On the ebike I have been fooling around with each winter, it seems like Li degradation is sort of a straight-line phenomon. i.e. the amount of energy that can be put into a pack diminishes slowly but steadily over time.
If that is the case with automobile batteries, I would think that the pool battery would be unpredictable. i.e. there would have to be a cutoff point where the battery is retired and/or rebuilt and that cutoff point would be something much less than 100% full life.... so the battery I get at the next change might take me the full 80 miles.... or only take me 50 or 60 miles... and I might find out the hard way if my round trip to work is 65 miles.
Seems like hydrogen has dropped out of the news cycle lately. Wouldn't that be the optimal "battery"? or has some deal-breaker emerged?
Worst case it means you make an unplanned 10 min stop at another "gas station". Hardly the end of the world, and there can easily be an automated rebate if the battery ran less then the guaranteed minimum. It's certainly not an issue that would undermine such a system.
Hydrogen isn't very efficient to separate from say water, though some gains have been made. Once separated it then has to be compressed to very high pressures to get enough in a vehicle to give a practical range, another big efficiency loss. In the end unless you are feeding the system from a very low cost per unit energy source, say nuclear, hydroelectric or perhaps tidal generation, the efficiency is so bad as to make it worthless. Don't be fooled by the hydrogen that is produced from natural gas or the like, that's still a "fossil" fuel, not a true use of hydrogen as a "battery".
Hyundai has some Tuscon models out on lease in southern CA. From what I've read, they seem to want to expand the program. It is limited to So Ca because they have the fueling infrastructure.
I was under the mistaken impression that batteries did not care what the voltage was. I don't expect a small charger to make a big difference just making use of vehicle being parked in the sun. I would like to see vehicles with solar panels built into the roof such that a charge is added anytime there be sunlight.
Worst case, you run out of juice 20 miles from the next town. Around here, that usually means you can take your smart phone and play Angry Birds or something until someone comes along because there isn't going to be a convenient cell tower.
They might make it heavily populated urban areas or for commuting short distances.
Hydrogen production isn't all that efficient and it needs to be compressed. Then there is the PR problem. We had a glassblowing operation and for quartz glass you need a hot hydrogen/oxygen flame. For industrial use, you get a flat bed trailer with a number of long tubes and they just swap out the trailers. Anyway we needed to get a permit from the local fire marshall. When you say 'hydrogen...' a lot of people complete the sentence with 'bomb'. Actually the liquid oxygen tank might have been more hazardous but oxygen sounds friendlier.
Excuse me, Wix. As for synthetic, the owner's manual specifies 5W-30 and does not mention synthetic. The first two years of maintenance may be included, but I do my own work. If you want to use Toyota filters, go for it. I'll use either NAPA Gold or Wix, which are the smae thing.
Antifreeze, spark plugs and tune-ups, zero unless you're driving a car from the 80's. Modern cars don't need any of that done at 80K miles. Obviously you either don't know anything about cars either or are lying to further the tree hugger cause.
Great idea. Sink another $45K into a solar array to charge the electric car that's already cost prohibitive. And the only reason that solar electric is marginally practical at all is that it's heavily subsidized by the rest of the poor saps out there so that the hippies can put them in.
Sure sink big $$$ today so that if energy costs more in 2030, you'll be ready. Remember when Jimmy Carter and the experts told us we were running out of oil in the 70's? How well did that work out?
I'm sure that's good for going at least a few blocks.
Well, after Carter, we had a couple admin that prohibited domestic drilling, Alaska pipe line, etc. So, the price of oil has gone from .33 when I was a kid, and went over 4.25 for a while, due to supply shortages. I'd like O out, and Sarah Palin for Pres.
EVs probably have a decade to go before they are useable in very rural areas. In any discussion of EVs today I assume suburban to urban use since 15 mile range won't even get you to a rural area. In a rural area
15 miles won't even get you to a grocery store, much less back from it.
LO2 is more hazardous, however the fire marshals are more familiar with that since it's common to have bulk LO2 tanks at hospitals and even large nursing homes. Hydrogen is the big unknown to them, so bring the MSDS sheet and the relevant page from the hazmat response book when you talk to them.
If you covered all available flat surface areas on a prius or similar with PV, you could probably fit about 500W worth of panels. That would get you about 4KWh of charge in a really sunny 8 hour work day, so if the numbers above are correct there is some possibility of solar charging for your commute home in sunny weather.
I would LOVE to have an electric car, even if it cost more per mile to drive. Unfortunately, the initial cost of an electric car puts them way out of my price range.
I realize I am in the minority, but I drive an old 1976 VW Rabbit.
formatting link
I bought it used for $850 in 1988 and have spent approximately $8000 on maintenance and repairs since then. I keep a log of my fuel expenses and have spent $9200 on gas since I have owned the car. I get about 25mpg now, but it has been as low as 19mpg when I was having carburetor issues.
So, in 26 years the car has cost me less than $18,000, including the vehicle cost, maintenance, and fuel. That includes a new paint job, and an engine replacement. It currently has about 400,000 miles on it.
At my current rate, I could drive my old car another 26 years and still come out less than the cost of most electric vehicles. Even if I have to rebuild the engine and repaint the car again.
From an environmental aspect, it takes a lot more energy and polution to manufacturer all the steel, plastics, and rubber that make up a new vehicle. The "cash for clunkers" program years ago made no sense to me as a lot more energy and polution would be used to build all those new cars than the better efficiency would provide. Not to mention the energy and waste to recycle the old vehicles.
Cars lose value so quickly I would never buy a brand new vehicle. Every car we have ever purchased has been at least 10 years old, and we've never paid more than $4000 for a vehicle.
Of course, I realize everyone doesn't have the desire or ability to drive an old car (maintenance costs would be MUCH higher if you had to pay shops to do the work). At some point age and rust, or accident damage will force you to buy a newer vehicle. Or, you just might WANT a newer vehicle.
To each their own, but paying $30K and up for a new car to get slightly lower cost per mile just doesn't make sense.
Assuming the CfC was environment in nature. It was much more to get people to buy new cars and keep the automakers in business until "real" demand took off again. The pollution stuff was just a bone tossed to certain groups for campaign money (and they actually fell for it!)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.