This is JMartin's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following JMartin's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Hydraulic and/or batteries are great for local driving, not so much for over the road. Unless we go to a Hyperloop, high speed train, or PRT system for intercity transport (products, not just people), we need other approaches. Fuel cells are one possibility. I am not good at predicting the future. I just can't rule anything out - particularly technologies that companies are spending millions of dollars on. Wait and see.
Arnold: Every technology has had man vs. machine at some point, back to John Henry. Actually back to the horse, but that may not be called technology. At first man wins, but over time, technology dominates. It will again.
What SJC said. PHEV's, once widespread, will use little fuel, whether gasoline or hydrogen. Most mileage for most people will be on battery. So the need for and distribution of filling stations will change dramatically in the next decade. Some, if not all, will dispense hydrogen.
Nordic. One problem is that all those few hours are the same ones. Electric cars, and self-driving cars will not solve the congestion problem. They can, however, solve the last mile problem for mass transit. Combine the two, and we could have a true transportation system, which would then, reduce the number of cars needed.
Lad is right. Safety and the cost of accidents will decline quickly as avoidance systems are implemented. We don't need new laws for that to happen, and we don't need perfection. Also, by not insisting on fully autonomous vehicles, the lawyers still have a responsible driver to go after in those few cases where there are accidents.
@ Lad: Cops don't stop drivers because they are drunk. They stop them because drive erratically while drunk. So if we eliminate the erratic driving, whether drivers are impared or not becomes a moot point. Everyone is safer. Works for me.
@ Alain I am not sure I understand your point about cheap labor, but emerging countries certainly have a shortage of dollars. Oil refineries and transport are very capital intensive (disregarding the cost of finding the stuff). Solar and Wind can be installed incrementally and locally with much lower capital cost, and the energy is available quickly. So, emerging countries will move more quickly to renewables than many developed countries.
The spike in oil prices may well come, due to lack of investment. But who is going to do that investing. International banks are already predicting huge stranded assets in fossil fuels. If I had a spare 10 trillion, I would put it in alternative energy, not oil. That means more volatility in oil, and faster adoption of low-mileage cars.
It is an immigration issue, not an economic issue.
@mohonj: You are correct, but they are certain to go back to China with the current US immigration laws. Anyone can come and pay tuition for advanced degrees, but then when they want to stay and build the economy, we send them away. Genius, for sure.
This is another step in the right direction.
@Henrick: I agree that BEV's are ideal for self-driving taxi's. But if the technology is developed for autonomous vehicles, then I think auto companies should not wait for Electric to make it happen. Driverless is the future, whether on current roads, or rails/PODS.
Engineers can argue the merits all they want. Until investors step up with money no NPPs will be built. And investors will not put up that kind of money until the Government guarantees the investment, and all risks. I don't see it any time soon.
Heavy loads can travel by train. Speed is rarely an issue for them, except in time of war. The key is a network. Autonomous Uber type cars for the "last mile" and first mile. Skytrain type automated taxies for local travel networks, and higher-speed (100 MPH) Skytran type transport for closer inter-city, like up to 300 miles. That would get you LA to Las Vegas in less than 3 hours will little or no wait on either end whereas Hyperloop, like Air would take 1 hr to the port, 2 hrs wait/security, 20 minutes travel, and another 1/2 hour to the final destination. Air, or perhaps Hyperloop for transcontinental travel. Both, as far as I can tell still require the amassing of a large group of people who want to travel from one point to another.
@ Sirkulat You might want to share your opinion with the Japanese. They are testing dirverless cars now.
@ NP The beauty is that not all areas have to have chargers at once. Silicon Valley now, but other areas can be added incrementally. We don't require a nationwide network to make EV's attractive locally.
With well positioned charging stations, we can solve both the range and inital cost issues (smaller batteries). I would buy an EV tomorrow if the cost was low enough and I could get to work everyday then charge at work. We have two cars, so one can be available for longer trips, at least for a couple of more years. I believe others would make the same type of decision if they could.
Subsidize charging stations, not batteries. If every employer and parking lot had a number of charging stations, few people would worry about 150 miles. <100 would be fine for most local trips, if you can charge while parked on one end. Maybe
The US in the dust, while the Presidential candidates argue about who has the prettiest face, or lacks email security. China will catch up.
I meant pollution not solution.
Not to worry about 10 Billion people on the planet. Nature will take care of that. She is already pissed about all the solution and global warming, but has barely begun to show it.
DaveD: "VW group certainly didn't mean to, but they just fired the starting gun to the age of EVs." You got that right. Diesels didn't sell well in the US before, now, they are dead in the water. And if they don't pass emissions tests elsewhere, they are dead, period. The race is on.
Driverless Uber type cars, whether electrified or not, could solve the last mile problem for many drivers and encourage the use of mass transit for most trips. I suspect most drivers like me would take a bus, but I need a car on either end of the line to get where I am going in a reasonable amount of time (less than three times that of driving). Such solutions could easily be piloted in limited geographic areas prior to full rollout. We just need the driverless cars. However, even a frequent, short route bus during rush hours to and from mass transit terminals might do the trick.
These figures may also reflect the high cost of living in a city. Around Denver, the only housing most households can qualify for is a long commute -- drive until you qualify. I think Mahonj is correct, congestion may be the only thing to stop the increase. Governments don't seem to be serious about increasing public transit -- too communist, I guess, or it may look like a tax.
“5-5-5. We will develop batteries that are five times more powerful and five times cheaper within 5 years." People use 5-5-5 as shorthand, but really they should refer to it as 5-5-? since we are already 3 years into the goal. Personally I would be very happy with a 3-3-4 at this point. It would take care of most people's needs, for most uses. Even a 2-2-2 would satisfy my needs and range anxiety.