As the president of Rochester Institute of Technology, one of the nation's largest technical universities, I became interested in electric vehicles a few years ago because one of our major research centers was working on advanced battery and fuel cell research projects for major automotive companies. I was at first quite skeptical of electric vehicles because electricity must be generated from another source of energy, and that seemed to insert another inefficient step in the energy conversion process that would make such vehicles inherently less efficient than the current generation of gasoline-powered cars and trucks.
And I was not alone. In fact, first-generation electric vehicles such as the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf have failed to gain significant market share in their first two years of availability, and many have concluded that they are not the future of personal transportation, either in the U.S. or elsewhere. Nevertheless, despite this widespread skepticism, other carmakers are rolling out new electric vehicles on a regular basis, including Ford, Tesla, Mitsubishi, Volvo, and BMW, among others.
Why? Because a careful analysis reveals that there are fundamental reasons that will drive manufacturers and consumers inevitably to electric vehicles in the years ahead, reasons that the public in general is unaware of. So here are a few of the reasons that I have learned that lead me to believe that within 50 years a majority of our cars will be equipped with electric drivetrains.
1. Electric vehicles are inherently more efficient at turning energy into miles driven. Most people do not realize this, but electric drivetrains are much more efficient than internal combustion engine (ICE) drivetrains (about 75% vs 25%, in fact). In fact, there is little hope that ICE drivetrains could ever compete with electric drivetrains in terms of efficiency. Why are ICE drivetrains so inefficient? There are many reasons, including heat losses and inertial losses of various kinds, but ICE's are also thermodynamic systems with efficiencies limited by the heat cycle they operate under. Engineers have done amazing work in improving the efficiency of gas-powered cars, but they are up against fundamental limits. In contrast, a Nissan Leaf or a Chevy Volt can go about 40 miles on 11 Kilowatt-hours (KWH) of electricity, the energy equivalent of a third of a gallon of gasoline. And since the national average cost per KWH for electricity is only $0.11, this performance translates cost-wise into the equivalent of more than 120 miles per gallon.
2. Electric vehicles are greener than gasoline-powered cars. There are those who have tried to argue otherwise, but the most credible research has shown that most of a vehicle's carbon production comes during operation rather than production, and electric vehicles that consume only a third as much energy in operation are inherently greener no matter what fuel is used to generate the electricity they use. And electric vehicles powered by electricity from hydro, solar, wind, or nuclear sources produce no carbon in operation.
3. Electric vehicles can be powered by electricity produced from multiple energy sources. Electricity can come from wind, solar, hydro, nuclear, biofuel, and fossil fuel sources including natural gas, oil, and coal. All but one of those sources is produced almost entirely within the U.S. from local natural resources. So electric vehicles have the potential to support the U.S. economy and reduce our dependence on imported oil.
4. An efficient distribution network for electricity already exists in the U.S. This seems obvious, but compare this situation to that of other next-generation vehicle fuels such as natural gas and hydrogen.
5. Range is less of an issue than most think. Most Americans drive 40 miles per day or less on the average, well within the range of almost all available electric cars, and future models will have 10 times this range or more. And for advanced designs like the Chevy Volt, driving distances are unlimited as long as one keeps filling the gas tank, because an onboard gasoline powered generator can provide electricity when the battery is depleted. In fact, statistics monitored daily at Voltstats.net on over 1700 Volts in operation indicate that the median Volt owner drives 80% of their miles using the stored energy in the battery, and consumes only one gallon of gas per 177 miles driven. So these drivers get benefit of the greater efficiency of an electric vehicle and the unlimited range of a gasoline powered car.
6. Next generation technologies, such as fuel cell vehicles, will require electric drivetrains to propel the vehicles. Fuel cells can be efficient, portable sources of electricity running on a variety of fuels, but all cars and trucks using these energy sources will use electric drivetrains. In fact, there are new fuel cell technologies that use natural gas as a fuel to produce electricity, but in a chemical reaction rather than a combustion reaction. These advanced fuel cells produce sequesterable Carbon that can be simply buried rather than being emitted into the atmosphere.
So in the future, electric drivetrains will probably dominate whatever the energy source. There's just no other way to get this kind of efficiency gain from an ICE drivetrain.
Follow Bill Destler on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RITNews
Does that mean if I buy an electric car it will really be coal fired?
If my electric car is powered by batteries, does that mean I
have to use coal to charge the batteries once I have driven
30 miles? Will the government have to kill coal before it is able
to make alternative energies "affordable?"
General Motors is sitting on 45K Volts it cannot sell.
The true cost of those cars is 90K each. That is really not
that much money if it was "borrowed" from taxpayers.
Electricity is used to refine gasoline - according to the EIA, about 6 kilowatt-hours of energy per gallon refined. About the same amount of energy, mile-per-mile, that electric cars use.
So... use electricity to power your car - or use electricity AND petroleum. Three guesses which one is cleaner.
GM isn't sitting on many unsold Volts. This chart shows Volts manufactured versus Volts delivered (in USA):
http://www.digifixpix.com/volt/sept2012_sales.jpg
The 10,000 difference shown between US deliveries and Volts manufactured actually nearly equals Volt's overseas sales, leaving very little remaining inventory. Those numbers are updated on Volt's Wiki page (scroll down):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt
It shows Volt on track to 30,000 vehicles by year's end. No best seller, but not a failure either - that sales figure beats half the car models for sale today.
GM does not spend anywhere near $90k per Volt either - that figure has been widely debunked.
And finally, GM disputes rumors of large amounts of government money behind the car. If you look at Volt's development dates (2006-2008) you will see that Volt's development was nearly complete before any government money became available for EV development. Government programs sent money to many carmakers, no special earmarks for GM or Volt. Foreign carmakers got US money, too. Yet we just seem to have a problem when US companies get tax dollars, for some reason.
It will also come with an insulated, heatable twin tank version- with built in demineralisation systems. i.e. water goes into demineralisation - and goes into special "brown´s gas" generators. and ultra-sonic-emulsifiers boosting the water content of the diesel going inot the microwaved air intake Turbo Diesel Injection system. That brings us to efficiencies on the XL 1 of close to 1000 m.p.g..on diesel. Projected price tag for the VW XL1 plug in hybrid- diesel-aqueous- about $42.000 U.S.D- Projected consumption on a 300.000 mile lifetime use of the vehicle- 300 gallons. Can you afford not to drivd one.?
"A123 Systems Inc. (AONE), a maker of rechargeable lithium-ion batteries for electric cars, filed for bankruptcy after failing to make a debt payment that was due yesterday.
The company listed assets of $459.8 million and debt of $376 million as of Aug. 31 in Chapter 11 documents filed today in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Delaware.
A123, which received a $249.1 million federal grant in 2009 to build a U.S. factory, needed a financial lifeline after struggling with costs from a recall of batteries supplied to Fisker, the plug-in hybrid luxury carmaker. A123 announced in August that it was working on a deal with Wanxiang Group Corp., China’s largest auto-parts maker, for financing in exchange for a majority ownership stake.
In yesterday’s filing, A123 said it was considering strategic alternatives including “one or more potential transactions” to address its liquidity problems. There is “no assurance” that A123 will be able to find a way to continue to operate its business as a going concern, the company said.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-16/electric-car-battery-maker-a123-systems-files-bankruptcy.html?cmpid=yhoo
Electric cars are NOT 'new technology.' They preceded gasoline fueled cars as the dominant mode in the US, but simply couldn't match the capabilities or economy of the later hydrocarbon fueled vehicles. Battery technology has been government funded since the days of the U-boat. It is mature.
However, the gas fueled vehicles of today would be nearly unrecognizable to a driver from 100 years ago. Likewise electric cars - everything inside a modern EV is different from it's century-old predecessors - new controller tech, new battery tech, new motor tech, and new tech all over the dashboard.
It's like looking at a modern LED lightbulb, and saying "that's not new! Light bulbs have been around a hundred years!" Technically true, but also completely missing the point of the LED bulb.
We'll be able to reserve or simply walk into a car in a similar way to using a taxi nowadays. Once you've completed your trip the car will be free to serve other people or recharge itself. You won't have to pick your kids up from school, take them to their friends or after school activities, they'll just hop into a driverless vehicle and go wherever they need to go.
If you're having a hard time understanding what I'm trying to say you might want to project a little further into the future, into the realm of a sci-fi movie like Minority Report.
Either way, the same will be true for Trucks, Trains, Buses, Airplanes, Cargo Ships, etc.
In a broader sense, we will live in a highly Mechanized & Automated world in 30 years.
The question is whether society can evolve as fast as the advances in technology.
:o)
This is a motor that will not require huge amounts of heavy, expensive batteries to recharge and replace. Many people have already built these and are generating home electricity, saving 50% or more on their utility bills. Others are working on prototype motors for cars.
And every electric motor will require large and expensive batteries to run. Because the energy to run the motor has to be stored somewhere.
If you are attempting to claim something like overunity, or perpetual motion, I hope you realize that your video shows nothing of the sort.
I also guarantee nobody is "generating home electricity, saving 50% or more" without a power source of some source (which this is not.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eU3cUssuz-U&feature
The couple hundred million Euros needed for that project could finance an extended infrastructure of public transportation for a long time.
Its far more than a single toaster plug....
That figure is ridiculously incorrect. Try a Google search for "Nissan leaf miles per KWH"
The Leaf gets around 4 miles per KWH, on average, and the Volt around 3 miles per KWH. That means your number is off by more than a factor of ten.
If you Google Leaf's charging time, you will also see that it can charge up for a 100-mile range just fine from a 110v plug in a single night of charging, not 10 full days! (your 233 hours number.)
Most electric vehicles charge at night when power demand is low. Power companies call this the 'bathtub' effect because the curve looks like it sideways view of a bathtub. Energy demand is so low they have to shutdown generation plants at night. They would rather fill in the bathtub and have steady generation (and sell more power) during that non-peak time.
Electric vehicles introduce a completely new way to think about transportation. You fuel an electric vehicle up at night and have a full 'tank' every morning. Innovation doesn't really care if people are afraid of change because it's all economics. Electric vehicles are more efficient than gas vehicles. It will always be cheaper to use electricity to move a vehicle than gas. And as we've seen with the technology of cell phones.. EVs will only get cheaper and get better batteries (and bigger batteries).
And if you think it's just spin, then raise an argument or two and let's deal with it.
And all the sales graphs still slope upward.
How is that a market failure, given those models have been for sale less than two years? It looks like a success story to me, that's still in the first chapter or two.
I also wish that government can help more in this endeavor. They need to provide tax incentives not only for the purchase of this car but also for infrastructure. Every shopping center should have charging stations and every university should also be fitted with charging stations as well. This will help to alleviate some of the fears in buying this car.
There is nothing wrong with these cars. In fact, I feel they are much more technologically advanced then the regular gas engine cars. They just not have been marketed correctly so far and hopefully they can do a better job at that in the near future.
Not speaking about the batteries production process with regards to the very limited batteries lifetime .
Not at all speaking about limited range of such cars, especially if you turn on the electric heating !!!
The future is Hydrogen cars where hydrogen can go indefinitely through the H2O cycle. Current cars could drive with hydrogen with very small changes to today's engines (same a adapting a car to operate with propane or natural gas).
All arguments calling for electric cars do not include the overall production and manufacturing chain end-to-end and definitively not the range of such cars in real conditions that can be extreme in some places in winter. What about the range of an electric car staying the whole night outside by -25 to -30 Celsius and where you need heating when driving. Current range would never exceed 80km in such conditions.
Electric cars are not the future. Hydrogen ones one yes for sure.
2) ...carried over long power lines with losses: The efficiency of the power grid is around 93% efficient overall - this easily beats the equivalent fuel-delivery step for gasoline - TRUCKING gas to thousands of service stations.
3) ...batteries (with losses) to the electric engine (with losses): Both lithium battery systems and electric motors are around 90% efficient. Your gas engine only achieves around 15% efficiency in traffic, and the gasoline itself is produced in an extremely inefficient process - it takes more energy just to REFINE gasoline than EVs use.
4) ...an easy computation shows that the overall end-to-end efficiency is far below the using the fuel directly in the car: NO, it does not.
5) ...the very limited batteries lifetime : Folks forget that we've had traction batteries in hybrid cars for a decade now, and they have proven to have very long lifetimes of 150,000 miles or more. Hybrids enjoy unprecedented resale values today.
End-to-end. Power plant efficiency x power line losses x Batteries efficiency x electric engine efficiency (at the wheel) = 0.30x0.9x0.93x0.83 = 0.21% Even with the most performing power plan using co-generation reaching 40% efficiency, the overall efficiency for electric car is 0.27 %, far below the 45 to 50% of the fuel/diesel cars.
A modern turbo diesel car is at least twice more efficient than an electric one. (You should update your references wit real accurate ones).
Regarding the power required to charge heavy batteries, you need 246kW.h per 100 miles, assuming you can afford 100 spare meters of most efficient solar panels on your roof, and at the best sunny conditions in middle of summer, you would still need 15 hours at 100% full sun exposure which is never the case (sinusoid curve).
Practically, you need nearly one week to recharge your batteries for driving only 100 miles from 100 square meters solar panels.
The above calculation shows that a small home plug is not enough to charge your car, but a high power one is needed if you don't want to wait weeks to recharge your car...
http://clean-energy-blog.gnarum.com/why-drive-electric/
I don't know about the future, but one thing I hope I see in the future is the most freedom of choice possible to Americans whenever they choose to buy a vehicle. I hope they have the choice of Hum-V, a Silverado pickup, a Lincoln Town Car, a Ford Fusion, a Toyota Camry, a Honda Civic, a Fiat, and an electric car too.
Somehow I don't get the impression Bill Destler embraces freedom of choice. He seems exactly like the type to champion a special interest instead. Make no mistake, electric cars are a special interest just like any other.
Let's account for all of the economist's "externalities" so we can determine just how much freedom costs.
Practically, you need nearly one week to recharge your batteries for driving only 100 miles from 100 square meters solar panels.
The above calculation shows that a small home plug is not enough to charge your car, but a high power one is needed if you don't want to wait weeks to recharge your car.. With a 110V 10amps plug, you need 233 hours of charging you car for driving 100 miles wit a 100% charging and electric engine efficiency. reducing the time to e.g. 5 hours requires a 447 amps (under 110 Volts ) capable plug !!!
Its far more than a single toaster plug.... How do you intend to produce and distribute this amount of power to each home and offices ?