This is Dollared's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Dollared's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
No mention of lighter weight or better fuel efficiency.....
This is the Navy at work, creating another incredibly expensive target for relatively cheap missiles to destroy.
DaveD I think I understand your point but just to be clear, nobody is using ultracaps in hybrids right now, correct? How far away from general usage is the ultracap technology? The 3600 lb curb weight of the Ford C Max Hybrid is due to batteries, IIRC.
Thanks guys. I agree. This really seems like the sub-$1000, sub 100kg (with rear drive assembly), zero rare earths, solution to mass hybridization.
What PeterXX said. Why does this method lag so far behind electric hybridization, when it sure seems like it might be nearly as effective, far less expensive, require less vehicle weight and complex battery manufacture?
This is great news. This is the no 1 LDV in the US. a 25% improvement in mileage obtained by this single vehicle will generate a measurable improvement in the entire US LDV MPG. And Ford is really jumping in with both feet, with a new frame, radically new body, and not one but two new higher efficiency engines. This is far more impactful than any electric vehicle, or for that matter all electric vehicles put together
Harvey, think Prius V. Or Mazda 5. I want this car, with the 2.2 diesel. All I want is a seven passenger vehicle with good road manners and 35 MPG HWY. But somehow the Free Market system has decided I can't have that, even though everyone in South America, Europe and Asia can buy one. Funny that.
none of those matter compared to the basic supply/demand problem of caused by immigration and outsourcing, and the viciousness of the MBA class, which has driven working conditions to the point where people would rather leave the labor market than work split shifts at minimum wage.
1 reply
MajonJ, I saw that and was, well, surprised but willing to be convinced. How does enhanced electrification of non drive systems produce 15% fuel economy gain?
It's all about the cost, and about incentives. A full sized pickup or SUV (15 MPG) consumes US$40,000 worth of fuel in a 150,000 mile life. 5% of that is $2000. There could be maintenance costs that cut into the benefit, and we know that the first purchaser of a vehicle does not get 100% of the lifetime fuel savings, and finally there is the time value of money. But if the installed cost is below $400, you have to believe there is a business case for this.
I understand this is a good development. But how on earth does a bit more robust electrical system deliver 13% greater fuel efficiency? Some days the efficiency hucksterism starts to taste like medicinal radium.
What Mahonj said. 300 watts for a $3.00 bundle of parts could allow you to downsize your alternator, reduce the driving load by those 300 watts. Remember that 2% gas savings @20MPG and $4.00 gas, for 100,000 miles, is $400 saved.
And they are less than 10% apart, and the Ford has much better performance.
But you can see the endgame in Europe now. Vehicles there are underpowered but getting 50 MPG Hwy, even by US EPA standards. Now cut vehicle weight by 10% over the next 5-7 years, and increase HP/torque by 15-20% over that same period, and you get 5 passenger compact cars that are 50 MPG hwy, 40+mpg combined, and 0-60 in 9 seconds. Totally acceptable in US. The real challenge is the light truck category.....Europe won't help with that.
Ah, but the cheap route is to go up the Fox River from Green Bay, up through Lake Winnebago, and from there up the Fox again to the marsh at the town called (wait for it) Portage. At the other end of the marsh you exit to a tributary of the Wisconsin River, which flows to the Mississippi. Problem solved, with minimal canal digging!
1 reply
"Overall, the NanoSteel BIW design generated a 30% weight savings of 100 kg/220 lb over the baseline vehicle. This also represents an 10.5% improvement of 27 kg/60 lb over the NHTSA LWV’s BIW." What's really interesting about that is how little the body in white weight matters. 220lb is less than 10% weight reduction in the overall vehicle (baseline Honda Accord type, probably about 3200-3400lb). Note that Hyundai and Mazda appear to be achieving this kind of weight reduction already. It is going to be really, really, really hard to achieve 25% weight reduction in an Accord. OTOH, 500lb less in a Ford F-150 would really help......
It's hard to believe this isn't the #1 engineering priority at Ford. The F-150 is the #1 selling US vehicle. It currently gets less than half the mileage it will need to get by 2020, even with the V-6. They have to get a strong V-6 diesel and a ~25-27MPG combined hybrid on the market and proving itself, or Ford's penalties will equal the GDP of Denmark.
Davemart, seems like the killer scale application is stationary home cogen, which would require 1)operating on natural gas and/or propane; and 2) a home heating mechanism (heat exchanger/fan or water heater/circulation system). Is it possible to use the Acal system in this way?
Trevor, agreed! It is incredible that the US doesn't have a seven passenger micro van like the Opel, VW or Ford vehicles in Europe. It would be great to have the Mazda 5 upgraded - Skyactiv G or D engines would make that vehicle the most efficient transport in the US.
Where will it be available? Release date? Link to release?
KitP other peoples' problems are exactly the reason why we need regulation, or accurate pricing of externalities. DaveD does have exactly the same right to go outside and breathe that ejj does to burn petroleum products. Those are two freedoms and they conflict. Government or another agency are required to mediate between them. That's life Kit.
Why don't these questions need to be asked, D? How much should venture capitalists and energy companies spend on algae fuels R&D? A lot or a little? Aren't they glad now that they have a survey of the likely maximum of production so they can forecast a best case scenario? If I were a capitalist I would love to have that information. And no algae startup would have the resources to fund it. So it seems like government is helping business here.
This kind of exercise is useful. the real conclusion: algae may be interesting, but it will never be more than 1-3% of the energy supply picture.
Peter K, then did you do "the thing to do?" Or did you bravely advocate the stupidest military adventure in US history? And what say you today? Are you glad we did it? If so, how do you propose we pay for it?
1 reply
Amen, Harvey. What happened to this company? 3-4 years ago they had a great lead in advanced PbC batteries, and the possible applications were many. Now what?