPENSIVE.

Just another pipe dream.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

The idea was to have a solenoid operated drain cock
on the battery and the servo would have grids and a drain
system that then returned the electrolyte to a main tank for
a slow recharge via solar panels or conventional mains.

Solar recharging from panels on a vehicle even in ideal circumstances might
daily get you to the end of the road.

Do the numbers !

Graham

 

[David L. Jones]

At a true (unsubsidised) cost of between twice to nearly ten times that of
conventionally generated electricity.

If you want it to stay subsidised at those levels your taxes are going to go up
a LOT.

Fossil fuel is also subsidised in Australia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_and_transport_subsidies_in_Australia

In Australia we currently have the option to pay about 1.5 times the
fossil fuel rate for 100% renewable energy.

Recycled water is also massively subsidised in Oz, and same too even
regular water to some degree.

Dave.

 

[Eeyore]

Laughable.



**Not quite. Internal combustion engines are spectacularly inefficient,

Not particularly, a common myth. There is currently a drive to make 40%
efficient diesel engines for automotive use.

Large marine diesels have no trouble exceeding 50%.

whilst thermal power stations are respectably efficient.

Not particularly A common myth. About 30-33% from fuel thermal energy input to
wall socket.

Read it up !

Grham

 

[Eeyore]

Is there any currently opperating system that actually works
like this now? People keep claiming it can be done with lead-acid
technology, but I suspect they are mistaken.

Oh there are many battery Yechnologies but none ever quite seem to fit the
bill. I expect Li-ion to be seen most widely in the upcoming generation of
hynrids.

This was touted at one time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium-sulfur_battery

Unforunately it has to be kept at high temperature. Might for be suitable say
for buses that have long daily usage cycles.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Fossil fuel is also subsidised in Australia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_and_transport_subsidies_in_Australia
Curious.


In Australia we currently have the option to pay about 1.5 times the
fossil fuel rate for 100% renewable energy.

You mean as the consumer ? There'll doubtless be a big govt subsidy to the supplier
on top of that which isn't reflected in the price on your bill.

Recycled water is also massively subsidised in Oz, and same too even
regular water to some degree.

Water resource shortages presumably ?

Graham

 

[Mauried]

Where are the electric cars ?

Graham

Also where are the batteries.
Given that the artcile completely leaves out what battery technology
the cars are going to use, Id say the idea hasnt had much research
done.
Batteries are currently the weak link for EVs , not lack of charging
stations.

 

[Eeyore]

Also where are the batteries.

Indeed !

Given that the artcile completely leaves out what battery technology
the cars are going to use, Id say the idea hasnt had much research
done.

No. I suspect an attempt to manupulate share prices with provocative media
announcements.

Batteries are currently the weak link for EVs , not lack of charging
stations.

I believe the highest energy density types are the molten sodium and molten
salt types e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_battery

Like the Zebra battery. One small problem.....
"When not in use, zebra batteries typically require being left under charge, in
order to be ready for use when needed. If shut down, a reheating process must
be initiated that may require up to two days to restore the battery pack to the
desired temperature, and full charge."

They ALL have to be kept hot i.e. molten to work.

Graham

 

[Trevor Wilson]

Not particularly, a common myth. There is currently a drive to make 40%
efficient diesel engines for automotive use..

**And electric motors can easily double such efficiencies.

Large marine diesels have no trouble exceeding 50%.

**Indeed. Ever seen one mounted in a car? I haven't. I have, however, seen
such engines generating electricity.

Not particularly A common myth. About 30-33% from fuel thermal energy
input to
wall socket.

Read it up !

**Actually, the efficiencies of modern thermal generators is significantly
better than that. Transmission losses in the order of 3% per 1,000km are
easy enough to manage in this day and age. Large engines will always be able
to provide higher specific efficiency that similar smaller engines. Hence
the high efficiencies of the marine engines you cited.

 

[Malcolm Moore]

Laughable.

Some clarification is needed on David's claim. It should state "90%
renewable electrical energy."
^^^^^^^^
<http://www.mercury.co.nz/News/news_story.aspx?id=855>

I'll leave it to your self proclaimed research abilities to find out
what the present percentage is.

snip

 

[terryc]

Solar recharging from panels on a vehicle even in ideal circumstances
might daily get you to the end of the road.

For solarpanels to be a real option, you would needto park the car in full
snlight everyday and only be doing a short trip. You would also need a
top up ICE driven battery charger in the boot. Might be feasible with the
roof space of my LWB courier van, but anything else, doubt it.

 

[Eeyore]

"Eeyore" wrote

**And electric motors can easily double such efficiencies.

Strawman. Where does the electricity come from at what efficiency ?

**Indeed. Ever seen one mounted in a car? I haven't. I have, however, seen
such engines generating electricity.


**Actually, the efficiencies of modern thermal generators is significantly
better than that. Transmission losses in the order of 3% per 1,000km are
easy enough to manage in this day and age. Large engines will always be able
to provide higher specific efficiency that similar smaller engines. Hence
the high efficiencies of the marine engines you cited.

Grid losses are typically in the order of 6-10% alone AIUI.

And you're not going to replace all that coal fired electricity overnight. The
only realistic option is a huge scale program of nukes. You have the uranium
AIUI. Result, the EV is currently LESS efficient than modern ICE based proposals
and is inherently inflexible wrt long journeys.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Some clarification is needed on David's claim. It should state "90%
renewable electrical energy."
^^^^^^^^
<http://www.mercury.co.nz/News/news_story.aspx?id=855>

I'll leave it to your self proclaimed research abilities to find out
what the present percentage is.

If there's lots of hydro and there's room for more I could see that happen.
Bloody short timescale though.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

For solarpanels to be a real option, you would needto park the car in full
snlight everyday and only be doing a short trip. You would also need a
top up ICE driven battery charger in the boot. Might be feasible with the
roof space of my LWB courier van, but anything else, doubt it.

And then look at the cost of the panels ! Never mind the danger of accidental
or vandalism damage to them.

Nanosolar has been making great claims about their reduced costs, possibly
1/5th of current silicon panels if they're telling the truth but have put no
info of value in the public domain, nor do we know if the technology is
reliable or long lived, but are they going to sell them at that price when
investors want returns ?

Graham

 

[Mauried]

If there's lots of hydro and there's room for more I could see that happen.
Bloody short timescale though.

Graham

Provided that it keeps raining and in the right places.
Hydro power is great if the dams are always full and the water is
free.
Some countries like Norway can make most of their power from Hydro
but most cant as the geography isnt suitable.
Goals are great provided that some elaboration on how the goal is to
be achieved are also provided.
Bland statements like "our target is to achieve 90% renewable power by
some date arnt worth the paper they are written on unless its also
explained how this is to be achieved."

 

[swanny]

But where is the "clean, safe, affordable" electricity going to come from?
Not to mention "clean, safe, affordable" batteries!

MrT.

CSIRO are working on one at the moment:

http://www.csiro.au/science/psyp.html

 

[swanny]

Wouldn't it be better to use the natural and coal seam gas that will
almost certainly be used to generate the electricity, directly in the
car? A distribution system for the gas and a change to multi-fuel cars
seems preferable to me.

Yes, natural gas is a very good option.
It is not too difficult to convert a conventional vehicle to use natural gas.
The gas is usually compressed in a tank which will give about 100km or so,
usually enough for daily commutes. The engine can be configured to switch to
another fuel source when the gas runs out.

 

[David L. Jones]

Laughable.

Really?
They are already at around 70% renewable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_energy_in_New_Zealand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NZelectricity2008.png

So 90% by 2025 isn't exactly stretching the imagination.

Dave.