This is ai_vin's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following ai_vin's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
I'm not a Quebecer so this doesn't effect me and as I live on the west coast cold weather range isn't that big of an issue. My problem is different - I need my BEV "toad" capable. For those who don't know, a toad is a car you tow behind a RV with all 4 wheels on the ground. A Tesla can't be towed like that, it has to be put on a trailer. Get into an accident and you have to call a flatbed. Other EVs can only be towed with the driven wheels on a dolly.
There is no reason why these CNG buses can't run on renewable natural gas; Many of the city's vehicles already do.
Robotic arm nothing! Knowing Musk the truck will transform and stand up like Optimus Prime to hand over its own papers.
Thomas, please reread the article. "The mid-size van is thus suited for city-center use by delivery companies, tradespeople and public transport providers." If it stays on city streets why would it need to go faster? OTOH, the customer can choose between two options in top speed: "If more speed is needed, the customer can choose a top speed of up to 120 km/h (75 mph)."
On the semi's 500 miles range: At 70 m/h (interstate speed) that's a 7 hour shift right there. Let's give the driver a 1/2 hour break to eat at a recharge station and the truck's got it's range boosted back up to 400 miles. There's another 5.7 hours.
@ eci Where does it say the pickup would have a solo driver's position? Musk said his pickup would be big enough to carry another pickup: The track width of an F150 is 67 inches ball park, center to center of tire so add say another 8 inches for wheel width so 75 inches between the Tesla’s wheel wells would work. The box would need to be 80 inches on the inside above the wheel wells to fit the F150 body width. With that much width to work with where's no need for a central driving position and you could have 3 people side-by-side up front easily.
With all of the hoopla surrounding Tesla’s new semi-truck, not to mention the surprise unveiling of a next-gen Roadster, it was easy to miss Elon Musk show off the first official renderings of Tesla’s long-rumored pickup truck. During the special media event, Musk briefly showed crowd attendees a somewhat odd concept of a pickup truck big enough to carry a traditionally sized pickup truck. As Musk intimated, the design is essentially a mini version of the Tesla Semi with 4 wheels instead of the semi's 6, meaning it would not need a truck drivers license. Also Musk has tweeted the pickup could be the base for a cargo van. I would go for one of those, it would make for a great Class B motorhome.
What gets me is that Lamborghini is yet another member of the Volkswagen Group. "Volkswagen" means "People's car" in German. Since when do the people get to drive a Lambo?
But Capitalism SHOULD be about global this and people that because even when a company isn't thinking about the costs they are externalizing SOMEBODY has to pay them. I'm all for more organizations adopting the triple bottom line framework to evaluate their performance in a broader perspective to create greater business value.
The idea that diesels have a lower CO2 output than gasoline comes from their higher efficiency. But the numbers don't include the output of carbon black. In todays "clean diesels" CB is caught by particulate traps, and burnt off outside the engine. Question: what does carbon black become when it's burnt off? CO2 perhaps?
Yes sd, the amount of renewable energy is about 8.4 % in the United States while nuclear is about 20 %. But that's only part of the story. RE is very new and hasn't had the advantages fossil & nuclear have - until recently. Some forms of RE are now at price parity and their grid mix, which stared from nearly 0 only a few years ago, is growing fast. But nuclear, which we've had for 50+ years, has been sitting at 20 % for how long?
I'm just going to put this out there in the 'let's not reinvent the wheel' folder. There is a company in England; that makes hybrid light rail trains which uses station stops for recharging and flywheels for energy storage. In urban zones, with their closely spaced stops, the trams have zero emission operation. And on longer runs with fewer stops the much smaller engine can still use low carbon fuels like propane, CNG, hydrogen, etc.
What I'd like to see is a PHEV Transit with the long wheel base & high roof. It could be outfitted like a RV and the battery could also be used for house power. A battery with a 30 mile range would make for weeks of boondocking.
I could use this. And yes Harvey, there is room for more batteries: These vans have a spare wheel under the floor between the rear axle and bumper. That could be hung on one of the back doors and a battery pack put in its place. That would bump the electric range up to 80 km easily.
That car is a beautiful work of art, and like other artworks it should be put on display BUT not on the road. Stop giving us eye-candy you nitwits, you're wasting time.
All I know is what I read;
There is another way to reduce NOx and it can be retrofitted to any diesel: Propane fumigation. The reason Diesels produce so much NOx is that they run oxygen rich at high temps. Adding propane takes some of the O2 out of the equation. Running a diesel on a 50/50 mix of diesel/propane can reduce NOx by 50% and because propane is a low carbon fuel it can also reduce CO2 by 10%. Additionally, it reduces soot.
"Although fuel cells have been used in many successful applications, they have not been technically or commercially validated in the port environment." Fuel cells work by combining O2, taken directly from the local air, with H2 stored in a tank. Air in a marine environment, like a port, contains stuff not normally found inland. Stuff like salt. I imagine that might not be good to have passing through a fuel cell. Getting proper validation is a prudent step.
I take exception to calling this "refinery Offgas-to-Bioethanol production." It doesn't matter if they are using "biological catalysts to make fuels and chemicals" if the feed-stocks are from fossil fuels, as the off-gas from refineries and steel production would be. Catalysts are not consumed in any process so just the use of biological catalysts would not make the end product "bio."
I just found this; It explains the chemistry of NOX production in diesels - among other things.
E-P & Juan have the right of it. Studies have shown a plug-in with 100 mile range can cover 90% of the average driver's needs and 75% of drivers average less than 40 miles a day. Save the biofuel for the range extender engines.
And for those of you who like watching youtube the waterless robot cleaner is here;
At Ketura Sun, a large commercial solar field in Israel, the solar panels are being cleaned in a unique way: by robots. That's not the most unique part. These robots don't use any water in the cleaning process, making them a great match for the Negev desert where the solar plant is located. Even better, the robots could go a long way toward making solar power plants less dependent on water. According to Gizmag, the Ecoppia E4 robots are "mounted on a frame that moves laterally along the panels and the robots themselves move up and down the panels. They use a rotating brush made up of soft microfiber in conjunction with air blowers to remove what Ecoppia says is 99 percent of dust build-up." No water required.
E-P, The liquid nitrogen market size was USD 12.48 Billion in 2015. At 50 cents per gallon that's about 25 billion gallons. So the amount of CO2 the industry could remove is what? 13 million gallons???
CO2 removal would also be a consequence of plants that supply liquid O2 and/or N2.