Some thoughts on electric car tech and marketability

               The largest hindrance to electric vehicles is convenience.  The mass market is so used to how petroleum vehicles operate that they expect the same or better from the next generation.  The ability to pull up and pump in fuel less than 5 minutes is the largest obstacle electric vehicles have to overcome.  The other large market requirement is range.  Most electric vehicles have a very limited range to just around where a person lives.  The Nissan Leaf (http://www.nissanusa.com/electric-cars/leaf/) is a prime example of a limited range and practicality of a fully electric vehicle.

               There have been several solutions proposed by manufacturers over the last few years.  Tesla (http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger) is proposing building "Supercharger" stations across the country.  This building of a national infrastructure is highly ambitious.  But the recharge time is still 30 minutes under optimal conditions.  This is well short of what consumers expect.  Fisker (http://www.fiskercb.com/) attempted to build a hybrid electric vehicle to resolve the distance and convenience issues.  Other companies like Toyota, Hyundai, General Motors, Ford and several others have chosen the hybrid electric solution.

               Hybrid electric vehicles combine electric drive trains with various power generation methods.  The power generation can come from several sources such as gasoline engines, diesel engines, hydrogen fuel cells, propane fuel cells and at this time natural gas fuel cells.  Of these our current national infrastructure only supports one on a consumer mass market level, the gas/electric version.

               Toyota (includes Lexus), General Motors and Ford are the leading manufacturers of gas/electric hybrids in the USA.  The Toyota Prius is the most recognized in this group.  In the last 2 years General Motors released the Chevrolet Volt.  The Volt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt) however uses a new type of battery that has a faster recharge rate than previous generations.  However this still keeps the vehicle on a petroleum based fuel.  The one benefit is it just uses less of it.  Unfortunately at over $40,000 it is not affordable to those of lesser means.  As a stop gap measure and bridge to non-petroleum this works. 

               If you remember your history under President Bush there was a push for hydrogen fuel cell technology in the USA.  In response to this there were many people who stated that we did not have the infrastructure to support vehicles powered in this way.  Well in response to this Hyundai corporation conducted a hydrogen fuel cell/electric car test in 2011 (http://www.greenfleetmagazine.com/news/50615/hyundai-fights-cancer-while-also-promoting-fuel-cell-evs).  The proved that using our existing gas suppliers you could drive across the USA in a hydrogen fuel cell/electric car.  Their point was "if there is a Will there is a Way."  Since hydrogen can be created from water then it is a viable resource to replace petroleum as a fuel source.  The vehicle though is aimed at the middle to upper income markets due to its cost.  It does though pass the time to refuel and distance requirements the mass market looks for.

               One type that has been used for decades in the railroad industry is diesel/electric.  Large locomotives run diesel engines to drive generators that power the electric motors used to move the train (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel-electric_transmission).  In new news Volkswagen is testing a version of this technology (http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/05/volkswagen-xl1-driven/) that has a claimed 263 MPG on petro-diesel.  This will be an ever greater benefit if it is switched to Bio or WVO diesel fuels.  This addresses both the refuel time and distance needs of the mass market.  However, it still seems aimed at the upper end income market.

               So, at this point none of the major vehicle manufactures have a product that meets the convenience needs and cost point required to be accepted and used by lower income persons.

               The solution I believe is in combining existing technologies in a way never done before.  While I cannot go into the manufacturing processes and detailed designs at this time due to legal and patent concern, I can cover the basics.  Weight, materials cost, logistics and overhead are the main obstacles that add cost to the end product. 

               To attack the weight and manufacturing costs a three part main chassis construction of carbon fiber, Kevlar and steel are used.  The carbon fiber could be made in regions where coal is mined.  This creates jobs, new industry and helps to balance out the reduced use of coal as an energy source.  In most regions there is already a solid rail infrastructure for logistics purposes.  Using simple pressing technologies the outer composite structure can be manufactured near or at the same location where the carbon fiber is produced.  The steel inner "safety" egg can be produced in any market where steel is produced and stamped.  These and the support systems can be transported to a assembly facility anywhere there is a rail or shipping line.  Due to their materials they do not weigh much so the logistics cost can be greatly reduced.  The reduced weight of the vehicle requires less energy to propel it making it more efficient. 

               Another area of weight in a vehicle using electric motors is the weight of energy storage.  A great video pointing this out is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3x_kYq3mHM .  The use of capacitors can greatly reduce weight and resolve the "refueling" time.  The issue is reducing energy loss during non-use times.  There are strides being made in this area (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121205083826.htm).  Unfortunately at this time it only works at -273C.  Another area of progress are Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage (SMES) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage).  These are super cooled magnetic fields used to store energy.  Once again though due to the cooling needs and cost of materials are not ready for use in the mass market at this time.  However, the Chevrolet Volt is an example of how progress is being made over the initial offerings of the Toyota Prius.  The Volts battery is far superior to the Prius's in terms of zero state to full state charge time.  This is the area I will be focusing my greatest attention.  Once this hurdle is cleared there will be no reason a vehicle for lower income markets cannot be produced.

               The last area of focus is what fuel cell to use.  Bloom Energy has a solution that I have been watching.  Solid Oxide Fuel Cells (http://www.bloomenergy.com/fuel-cell/solid-oxide/) are made of sand.  These can be produced in any location that has sand such as beaches, deserts and river beds.  The simplicity of the fuel cell is its greatest strength.  It has no moving parts.  You pass a "fuel" through the cell and energy is created (http://www.bloomenergy.com/fuel-cell/solid-oxide-fuel-cell-animation).  Per Bloom, the cell can be created to run off of natural or propane gases, hydrogen or even bio-diesel.  Remember, Hyundai already proved this technology in 2011.  You then use that energy to power just about anything. 

               The technologies required to make my dream a reality are not fiction but fact.  With the exception of the energy storage, the fuel cell, fuel type and vehicle construction materials can be sourced all over the world.  The manufacturing can occur in multiple geographies.  The materials can be sourced and produced in those geographies.  This reduces the logistical cost 10 fold.  Improved marketing will remove the middle layer thus further reducing the cost by at least 20%.  What is now a $40,000 USD vehicle should come in around $18,000 to $25,000.  If a lower cost market can produce the vehicle and ship it for less to other markets that can even be a bonus.  But since most markets have import levies on vehicles not manufactured in their jurisdictions it may well be cheaper just to manufacture them in that location.  In the end I can see my dream coming true.

When Will We Get It Right?

          Thinking on "Green Energy" today.  People like their conveniences.  They like the comforts of a modern society.  The sad thing is most of those comforts and conveniences use up something that cannot be replaced to make them, non-renewable energy.  Coal, oil, natural gas and the multiple derivatives that come from them all have limits.  Nuclear power will not be viable until we master fusion.  Even then the creation of that source requires using minerals that are also finite in source.  As a society we have the knowledge to know that these limits exist.  Yet, here we are still using the same resources we did in the 1920's.  Why?  Because "we" like those conveniences and comforts.  "We" feel that they are earned and due us.  There is enough to last the next generation or two so what is the emergency?  I'll tell you, turning something of great mass like an ocean liner or tanker requires space, energy and most importantly time.  The worlds mass in people creates an energy inertia that will take decades to adjust course on.  The sooner we start the change, the less chance of us hitting the reef of resource loss.  

         So when do our societies act?  In my opinion we should have in the 1970's. We could have then made the infrastructure changes without endangering the limits of our resources.  Now in the 2010's we are now endanger of hitting those limits.  There have been some substantial attempts and strides in the last few years.  Under Carter a biofuels program was started.  That program also failed when it was found the fuel produced used more energy that it created by the time Reagan was in office.  The hydrogen fuel cell under Bush the second.  The Pickens Plan pushed the use of natural gas as a stop gap until renewable resources could take over.  Under Bush Sr. the E85 program was started using corn to make alcohol fuel similar to Brazil's program.  Unfortunately under Obama the program was canceled because the food industry convinced the Government that it would drive up the cost of foods.  This is (in my opinion) a false statement from industry that did not want more competition for its resources.  Of course we still pay corporate agriculture NOT to farm to keep the prices up.  So while there have been major attempts to change our energy consumption habits nothing has survived.

          This does not cover of course the other Green initiatives that have been pushed under both Bush's and Obama.  The push for an economical replacement for crude oil has been the most televised action.  Algae, pulpwood processing, and dedicated non-edible crops are in the forefront.  Solar and wind energy are growing as well.  These of course are the most preferable.  Many companies are using the roof space for solar generation to supplement their electric use.  So much so that the energy companies are starting to down size "Grid" plans.

         The area of greatest need that I see is making all new infrastructure "Green" and self sustaining.  By this you stop creating the "old" and replicate the "new".  This process while slow will slowly force the change needed. Examples of this are requiring all lighting in all new construction to be 12v LED.  These produce a bright enough light for general purposes and used 1/10th the electricity as their 120v counterparts.  The amount of energies used to heat and cool homes is also an area to address.  Most homes are notoriously inefficient as heated and cool spaces.  Gaps in insulation, materials used, windows, doors, and roofs in modern construction all waste huge amounts of energy.  By taking a page from some desert and cold climate builders there are ways to address these areas.  The use of premade laminate wall units that have no air gaps when constructed; aerated concrete using a polymer to keep it from disintegrating under vibration (earthquake),  geothermal heating systems, "in earth" construction, solar water heating and power supplementation, water reclamation for secondary uses, rain water collection for primary uses and many other techniques need to be made mandatory in all areas of the country.  Yes, these do increase the initial cost of a home.  But the long term benefits far outweigh the expense.  Another distinction needs to be made in transportation.  The use of Over The Road "OTR" transportation has a direct consumer cost impact.  This means of transport has a direct reliance on crude oil via diesel fuel.  If we require all OTR vehicles used for goods transportation to be hybrid electric we can shift that industry to more efficient use of diesel fuels.  Or, they can shift to fuel cell technologies and remove the interdependency on the oil industry by an estimated 60%.  This leaves lubricants, vehicle materials and tires to contend with.  The next area to address is commuting use of fuels and road maintenance.  Due to the sprawling nature of the American suburb commuting has become an accepted way of life.  This "freedom" to come and go as needed is one of those conveniences spoken about earlier.  So how do other places handle this task?  Not all countries have as many cars as Americans.  They solve it with public transportation.  Imagine if you only really needed a car for long distance travel?  I would suggest that this be defined as any trip of over 25 miles from one's home.  A regional public transportation system around any area with population densities similar to the northern Virginia area.  The initial investment in a rail/bus system would be high.  However, the long term benefits of lower emissions, road costs, and reduced fuels used would far outweigh that value.  An added benefit would be better disaster response due to lower traffic rates and multiple routes of access should also be weighed.  Let the car become the vacation tool.  Let it also become hybrid electric as well.

          These are just some of the ways using current technologies we can make change.  They still allow convenience and comforts.  When you walk into a house and see a light will you care if it is 12v or 120v?  When you go to work and you can leave to go home at any time because there will be a train or bus to take you and it costs less than driving, will you still want to drive?  When you get your power bill and it is more like $50 for a 4 bedroom house will you lament cleaning the solar panels twice a year?  When the power goes out and you still have days worth of lighting and basic low wattage sources for your laptop, cell phone or other small appliances will you miss being in the dark?  When the cost of oil continues to climb but does not affect the cost of your gallon of milk, will you wish it was like the "good old days" when every time the price of oil changed you food cost more?  To all these things I don't think so.  So, what are we waiting for?

Introduction to my minds island of thought.

Each person has their own views, histories and a volume of life that colors everything they do.  This blog is where I express my experiences, opinions, wishes, hopes and dreams.  Know I respect your (the person reading this blog) thoughts concerning what I put out here.  I ask that you do the same for me.  No foul language, no disrespect will be allowed.  That said let's see where this takes us.