This is Gasbag's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Gasbag's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
“If Nicola can get the H2 infrastructure built as they have described, ” They were supposed to have 50 H2 stations installed across the US by the end of 2019. With 0 technological road blocks how did that turn out? I haven’t seen any announcements giving an update on their status. Like the Badger it is probably nothing more than a press release.
“combined CO2 emissions: 164 – 153 g/km)” For ~$100,000 that is the best they can do? Is this really an example of the best diesel can offer? It may be impressive as a science project but I think the market will quickly pass judgement on this offering.
Obviously we’re =were. I’m not sure why auto incorrect felt compelled to intervene.
The CEO of PG&E when that call was made was formerly the chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute so he wasn’t someone who was squeamish about NP or someone who necessarily cared about fish and frogs. He cared about $$ as he is required by US law. They conservatively estimated they would save a billion+ $$ and subsequently have managed to have reduced the estimated closure costs by another billion. I be been around long enough to know that two billion dollars was a bigger. While it is true they are replacing a fraction of production that fraction is 20/23. They are comfortable doing that because their demand is decreasing. Moreover they have committed to reducing demand further by financing efficiency improvements well in excess of the net delta. You claimed CA couldn’t use more than 35% renewables without raising carbon footprint but PG&E has blown by 40% and eliminated coal and reduced NG by about half. How do you reconcile that with prior assertions? Would that four corners plant be Arizona’s Navajo Generating Station? If so it shutdown last year and doesn’t provide coal power to anyone anymore. When it did provide coal power to CA it went to SCE. SCE is coal free now also. We’re you thinking of Utah’s InterMountainnplant? It provides a fraction of one percent of CA electricity but it supplies that to LADWP. We’re you thinking of New Mexico’s San Juan Generating Station? It will stop supplying electricity to CA next year but it only has a CA contract with SDG&E not PG&E. That is it. There are only two coal plants remaining that supply CA and neither supplies PG&E.
“California is forcing the closure of Diablo Canyon” DC’s owner, PG&E, opted to close down DC early to save money. What SB1090 requires is that DC be replaced by carbon free or carbon neutral sources when it closes. PG&E’s power mix has included 0% coal for years and NG dropped from 20% in 2017 to 15% in 2018. Fossil fuels may soon be relegated to miscellaneous other as far as electricity generation goes. A couple things that nuclear power proponents rarely mention are the time and financial costs of NP. GA approved the application for Vogtle 3&4 back in 2003. It has been almost 20 years and neither unit is on line and they won’t be online this year or next. If you’re talking SMR in the US then your time frame is 2040. NuScale is probably the best hope for NP. They should be able to avoid the 3-5x cost overruns ala Vogtle and Hinkley C.
“eci, A 500 mile battery will be about 160 kwh. ” Obviously that depends on the vehicle. The Lightyear One should only need about 67 kWh, a TM3 about 115 kWh and a Chevy Bolt about 123kWh. An Etron should be able to get it done on 220 kWh. Since they are doubling or more the gravimetric density the first three vehicles would actually weigh less. One problem is that they are decreasing volumetric density so without altering the vehicle displacement they would have to compromise the cabin space. They don’t seem to mention price and typically cycle abilities are the challenge for Li S.
“PHEVs can be sized to average daily use, rather than maximum daily us” If BEVs were designed as multi pack vehicles with bays for standardized swappable packs then you wouldn’t have to choose. Moreover this would reduce the value/need for fast charging packs as well as degradation of fast charging. This approach would eliminate the substantial costs associated with TMS systems. Without any technical advancements this could make the initial cost of BEVs competitive with ICEVs, address the range issue, eliminate long refueling times, and dramatically reduce environmental impact.
If this is legit then it would mean sunset for ICE domination starts no later than 2023. This would be right about when FAVs are expected to make an impact.
Wow. There are probably half a dozen bounties in Northern California with more Plug-ins. I guess this equivalent of taking the first step in AAA.
“this battery can reach almost 500 Wh/kg” Is that what they are piloting or is that theoretical? They don’t appear to have quantified any of their purported benefits and gravimetric density wasn’t even listed.
“ vote for someone who will work to stop driving the auto plants offshore.” Anyone can say they are working to stop driving auto plants off shore just like they can say they alone can sole the opioid crisis and take on big pharma just like anyone can say they are working while they are playing golf. You can bet the workers in Lordstown will be voting for someone who supports policies which will promote their American made BEV trucks.
“They are being compelled by Government mandate to make BEVs, but it is obvious that they feel that fuel cells and hydrogen have a big part to play.” The government subsidies for FCEVs in SK were over the equivalent of $29,000 per vehicle! The government was paying millions for H2 stations. Free H2 stations! Reuter’s reported the downside of the 5-7 minute refueling meant the next vehicle would have to wait 20 minutes for pressure to build up. If that is so then you’re looking at about two vehicles per hour. The reality is that at this point FCEVs are being kept alive on subsidies. That is true in SK and CA but I don’t think that is necessarily a bad thing. It is good to have a backup plan and they are making adequate progress to justify life support. We can reEValuate in a couple years. In the meantime BEVs have demonstrated commercial viability in the premium markets but need to work their way down the food chain.
“s, it should be burned in gensets @40-45% electric efficiency and help with California's persistent rolling blackout problem!!!” Tell me more about this rolling blackout problem. I’m in CA and all of our blackouts have been due to fire, grid maintenance/upgrades, or precautionary due to weather events. In the short or midterm how does biogas help any of these?
I don’t know why semi platooning hasn’t been a bigger thing with the savings in driver cost easily exceeding the savings in fuel costs. This would seem to be low hanging fruit for any company in the FAV game. Looks like my 2017 prediction that this would be live in 2020 isn’t going to happen.
@sjc. There seems to be an echo. Try calling in again.
“Two large Chinese cities already have a total of over 3200 e-buses.” While your statement is correct I think you are missing a 0. Shenzhen alone has over 16,000 BEBs and that conversion took less than 5 years.
The remnants of the first in-car-nation of Fisker were purchased by Chinese auto parts company Wanxiang Group.
“10 miles / KwH is brilliant, way better than everyone else.” Way better than all others would cause concern about credibility. While there are still concerns that that can pull this off their targets are in line with what Lightyear One pulled off in the cruiser class of the world solar Challenge in their 5 seater. Also the Aptera One in their first go round was a four seater so you may yet find it useful.
“They test under wholly artificial lab conditions which do not remotely approach on the road use and then claim or imply that this has something to do with real world usage.” Try re-reading it. What they explicitly suggest is that the data presented be used in lifetime modeling. Implicit in their explicit suggestion is the acknowledgment that the lab results are not equivalent to real world results.
“Reason 1: Around 50% of cars in Europe have nowhere they could reasonably be plugged into at home” Around 100% of ICEVs in Europe have nowhere to reasonably refuel at home. It’s no big deal though. They can refuel elsewhere. Same for your estimated 50%. With a range that equates to recharging typically once every two weeks if they can’t recharge at work or elsewhere. 15 minutes a a fast charger gets you an average weeks worth of driving. “Reason 2: This costs a heck of a lot more than an ICE, rather disguised by subsidies.” I think you meant initial cost. At an equivalent of $6 per gallon it isn’t difficult to save a thousand dollars per year on fuel. More if you factor in maintenance. Over the average life span of the car we would expect the ID3 to actually Cost less. “Reason 3: You might not fancy either spending thousands for a new battery pack when the old one gets tired, or junking your car after 10 years or so.” You might not fancy spending thousands on a new motor for an ICEV when the old one gets tired either. People deal with it. The good news is battery prices are dropping rapidly while batteries are getting improving VAG expects 3 million vehicles per year based on the MEB platform. With that volume in 10 years you should be able to upgrade the battery pack to contemporary-tech At a fraction of the price or sell your car.
I believe 16GWh would be Northvolt’s largest contract and would be adequate for 200k 80kWh vehicles or 400,000 40kWh vehicles. They do have other suppliers; “they [VAG] issued battery supply contracts worth $48 billion with existing battery manufacturers. The contracts are estimated to be for about 300 GWh of battery cells. VW split those billions worth of contracts between several companies: Samsung SDI, LG Chem , SK Innovation, and CATL.”
“No special treatment for Tesla” Tesla absolutely is getting special treatment as in mistreatment. What is absurd is the notion that a government agency is going to help expedite improvements in AP. There is a race with tremendous financial rewards to whichever company is first. NHTSA’s objective is in fact to slow down improvements via harassment.
“Are we (as a society) better off using batteries in stationary storage or vehicles ?” We will be better off putting batteries in vehicles, adding intelligence to the grid, and incenting a fraction of that capacity to be available for grid storage. This would enable cheap intermittent power sources to dominate the grid.
“However, it isn't that complicated in aggregate,” That is absurd. 20% of all US plugins are sold in Northern California and we get 0% of our electricity from coal. ~50% of all US plugins are sold in California and we get ~4.1% of our electricity from coal. In a few months it will drop to 1.7% and in 2021, when this takes effect, we will be down to 0.6% from coal. And all of those numbers are actually probably high by 10% because none of them factor in behind the meter solar. if I drive 15,000 miles per year I might save up to a tank and a half of gas? Theses MH press releases always seem to confirm the hopelessness of mild-hybrid approach.