"That seems a curious statement since all fuel cell vehicle projects of which I am aware ARE electric vehicles. "
not curious at all. Started as fuel cell as primary electric power source, and now leaning to EV relying on batteries to supply juice which you plug in for the most part with a small charging engine of various mode..fuel cell probably being off in the distance if at all.
People who think EV's may be a big part of the future transportation, at least near term future, have been called ingorant, fanatical, deluded dreamers by some on this board. Well, those deluded fanatical dreamers over at a little company called GM are in the game now.
I believe Toyota (or whomever) will be able to handle all those deluded dreamers at GM, if and when they bail out that (almost) bankrupt company, and set it on a firm financial footing...
Maybe Toyota could use GM as the production arm of their Hybrid line!
A plug in hybrid would be almost as good as an ev for reducing oil usage. Good for toyota if they can pull it off. perhaps Toyota will get so good at the electric end of the hybrid, that they come to similar thinking as the gm representative.
A plug in hybrid would be almost as good as an ev for reducing oil usage. Good for toyota if they can pull it off.
I agree, to an extent. For a good percentage of the driving public that typically makes short trips a PHEV would essentially be a BEV. So in terms of oil usage it would provide the same benefits. Where I disagree, a little, is that I think this potential would best be exploited with a serial hybrid. It's clearly less complicated and should be less expensive. Unless I'm mistaken that isn't what Toyota is pursuing.
I agree with what you say. I also believe that if GM starts to get a leg up with a SHEV, you can be sure that Toyota will adjust course rather quickly to compete. You can bet that the execs at Toyota are reviewing GM's strategy around the table as we speak. But who can say, maybe Toyota will maintain the early tech lead they have. Just throwing a little bone to those who worship at the feet of TMC.
Has anyone actually stated that they would be producing a series hybrid as opposed to a parallel hybrid? Just wondering since it seems to me that the better implementation would be to go for a smaller more efficient engine that's just large enough to charge the batteries and have a larger more efficient electric motor to motivate the vehicle. I sure hope that Toyota isn't too stuck on their current solution with just putting in bigger batteries. The engine could kick in when the batteries are down to around 10% capacity and cycle to keep the battery to between 10% & 25% capacity. Leaving the battery in a lower level of recharge by the engine would seem to be a good way to reinforce that the battery really should be plugged in to recharge it.
And a good way to assure that you replace batteries sooner. It's a trade off of battery life for energy cost, which given the extreme cost of batteries does not seem a good idea.
Not sure we have much information on particulars. AS far as I know there isn't one scheduled for production as of now.
Would the car have an engine large enough to keep it working at reasonable performance after the battery gets to the kick in level for the ICE? That might well be what GM is aiming for. Another possibility would be a smaller engine that kicks in and just extend the range...then when the car is parked it could act as a portable charger.
Improved storage batteries (or capaciters) that would give longer range and charge quickly could make the serial concept largely obsolete pretty fast. We'll see how it all plays out.
It was Agnew, the guy who gave us "nattering nabobs of negativity," and "pusillanimous pussyfooters." But he had a great (wickedly great) speechwriter -- Pat Buchanan.
>> Some environmental activists also seemed intrigued by the idea, noting that although it is not a ''pure'' electric vehicle like the battery-powered EV1, a generator-driven hybrid electric car still would consume far less fuel than a vehicle that relied on a larger, thirstier gasoline or diesel engine for propulsion.
''We shouldn't make 'perfect' the enemy of 'good,''' said Roland Hwang, Berkeley, Calif.-based vehicle policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. GM ''apparently recognizes that it is falling behind in the race for a piece of the 'green' vehicle market and needs something it can get out there and sell in substantial numbers.''
The new car, if developed as a production model, would be recharged daily by owners and probably would deliver sufficient power from the batteries to cover the typical daily commute of 20 to 30 miles before depleting the battery charge and switching to electricity generated on-board.
It could be plugged into a home-charging unit or into a publicly available recharger such as those deployed around California at shopping centers and public facilities when the EV1 and other electric vehicles were on the road in the late 1990shttp://www.mcall.com/business/local/all-electricnov10,0,4831492.story?track=rss
I so hope that the auto manufacturers will have options for us to vary the distance available for operating in battery only mode. I know that I would want to have sufficient battery capacity to allow a 60 mile daily commute so that I could utilize electric only mode as much as possible.
20-30 is pretty sparce, isn't it? Still, 20 x 365 = 7300. In a lot of cases that would reduce ICE mileage by half. Hopefully, something better will come along.
Agreed. You know, I would expect that it would sure be a loss to a manufacturer to not have someone purchase their vehicle if they normally would given a choice. I know that I would probably be willing to accept some compromises in order to ensure being able to have a long enough driving range.
I imagine that the driving range is also factor of driving time. I'm thinking that those that don't have as far to drive, but are stuck in traffic for long periods, would feel much better knowing that they had sufficient electric capacity to cover sitting in traffic for a couple of hours (possibly with a need to have the heat on, wipers, window defoggers & deicers, etc).
sufficient electric capacity to cover sitting in traffic for a couple of hours (possibly with a need to have the heat on, wipers, window defoggers & deicers, etc).
That will be a real challenge for the EV. Less so for the hybrids with ICE backup. A straight electric vehicle is going to be limited for heat and AC capability. They will be best suited for mild climates at first.
A straight electric vehicle is going to be limited for heat and AC capability. They will be best suited for mild climates at first.
That's another reason, on the growing list, of why a serial hybrid seems to be a good interim solution until we have an acceptable EV only alternative. I wonder if anyone would be able to put together some calculations that would show how much battery would be acceptable to have in a serial hybrid before reaching the point of diminishing returns; e.g. too much weight to carry around?
points taken. if you are literally sitting in traffic, the motor should draw no current. you of course would have to deal with cabin temp control and the other things you metioned. Looks like the GMs, Hondas and Toys of the world are with the traditional model of having cars that you can fill up conveniently so there are no range limitations. Guys like mitsubishi and Tesla and a few others will have to carry the banner for cars that sacrifice range for a simplified electric drive.
"Guys like mitsubishi and Tesla and a few others will have to carry the banner for cars that sacrifice range for a simplified electric drive."
The difference is whether one wishes to develop a specialty product for a niche market rather than compete with existing products in an established market. To capture an existing market, you must do what existing products do and do it better and/or cheaper.
Actually, the early Hondas captured a segment of the existing market that had been satisfied by small European cars. They provided similar performance and utility and were more reliable.
If I remember correctly the first Hondas in this country (prior to Civic) were 2 seaters or had a non-functional back seat. Whether or not some European manufacturers already offered vehicles of this size is irrelevant. What was the market share for this type of vehicle? Then tell me what your definition of niche market is? My definition of niche is a very small, specific subset of the entire market. In that case the early Hondas definitely qualified.
Also when Hondas, Toyotas, and Datsuns first came to this country they didn't have a reputation for greater reliability. In fact the phrase "made in Japan" was at the time a reference to poor quality. It was only over time that their vehicles earned this reputation
The safety and emission regulations imposed in 1968 and later caused the elimination of many European products (e.g. Morris Mini). The Japanese filled that void with products that were more reliable regardless whether they had that reputation in the US. The repution for quality and reliability grew quickly and was well established by the early '70s.
Perhaps I should have been more specific to differentiate a NEW niche from an existing one. On the one hand, you are competing for established demand, even if small. On the other, you are attempting to create a NEW niche.
Not too much in the way of details in this article but another indication of where things are heading. Skeptics will claim EVs have been tried before and failed. There is a fundamental difference this time. The automaker's were forced to produce the last round of EVs and they fought this legislation from day one. They are now voluntarily and, IMO, aggresively pursuing this technology.
I feel that one of the limitations imposed by the previous generation of EV's was due to the unique recharging station requirement. It seems like the manufacturers may have learned from this earlier mistake and will adopt a standard which includes allowing recharging from a standard 110 or 220 outlet (preferably both); perhaps in addition to a higher capability unit (which I hope can be standardized and adopted by all for the purpose of public high-capacity recharging).
The simplicity of the infrastructure is definitely one of the Pros for EVs. Most people will do the vast majority of their re-charging at home, at night, when the utilities have plenty of spare capacity and energy is cheaper. For the occasional long trip that exceeds your battery's capacity there will be high-speed recharging stations located at rest stops along the highways. Parking lots will probably offer a few spaces where a person can plug-in while at work, shopping, or whatever. I imagine these would typically be metered where you would deposit a certain amount of money and a corresponding amount of power would be dispensed.
The eBox has a 140-180 mile range on a Lithium Ion battery pack (comprised of 5,300 18650 Li-Ion cells), accelerates 0-60mph in under 7 seconds, has an electronically limited top speed of 90mph, and is propelled by a 120kW AC Propulsion drivetrain. The power steering and air conditioning are fully functional. The Scion air conditioning system was left completely intact and the compressor is now driven by an accessory electric motor selected by AC Propulsion. I was seriously impressed how quiet the air conditioning system was while operating.
************* A couple of people asked if AC Propulsion is taking orders. Gage explained that for $55,000, AC Propulsion will convert a customer's xB to an eBox. Drivetrain parts and installation labor are included in this price. Nobody grabbed for a checkbook immediately, but Earl Cox asked Gage what it took to get on the list. "$10,000 and an xB gets you in the queue," Gage replied.
Later, Gage told me that he was confident that AC Propulsion could bring materials costs down dramatically if a major auto manufacturer committed to installing the eBox drivetrain in on or more of its vehicles. "At 50,000 to 100,000 units manufactured per year, we could bring materials costs down to a retail price equivalent of $10,000 per drivetrain."
I'd seen that conversion Scion before. It's impressive from the perspective that it demonstrates what EVs are capable of. On the other hand I'm not a big fan of conversions. I think an EV needs to be developed and manufactured from the ground up in order to take full advantage of its unique characteristics. Not to mention the wasted money of basically chucking all the ICE stuff that you've already paid for. I like the skateboard design that is being pursued where you have this flat platform, like a skateboard, that has all the batteries and other components laid across it. It's a very modular design that can support many body styles.
I think AC Propulsion http://www.acpropulsion.com/ and companies like that are the way of the future. EV's are to ICE cars are what the modern GE locomotive is to the Steam Engine. The technology is just beginning to show what can be done. I view the cost as if prototypes are being made. I am sure if GM only made a thousand cars of one model the cost would be more than the E Box. For the nay-sayers, packages could be available for home owners where solar power could charge batteries during the daylight adding no burden on the current utility system. There is even the possibility of using Vehicle to Grid capacity reducing the load on the Power Grid.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge EV proponent. I also realize that AC Propulsion is a cutting edge company in this field. I'm just a little opposed to conversions because they started out as ICEs and can't be as good as an EV designed and built from the ground up.
I believe that Tesla Motors had to pay AC Propulsions a significant licensing fee for using similar motors in their revolutionary Roadster.
As far as the solar and V2G stuff you mentioned, I'm 100% on board. Let's cut the oil industry and OPEC completely out of the loop.
I agree. The conversions are not as good a use of resources. A car designed from the ground up as electric would be better. I also think that it will take a while for people to become accustomed to little or no front air intake area and other design factors. CIGS Solar panels could also change the future as they could make it economically feasible to charge your car from solar power at home, but that would be a different discussion.
CIGS Solar panels could also change the future as they could make it economically feasible to charge your car from solar power at home, but that would be a different discussion.
Its not really a different discussion. One of the main arguments against EVs is that they are merely transferring the pollution from the tailpipe to the powerplant. Electricity at least has the potential to be generated in a non-polluting way. That can't be said for burning gasoline.
It's impressive from the perspective that it demonstrates what EVs are capable of
Yes, part of the problem was getting A product out there so folks can see what can be done. Though Tesla is hardly a "car company," what they have done so far is to generate buzz and expand peoples thinking as to what is possible. I see no harm in as many players as possible. If a conversion company comes up with one componant in the chain for a practical EV, then it will most likely be licensed or bought by larger fish...the major car companies.
Seculating on conversions....if someone has a car they like that is on its last legs ICE wise, it might be possible to convert it over if batteries and componants come down in price. I suppose weight might be a limiting factor..but..how about that old celica being converted to EV..might get some play if the cost were 10-15k...maybe?
I do agree that mass production will have to come from a ground up or at least a tweeked at factory car...like Mitsubishi is reported to be doing with the Colt.
I think most of the EVs on the road today are probably converted junkers. So there wasn't much waste involved. This AC Propulsion conversion is a Scion, a fairly new vehicle.
The Phoenix Motorcar SUT (sport utility truck) should be on the road before the Tesla, early 2007. At $45k and the ability to seat 5 it will have a more practical appeal. The first ones will be sold for fleet usage but the rest of us will still get to see real world capabilities. It's definitely an exciting time if you're an EV enthusiast.
range estimates were 100+ with another part of the page stating 130. Kind of marginal...but a ten minute charge! Apparently have to use 220 though. Less accessible and more dangerous. Fleet users should love it.
45k is still a bit expensive...but if it can go 200k+ miles on one battery pack requiring next to no upkeep...wow, that is starting to look pretty darn good in terms of real cost.
almost to the stage of computers...do you buy one now..or buy one a year or two later and get a better model for cheaper?
the other day I saw a guy from the Rocky mountain institute talking about a composite material that is stronger, much lighter and costs about the same in terms of real world usage as steel.
but a ten minute charge! Apparently have to use 220 though
Unfortunately that 10 minute re-charge cannot be accomplished on even a 220 outlet. I'd guess that would be little over 3 hours for the full 35 kWh charge. Probably the only way you could ever accomplish this 10 minute re-charge at home is if you had an additional set of altairnano batteries that were charged at a slower rate but could be quickly discharged into your vehicles battery pack. That would be very expensive. Regardless, the need for a quick re-charge will only arise on long trips. Long trips almost always involve driving on a major highway so this is where specialized charging stations would be located. A relatively small infrastructure investment compared to what would be required to support hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. BTW, they are already installing charging stations on the streets of London. They are experiencing a significant growth in the use of short range electric city cars.
I agree that $45k is still pretty expensive and would preclude wide-spread acceptance at the present time. But its close enough where you get the sense that this is doable. Especially when you consider that this is based on small volume and a battery pack that probably makes up $25k of the total amount. Your analogy to computers is valid. The early adopters will be paying a high premium but rapid advancements and price declines should follow. If I was to venture a guess I'd say that by around 2012 EVs will be an attractive option for a good percentage of American motorists.
That definitely is a lot. Even at 440 volts you'd need 500 amps to achieve 35 kWh in 10 minutes. Altairnano will be coming out with a 70 kWh battery pack that they say can also be charged in 10 minutes, so double the amps. It can be done and I'm sure safely but the system will require some sort of cooling feature so its not the kind of thing your likely to see in a person's home. No big deal because if most of your re-charging is done at night while asleep who cares whether it takes 10 minutes or several hours.
Comments
not curious at all. Started as fuel cell as primary electric power source, and now leaning to EV relying on batteries to supply juice which you plug in for the most part with a small charging engine of various mode..fuel cell probably being off in the distance if at all.
People who think EV's may be a big part of the future transportation, at least near term future, have been called ingorant, fanatical, deluded dreamers by some on this board. Well, those deluded fanatical dreamers over at a little company called GM are in the game now.
Maybe Toyota could use GM as the production arm of their Hybrid line!
:P
:shades:
I agree, to an extent. For a good percentage of the driving public that typically makes short trips a PHEV would essentially be a BEV. So in terms of oil usage it would provide the same benefits. Where I disagree, a little, is that I think this potential would best be exploited with a serial hybrid. It's clearly less complicated and should be less expensive. Unless I'm mistaken that isn't what Toyota is pursuing.
Hadn't been a post on the Tesla board in a month until the moderator just posted.
terry92270, "Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars" #264, 9 Nov 2006 1:48 pm
http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_03/pr2901.htm
Here, save yourself a couple bucks.
http://www.amazon.com/Remote-Control-Spinner-Lexus-IS300/dp/B000GT7UJ4/sr=8-12/q- id=1163133472/ref=sr_1_12/102-8391268-1961741?ie=UTF8&s=toys-and-games
The engine could kick in when the batteries are down to around 10% capacity and cycle to keep the battery to between 10% & 25% capacity. Leaving the battery in a lower level of recharge by the engine would seem to be a good way to reinforce that the battery really should be plugged in to recharge it.
Would the car have an engine large enough to keep it working at reasonable performance after the battery gets to the kick in level for the ICE? That might well be what GM is aiming for. Another possibility would be a smaller engine that kicks in and just extend the range...then when the car is parked it could act as a portable charger.
Improved storage batteries (or capaciters) that would give longer range and charge quickly could make the serial concept largely obsolete pretty fast. We'll see how it all plays out.
WAIT! There is a serial hybrid in production!
http://www.hybrid-vehicle.org/serial-hybrid.html">
EVs are the future, get with the program.
He still, however, hasn't lost his edge.
EVs in some form may be part of the future, but not without acknowledging reality and dealing with it. Wishing won't make it so!
>> Some environmental activists also seemed intrigued by the idea, noting that although it is not a ''pure'' electric vehicle like the battery-powered EV1, a generator-driven hybrid electric car still would consume far less fuel than a vehicle that relied on a larger, thirstier gasoline or diesel engine for propulsion.
''We shouldn't make 'perfect' the enemy of 'good,''' said Roland Hwang, Berkeley, Calif.-based vehicle policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. GM ''apparently recognizes that it is falling behind in the race for a piece of the 'green' vehicle market and needs something it can get out there and sell in substantial numbers.''
The new car, if developed as a production model, would be recharged daily by owners and probably would deliver sufficient power from the batteries to cover the typical daily commute of 20 to 30 miles before depleting the battery charge and switching to electricity generated on-board.
It could be plugged into a home-charging unit or into a publicly available recharger such as those deployed around California at shopping centers and public facilities when the EV1 and other electric vehicles were on the road in the late 1990s http://www.mcall.com/business/local/all-electricnov10,0,4831492.story?track=rss
I imagine that the driving range is also factor of driving time. I'm thinking that those that don't have as far to drive, but are stuck in traffic for long periods, would feel much better knowing that they had sufficient electric capacity to cover sitting in traffic for a couple of hours (possibly with a need to have the heat on, wipers, window defoggers & deicers, etc).
That will be a real challenge for the EV. Less so for the hybrids with ICE backup. A straight electric vehicle is going to be limited for heat and AC capability. They will be best suited for mild climates at first.
That's another reason, on the growing list, of why a serial hybrid seems to be a good interim solution until we have an acceptable EV only alternative. I wonder if anyone would be able to put together some calculations that would show how much battery would be acceptable to have in a serial hybrid before reaching the point of diminishing returns; e.g. too much weight to carry around?
Should be an interesting next few years.
The difference is whether one wishes to develop a specialty product for a niche market rather than compete with existing products in an established market. To capture an existing market, you must do what existing products do and do it better and/or cheaper.
Also when Hondas, Toyotas, and Datsuns first came to this country they didn't have a reputation for greater reliability. In fact the phrase "made in Japan" was at the time a reference to poor quality. It was only over time that their vehicles earned this reputation
Not too much in the way of details in this article but another indication of where things are heading. Skeptics will claim EVs have been tried before and failed. There is a fundamental difference this time. The automaker's were forced to produce the last round of EVs and they fought this legislation from day one. They are now voluntarily and, IMO, aggresively pursuing this technology.
The eBox has a 140-180 mile range on a Lithium Ion battery pack (comprised of 5,300 18650 Li-Ion cells), accelerates 0-60mph in under 7 seconds, has an electronically limited top speed of 90mph, and is propelled by a 120kW AC Propulsion drivetrain. The power steering and air conditioning are fully functional. The Scion air conditioning system was left completely intact and the compressor is now driven by an accessory electric motor selected by AC Propulsion. I was seriously impressed how quiet the air conditioning system was while operating.
http://www.stefanoparis.com/piaev/acpropulsion/eBox/ebox.html
*************
A couple of people asked if AC Propulsion is taking orders. Gage explained that for $55,000, AC Propulsion will convert a customer's xB to an eBox. Drivetrain parts and installation labor are included in this price. Nobody grabbed for a checkbook immediately, but Earl Cox asked Gage what it took to get on the list. "$10,000 and an xB gets you in the queue," Gage replied.
Later, Gage told me that he was confident that AC Propulsion could bring materials costs down dramatically if a major auto manufacturer committed to installing the eBox drivetrain in on or more of its vehicles. "At 50,000 to 100,000 units manufactured per year, we could bring materials costs down to a retail price equivalent of $10,000 per drivetrain."
http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&archive=1&storyid=1084&first=523- 2&end=5231
Tough to justify paying that much for an EV Scion, but still, another step in the right direction.
I believe that Tesla Motors had to pay AC Propulsions a significant licensing fee for using similar motors in their revolutionary Roadster.
As far as the solar and V2G stuff you mentioned, I'm 100% on board. Let's cut the oil industry and OPEC completely out of the loop.
Its not really a different discussion. One of the main arguments against EVs is that they are merely transferring the pollution from the tailpipe to the powerplant. Electricity at least has the potential to be generated in a non-polluting way. That can't be said for burning gasoline.
Yes, part of the problem was getting A product out there so folks can see what can be done. Though Tesla is hardly a "car company," what they have done so far is to generate buzz and expand peoples thinking as to what is possible. I see no harm in as many players as possible. If a conversion company comes up with one componant in the chain for a practical EV, then it will most likely be licensed or bought by larger fish...the major car companies.
Seculating on conversions....if someone has a car they like that is on its last legs ICE wise, it might be possible to convert it over if batteries and componants come down in price. I suppose weight might be a limiting factor..but..how about that old celica being converted to EV..might get some play if the cost were 10-15k...maybe?
I do agree that mass production will have to come from a ground up or at least a tweeked at factory car...like Mitsubishi is reported to be doing with the Colt.
The Phoenix Motorcar SUT (sport utility truck) should be on the road before the Tesla, early 2007. At $45k and the ability to seat 5 it will have a more practical appeal. The first ones will be sold for fleet usage but the rest of us will still get to see real world capabilities. It's definitely an exciting time if you're an EV enthusiast.
http://www.phoenixmotorcars.com/
looks like the altair nano battery was for real.
range estimates were 100+ with another part of the page stating 130. Kind of marginal...but a ten minute charge! Apparently have to use 220 though. Less accessible and more dangerous. Fleet users should love it.
45k is still a bit expensive...but if it can go 200k+ miles on one battery pack requiring next to no upkeep...wow, that is starting to look pretty darn good in terms of real cost.
almost to the stage of computers...do you buy one now..or buy one a year or two later and get a better model for cheaper?
the other day I saw a guy from the Rocky mountain institute talking about a composite material that is stronger, much lighter and costs about the same in terms of real world usage as steel.
Exciting times!
Unfortunately that 10 minute re-charge cannot be accomplished on even a 220 outlet. I'd guess that would be little over 3 hours for the full 35 kWh charge. Probably the only way you could ever accomplish this 10 minute re-charge at home is if you had an additional set of altairnano batteries that were charged at a slower rate but could be quickly discharged into your vehicles battery pack. That would be very expensive. Regardless, the need for a quick re-charge will only arise on long trips. Long trips almost always involve driving on a major highway so this is where specialized charging stations would be located. A relatively small infrastructure investment compared to what would be required to support hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. BTW, they are already installing charging stations on the streets of London. They are experiencing a significant growth in the use of short range electric city cars.
I agree that $45k is still pretty expensive and would preclude wide-spread acceptance at the present time. But its close enough where you get the sense that this is doable. Especially when you consider that this is based on small volume and a battery pack that probably makes up $25k of the total amount. Your analogy to computers is valid. The early adopters will be paying a high premium but rapid advancements and price declines should follow. If I was to venture a guess I'd say that by around 2012 EVs will be an attractive option for a good percentage of American motorists.
That definitely is a lot. Even at 440 volts you'd need 500 amps to achieve 35 kWh in 10 minutes. Altairnano will be coming out with a 70 kWh battery pack that they say can also be charged in 10 minutes, so double the amps. It can be done and I'm sure safely but the system will require some sort of cooling feature so its not the kind of thing your likely to see in a person's home. No big deal because if most of your re-charging is done at night while asleep who cares whether it takes 10 minutes or several hours.