This is JMartin's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following JMartin's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
JMartin
Recent Activity
Do you really think drones will be more fuel efficient delivery vehicles than driverless trucks?
I know this is the GreenCARcongress website, but Yoatman and others seem to totally dismiss the broader applications of fuel cells, including home heating and electric production, grid balancing of renewables, etc. Why does one technology have to be judged as the WINNER and for one purpose only?
HaveyD: Not so. Most fuel cell vehicles will be plug in hybrids, so the majority of miles, particularly city, will be on battery. Far fewer FC distribution posts will be needed than the current gas pumps.
DM: something could be done about what? I forgot the subject.
If this is a mandate for new vehicles, why not start now, or as soon as regs are promulgated? Then the fleets would be 50% (or more) by 2025. Let's get serious.
Harvey is right. I have solar and pay ~$10 per month connect charge with net metering. I get a small check each year for the excess electricity produced. I have no objection to that connect fee. If it went to $50, that might be different.
I have no expertise, but I would think going off the grid would not be good for most individuals or our overall economy. However, I can see the development of many microgrids, connected by national lines (HVDC) to balance loads and use renewable resources. In 15 years, most homes and buildings will have fuel cells for that winter heat while they produce more electricity. The grid will be needed to manage it all and the fee is just a cost of doing business -- like road taxes.
I continue to be fascinated by the either/or debates in these threads. As technology develops markets will change, but I suspect there will be a place for both BEV and FCEV. The real game changer for fuel cells will be in-home use, where it can heat the house and generate electricity to charge the PHEV in winter. Distributed energy and new storage schemes will change our world, we just don't yet know how.
DavidJ: Fuel duties will not help the poor to buy EV's. It will just keep them poorer and probably out of the market. You are probably correct about initial purchase. If there were political will to do a bonus/malus program, at least those who buy new cars every year would fill the used car pipeline with more efficient cars eventually.
Don't be stepping on my religion, or my lizard. Who will lead me?
CheeseEater88: You introduce an interesting idea for car sharing. My guess is that the software could allow riders to choose private or shared rides and charge differential pricing accordingly. That way the inefficiencies of many stops (the major problem with bus and light rail) can be eliminated for those who are willing to pay. Others can save $.
Roger, I share your concerns about job creation and other social ills. I don't think paying them to drive vehicles is necessarily the answer. We need to address these issues as a society, but maintaining outmoded work models is not the answer. India used to require people to spin yarn at home in order to keep them employed. That did not work out so well.
Roger: Your parents are a different generation from the one coming up. I think we will see autonomous cars used for short trips like to the grocery, Costco, AND to public transit--probably PRT which is simply autonomous vehicles on elevated rail. Yes, some people will want their status vehicle or one for travel, but not for everyday use. The aging population will help drive (pardon the pun) this trend.
If we become energy independent, the middle east may lack funds and focus to export their wars. Then we can leave it to them to rebuild their civilization, or destroy it. Is it possible to have another "dark ages" in only part of the world?
Air and Water transport seem to be the biggest challenges. Investment in current or foreseeable near-term technology can address most on-ground surface transport emission issues.
I also am not an engineer, so take this for what it is worth. If electrolysis can be done efficiently, then why not use wind and solar for the base load, excess from wind and solar for electrolysis, and nuclear as steady-state generation, adding to the grid if needed, but otherwise for electrolysis or pyrolysis?
I don't understand why posters insist on declaring winners in a race that has just begun. If you can tell me exactly what gasoline will cost 5 years from now, maybe you can tell me how much electricity or hydrogen will cost. But I won't believe it until a winner emerges. I personally think there is a place for all of these technologies. Among other things, hydrogen, whether cheap or not, can provide certainty that renewable electricity cannot. It is not a question of which is the cheapest or best technology, it is a matter of what mix works. After all, I can buy 3 grades of gasoline or diesel, and guess what -- they all sell, and at different prices. Explain that.
Better economy, consumer confidence, and banks lending money = more trucks and SUV's being sold. Lower cost of gas adds psychological boost as well -- more than financial.
gor: Welcome to the car as computer on wheels. How long do you keep your computer?
And that link may be weak in the developing world. People on these pages argue about infrastructure all the time. In some parts of the developing world there is little oil and gas infrastructure. So is it easier to put up a solar panel and battery or put in an oil pipeline? Time will tell.
The article says Toyota is increasing production because of higher than expected demand. I don't understand all the arguments that say no one will buy the car. Someone is obviously interested.
Big oil may control politicians, but politicians have less control over the economy and business than everyone (especially politicians) would like us to believe. GE is betting on distributed energy. India is working on solar and wind, as is Iran. The interests of businesses other than oil are to have stable, sustainable energy sources. This report and others like it will just accelerate the effort toward other sources. I have no idea how this will all shake out, but it will shake out - probably not smoothly, but also probably not how 99% of us predict.
One more thing. Russia and Iran will continue to sell all they can, even if it is at a loss, because they need the income now to sustain their governments.
The Saudi's may be reading economic reports on stranded assets, and they don't want those to be in Saudi Arabia. We may be reaching a tipping point where oil producers need cash flow from sales now and cannot depend on sales rising in the future, so they are not holding out for a better price.