This is CheeseEater88's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following CheeseEater88's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
These are more for proof of concept and to showcase the technology. Where these will shine best will be on more demanding platforms, like trucks and heavy duty applications, where payload capacity and uptime are critical. Yes, it does come down to towing ;) batteries alone due to size and weight constraints won't be able to adequately replace the outgoing ICE. Buses like SD points out are more or less on a track, thier miles per day are known, and thier recharge times can be scheduled. I don't know if most places would get much more than thier home energy needs from rooftop solar, let alone be able to dispatch it adequately to vehicles sitting on parking lots at workplaces during the highest potential for solar energy. And if you are storing the power in battery banks to use it later, you are cutting your lead over FCs efficiency. If BEV over the road trucks (long haul) were remotely viable, we'd see some significant introduction already. These are very profit driven vehicles, fuel economy matters, and money matters most. We know an electric motor can dethrone an ICE, but what's going to power that. Batteries are available, and electric motors are available, and yet no one has really put anything into production yet. Batteries scale well electronically, so its not going to be a mystery when you stack cells or module together to make a bigger pack. FCs seem to be more able to meet these demands than the current crop of batteries. Even if cars had small fc range extenders in the ballpark of 15kw, and could be packaged small enough, it could mean unlimited range, on those road trips. Enabling EVs to fully take over ICE.
well, I for one think bringing the ranger back is a silly idea, you get half the capability for like 90% of the price... They already axed my platform and drivetrain, fiesta 1.0L. I'm kinda bitter about that. I'm kind of worried about which powertrains they plan to eliminate. I get that companies spend tons of money on testing and planning for ICE emissions. Hopefully they just ax the diesel powertrains in the small cars in Europe. I'm just running through my mind and thinking about what we have here in America. I guess they could go eliminating the some of the NA motors with similar siblings like 1.6l and the 2.0l and the 2.3l like picking a winner there. I am hoping they get rid of all the beige trims... and the chrome. It'll save them so much money right there they could afford to keep the fiesta with the 1L.
Most of the home storage solutions currently offered are in the range of 3-15kwh per module, and come with a steep premium. The home uses a lot less electricity than a vehicle would in an instance, you wouldn't get much charge unless you had a closer parity between your car battery and your house battery. Harvey and several others are looking for a vehicle that would be practical to replace their ICE before they jump into EV. I can't own both at the same time. I drive a lot, cross country trips for work and leisure, a nice real 500mile range and 30-45min recharge would be acceptable to me. I also fill my gas up before it says zero miles till empty, i don't think i would like to deep discharge a car battery to get that range. 40-80% charge is where lithium likes to be. Lead acid likes 70-100% charge. I'm in the market for a huge suv, to tow a trailer just over 5000lbs (also looking at one that weighs just under 3000). I'd like a pretty hardy battery, if i were to get an EV one. I think if i were to get an electric version it would have to be hybrid. Harvey may seem irrational to you guys, but he represents a large demographic. He wants EVs to have parity with ICEs. A seemless replacement if you will. People spend a lot of money on gasoline vehicles right now just to have that freedom. You basically have deliver a product that people want, or change thier minds to make them want it.
I think upfront rebates would be a much better way to get the bulk of the population into these types of vehicles. the buyers who would normally avoid hybrids/ev due to price, would likely benefit most from this campaign. If price is an entry barrier, it would make sense to make it cheaper upfront not on the backend. We need another cash for clunkers as well. Older/poorly maintained vehicles are a huge blight on our atmosphere. That and small engines ex. 2-stroke weed eaters, lawn mowers, and motorcycles.
I have the same requirements as Harvey ;) Though I would be okay with 30 min charging, especially for something that would have that many kwh. Hopefully this battery turns out... it seems capable so far, and not a bunch of exotic materials either. so this gets me thinking... if EVs are the new norm lets say in 20-40 years... wouldn't it be prudent now to build out the infrastructure to handle fast charging to nearly every (new) home? I mean if you have a 150+kwh pack, it could take days on single phase. a pickup might need 300kwh or more, so we better be planning for that future now, rather than making these half measures... I guess that's what frustrates me about this EV future. Its better to plan and overprovision, then to have to rip all of these current "fast chargers" from the ground to place ones that are 10-20x more powerful. We are spending gobs of money on technology that might last for 5 years before its outdated. I use this example a lot, but a relevant comparison would be the short amount of time we went from SD to SDHC to SDXC... where as other formats didn't have these compatibility issues. We as a global community need to come up with a solution for plugs on our EVs, we need to guess and say that we will charge at ex. (arbitrary numbers) 100amps at 480v or something like that, but allow up to 150 amps at 1200v or something like that, just build out for the near impossible, that way if its a EV semi, or an EV passenger car we can manage just the same... and we could modulate the power down or up based on the need/vehicle.
Dave, I think they should throw some goodwill our way, not only are they second hand, they are basically making money on something that they would have to pay to dispose of. I am looking for some Li-Ion batteries such as those for some off grid RV/solar contraption that lives only in my brain, till I win the lottery or something, the only thing I've seen worth while price wise is the powerwall 2. Ideally I would like a 48v system like LGChem's Resu line, figure by the time I get all of this in motion, stuff will be cheap. I want to slap monocrystalline panels nearly every place that I can (and that makes sense). Have a decent energy storage/sink, and be able to go a decent amount of time off grid- almost indefinitely if I could, to see if I could do it. My design is not perfect, I would need a diesel powered jet coolant-heater like truckers use to heat the cooling loop for their engines, I'd cycle radiant heating to keep the tanks and myself from freezing.
Also, please note in the article/flier when it says "What we blow out when we floor the throttle" WOT is open loop and usually not regulated as it accounts for a very small fraction of driving. WOT on any ICE car will lead to detrimental emissions, the car can't operate safely and cleanly easily with those demands. WOT richens the mixture on gasoline ICEs increasing potential for soot, its open loop and dumping fuel in for power, the mixture is richer to keep the temperature down and to save the emissions equipment(when possible).
People have a hard time as it is simply doing maintenance to their vehicle. Having them use a gasoline car that needs to be maintained like a diesel is asking for trouble. Most of the particulate can be mitigated by tuning of GDI. The filters and the sensors to operate the DPF system successfully are not cheap. DPF on gasoline equipment will quickly lead to the demise of the ICE, an increase of the average age of the cars on the road, and general distain from the public. Upfront it might add $3000-4000 to the cost of the car. Manufacturers might just cut the losses and go back to port injection. There is no good, cheap way to put particulate filters on small cars. Big trucks are much easier to bury the costs on. Also you have to drive like a mad man to bring the filters up to light off temperatures on normal short drives, meaning most people who granny their cars will spend tons of money trying to keep their cars from de-rating on them.
Its just construction costs likely, running power lines, etc. I would also agree that they could do better, why not 5 fast chargers? (probably wouldn't cost that much more) These are public chargers, not all day/overnight parking places, fast chargers should be the normal. If EVs are going to supplant ICEs they need capable infrastructure not piecemeal shortcommings
I've studied emissions equipment in the US, and while there was an emissions scandal/failure with VW(and some others), the US/CARB placed emissions standards on vehicles to target HCs, PM, and NOx. CO2 has only been a recent concern, but that has been addressed by CAFE laws. Fuel consumption here for the longest time has been more of a national security issue than a climate issue. Only recently I think has euro targets on NOx and PM have been close to the US. What needs to happen here and across the world is yearly or bi-yearly emissions testing. Even if it is only OBDii pass/fail, it will take the bad actors off the road. New cars are only a small portion of vehicles on the road, the ever aging population. If the government came out with a program like cash for clunkers we could see quick improvements to air quality. Giving money for people to make fixes to their car or assistance affording a newer one would go a very long way. Modern diesels' with SCR and DPFs aren't for the lay man, they need to be worked or they are an expensive garage ornament. These style diesels' wouldn't work well in passenger cars, compared to alternatives. Diesel hybrids may do well though as the engine can be loaded heavily at the optimum times for light off of the DPF. We can probably wring a few more percentage points of efficiency out of gasoline engines with advanced fuels, diesels are nearly at their peek as far as efficiency goes. BEVs and FCs will start filling in the gaps at the outliers and working thier way to center. FC over the road trucks will be fairly attractive to fleets, as long as the technology helps the bottom line. Greed is a great motivator. The biggest distruptive force for any change will come from autonomous vehicles(even just collision avoidance). If vehicles don't crash as often, we will see an era where vehicle age means very little, and the average age will climb. It needs to come at the right time with the right technology. If in ten-twenty years all preventable crashes were avoided cars could very well see twenty years of age. Where that becomes an issue is the spare parts industry, the frequency of refreshes/changes from the manufacturer, and battery longevity. The aftermarket will have to step up and get into selling replacement battery packs. BEVs could be designed around the notion that the car will last 40years in service, making the possibility for battery swaps from the aftermarket a reality. All we need to do is look to the skies and see where aviation is at the moment. There are always new sales, but there are fully functional models where the body is twenty years old or more.
I don't think the PM in GDI is as big of an issue in the states as it is in Europe. Different calibrations being the main difference. With GDI you can run rich for a much higher torque number at lower rpms, or use it to prime turbochargers. There is some very interesting things you can do with DI to change the engines characteristics, but certain things lead to partially burnt fuel. If tuned to avoid the PM i don't think it will be an issue, at least not any worse than port injection.
I rather them skip the 25million for education. Even if every commercial on prime time tv was promoting EVs I don't think the public would change it's buying habits that much. Any change could be within a margin of error i suspect. People buy cars namely for utility/comfort, and with cars being such a large part of the budget many wont consider EVs until they can replace the lifestyle they have with their current cars today, that and most cant afford the step up to electric. I don't know if it's wise limiting yourself to 150kw chargers. If like many on here are speculating, we'll see cars and trucks with over 300kwhs of batteries. Why not put in infrastructure to handle the future, not just something to satiate cars of today, 500kw would be better, and then you could slow the charge rate if needed. You have to think about gas stations, if 30 cars can fill up in 30mins on a normal volume station, what's it going to be like if you have people waiting 30-120mins to recharge? Will there be Charge lines like gas lines in the past? The bigger the batter the bigger the sink, meaning you could charge at a faster rate if all other things remained the same. We need to plan this EV future, not just start something that has to be replaced in 5 years. That is the only way it's going to work well. Hydrogen has 2 fill styles and that's it, but you can use either on the current crop of FCevs, battery electric cars have a variety and I think that it will hurt it in the long run not to set high standards right away. Look at SD(HC,XC) cards vs Compact flash (sd cards had to re-release every few years because of demanding devices, where as compact flash had a large capacity to begin with). HDMI vs Display Port(HDMI had to be updated several times sometimes yearly just to keep up with displays where as DP has been relatively capable from the start). Blu-ray vs HDDVD(read speeds are an issue on Blu-ray but not hddvd, but both can carry similar amounts of data as a triple layer hddvd was possible from the start, and the cost of the disc and the laser were much less than Blu-ray), there launches in technology that go mainstream popular when there are other better thought out standards in existence. Many times its the player with the most backing that win out. Bev "gas" stations will look like parking lots if we don't put a lot of forward thinking to this. Cars may very well take advantage of a 500kw charger, and hd vehicles might need 1000-2000kw.
I don't think any maker could go full on BEV semi for long haul(weight, cost, and size restrictions), so a hybrid makes the most sense. I would argue that modern diesels (within the last 5 years) are probably the cleanest thing on the road in the US if they are operating correctly(as far as ice). ( I won't vouge for the thousands of VWs at pikes peak international raceway.) If you can pull 80,000lbs and still get 6-8mpg I think that is pretty good. By comparison it makes most passenger vehicles seem wasteful. Older/defunct vehicles are the problem. Most modern vehicles will clean the air in heavily polluted areas. FC trucks are going to arrive quickly enough. If there is room in the mix for fleets to save money they will jump at the chance. Again, the way I see it, BEVs will fill in small to large, FCEVs will work their way down from large to small. They will meet somewhere in the middle with some overlap.
Video games can improve lots of traits. There is a TED talk on First person shooters and how the improve vision, awareness, concentration and several other traits. Keep your mind active, try to learn new things daily. I'm going to eventually learn guitar... I don't have the talent to just pick it up, but ill still try.
I'm excited for this. I wonder how soon to market. Lead acid chemistry is one of the few that can sustain 100% charge level for a significant period of time without stressing the cells. I'm thinking about an rv, and what that could mean for off grid power. I was looking into SLAs but this sounds like a better and hopefully cheaper option.
5000lbs is fairly low, now a days. 1/2 tons have been getting up there for towing. If this were a short route delivery truck, with a ample time for charging between routes and never really used the on board range extender it would be great. The biggest benefit of ownership would come from on board power plant for tools and such.
Also, I'd be happy if the CARB/epa started probing everything new with an exhaust pipe for NOx, HC, and PM. Those three are a major health concern, and we need to address those before we block out the sun from space to deal with global warming. (my approach, as the sun has the single greatest affect on our global temperature, we could get fancy and make a big solar array in space, then laser down the power to a receiver) Gasoline and mixed gasoline should make thier exit from most yard equipment as it's completely unregulated in most places, an hour of mowing your grass with a traditional mower is very harmful to those that breath.
Lad pick your poison, we could all be driving motorcycles and trikes because they can get 73mpg in some circumstances. The upside, lower ghg, the downside is the more pollution, and everything else that comes with driving a motorcycle. Energy isn't something to restrict to the highest bidder/ people who can afford it. (after taxing it into oblivion) There was another article on here a while back of Ford and GM discussing CO2/mile generated by tesla, and how that would play into CAFE laws. And as others point out, there are lower hanging fruit. Why go after something that is very efficient? Why not go after old homes, boats, and the older/failing vehicle population on the road. I am all for tail pipe tests. If people can't have a properly running cars... I believe a cash for clunkers round two would have various advantages to fix the average vehicle age/ poor operation by the owner. I'd like some logic to the way government addresses problems.
Odds are it will be like every other car: speed limited based on the tires, and customers will have to pay large sums to unlock its full potential from the factory (larger battery and motor) Electric cars are hard but easy. The more money that you ask for one the more appealing it can be. The Tesla Model S is a great car, but at the asking price, its not a practical choice for most of the population. 217 mph is very impressive for any car, especially for an electric. If this is an Alpha or Beta proto type and they can get help passing safety, this has a very good chance to compete on the market. I think there needs to be a new kid on the block. I feel like this is targeting a different market then Tesla. Product differentiation/marketability is going to be how electric car makers survive, speed and power will attract a following. Where startups like these guys and Tesla do well, is they bring products to market quickly with sometimes risky/not 100% proven technology. Older style automakers will quibble over the 10mm bolt holding the luggage garnish on the car. They move slower, and they are operating with incredibly small margins and huge overhead, sure they could easily build an electric car, but they would never sell as well as they would need to be a profitable line for them. What they could do, and I am surprised they haven't done it, is run an electric halo car down a production line. An electric Viper, an Electric Ford GT, or other sporty variant could sell, but again, these would likely only sell to those who already have a tesla or two in the garage.
I do hope there are fair and reasonable goals for fuel economy quotas from the government. There are several paths we can go down to make our air easier to breath. Like taking advantage of our bountiful supply of natural gas to power high efficiency power plants, or by converting waste/biomass into fuels, or by generating electricity from renewables. Bigger trucks, and other modes of transportation might do well going with a turbine setup. Turbines can burn a variety of fuel, which could lead to less processing and overall better wtw picture. By nature these turbine vehicles would be range extended BEVs. Same goes with the Fule cells, by going to hydrogen you can go directly from a renewable source to a denser/lighter than battery storage medium. You still need batteries, but you can get by with 300kwh instead of a much higher capacity for large trucks, which would lower the tractor weight, increase the range, and enable round the clock duty.
There are kits made specifically for the 3.5L ecoboost, I have the 1L ecoboost. Which leaves me looking around for a spare intake tube, or an aftermarket throttle body adapter. The nice thing is that you don't need to tune for it, and it provides tons of benefits while remaining in closed loop. Most of the performance gains (without other mods) come from timing advance, which is enabled by the cooler air charge, and less knocking. A kit all on its own might see 20% increase in performance max. Water alone can provide a benefit, and methanol or ethanol can richen the mixture(car will correct and lean out the gasoline injectors to keep close to stoichiometric, if not in WOT) and allow more advanced timing with a possibility to clean up the combustion.
I am currently looking into water/meth injection as an aftermarket modification to my car, other OEMs are looking to add something of the sort from the factory. Turbo DI motors can benefit a lot from less knock and lower i take temps. If the fuel standards don't improve, you can wager that OEMs will seek out this route. Ford and BMW and others have at least tested a Throttle body injector to deliver ethanol or a water or a water meth injection. The system acts as an octane booster, cools the air charge, and can help clean up the burn as the fuel source (menthol and ethanol) contains oxygen.
Well, they changed the requirement and the qualifications for what is an alternative fuel. Change it around again and we could have second/third generation ethanol and isobutanol be primary sources. They could also target waste to fuels in particular. There is a quota/limit by the government on what makes it into the fuels. I am a firm believer that electric BEVs in the long term will take a good chunk of the sedan/coupe c/d and smaller market. Leaving hybrids to take the rest of the field. I would be okay with a nation wide minimum of 87, or even 91 octane. The 85 octane floor in Colorado is awful, and going by my eyes and nose alone I'd say about 50% of the vehicles that I've seen in springs would fail an emissions test. No matter how good new vehicles are the polution of a few Older cars negate almost all of the progress. I am for emission and safety inspections. I think that could improve the air quality for the nation rapidly if it were rolled out in all 50 states. Even if it came with some incentive to fix or replace (like cash for clunkers did)
I'd also wager that the fin showed here is cheaper to 3d print, and faster to 3d print than making it the conventional way. You could invest in the 3d printers once, and use it across almost all of your product lines current and future. That to me sounds like a great investment. If they can control surface finish accurately with this additive tech then it is very precise. if they can do this fin, basically they are saying to the world that 3d printing is now virtually limitless when it comes to metal.
I think there could be great economies in 3d printed turbines. Its like cars, the first one cost millions, the rest are for profit. Think of what goes into the process of making it. powdered metal, possibly shielding gasses, and possibly some coolant VS machining an incredibly complex part one facet at a time with hundreds of separate operations and man hours making the one thing. 3d printed plastic is almost total waste (unless its highly complex), and anything metal that can be stamped out would be a waste (so much of the auto world). The more complex the item is, the more likely they can make it profitable by 3d printing it. I see the turbine being something they could make good money on. That part is extremely complex, and would likely have been machined from some billet piece of metal. The one with the cooling design would have likely never been machined/ made without 3d.