Who killed the Electric Car?

A company called Modec has come up with a clever way to sell electric fleet vehicles in the UK.

They are making the trucks affordable by RENTING the battery, instead of selling it as part of the total price. http://www.gizmag.com/go/7172/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Now that's a GOOD novel approach! It just may take the day.

You can sure bet on one thing, though, if very many of them DO become popular, that zero tax business will quickly become history.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes, all this 'working for a green planet' stuff is pure BS. People work for green, end of. In the UK the tax revenue on driving (road license tax, fuel duty) far exceed the money spent back on the road network, and it's not as if our Rail Network benefits from much subsidisation, far from it, shareholders were paid guaranteed bonusses for investing when it was privatised!

If electric vehicles take over, the govt cannot afford to lose the revenue, so the 'green issues' flag they wave will soon get trampled.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The answer is simple: batteries.

Ever notice how often (and how quickly) the batteries run out on laptops?

The biggest stumbling block for technology at this point is battery power. Batteries can, of course, be designed to provide sufficient power for nearly anything, but unfortunately the battery you'd need to run a laptop as reliably as a PC would probably fill a backpack, and weigh 50 lbs.

The battery sufficient to send an electric car from New York to LA with four or five stops in between (roughly the same as gas) would outweigh the car, you, three passengers, 1000 lbs of cargo...

Hence the problem.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Phoenix electric car

Well, maybe not five stops, but how about twelve stops? Take a look at the Phoenix, at

phoenixmotorcars.com/models/fleet.html


The Phoenix EV has a battery pack that charges in 10 minutes, and with the expanded pack, gets 250 miles per charge.

That doesn't seem so bad. The Phoenix is a real car, being built right now (for fleet use.)

 

Just watched this docu and was blown away by the disgusting face of capitalism's darker side. Sis.

 

Hmmm, six hour charge from a domestic 220v socket, it's only 10mins from their special charger, and with an estimated prodcution run of just 500 this year, don't expect to find one anywhere en route.

This charging limitation is of course why they are targetting fleet vehicles, I guess local delivery services can make use of this sort fo vehicle, and then there is an economy of scale, and it's worth buying the 10minute charger for your fleet.

I'd like to see the price tag, ....

 

Chuck Norris.

 

An answer, if question were: "Why no significant return of electric car?" is:

World's largest car maker, Toyota, is now selling two vehicles that can run on 100% ethanol, a first for the Japanese auto giant. The Corolla Flex and the Corolla Fielder Flex were put on sale today (24 May07) by Toyota's subsidiary in Brazil.*

Electric cars are a great technological change, Alcohol cars are not - they have 30 years of history. Who knows what the economics and environmental long term use of batteries, especially where they will be dumped (near your house?) when dead. I.e. electric battery cars may be an ecological disaster, that no one want to speak about. In contrast, alcohol cars reduce the amount of CO2 in the are (provided the alcohol comes from sugar cane. - not true if it comes from corn as corn requires essentially the same energy input form fosil fuels as contained in the alcohol produced, but the energy gain with tropical sugar cane if between 5 to 8 fold!)
----------------------
*80+% of cars in Brazil now run on alcohol. - It is less expensive than gasoline and provides more power in same engine that can burn 100% gasoline. As the octane rating of Alcohol is higher, someday alcohol only cars with higher compresion ratios may be interduced. (Toyoto was slow to join GM, Ford, VW and Renault and others already making "Flex-Fuel" (100% alcohol or gas or any mix OK) cars in Brazil for several years now, but is now trying to catch up.)

 

Yes, but cars dont need a fuel that gives better acceleration...they need a fuel which costs fewer cents per mile of driving, with lower emissions.

Even the the old Doble steam cars of the 1920s were better in some ways than what we have now.

They had very low emissions, due to the open flame combustion, and very little noise, as there were no internal explosions.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtxA5a9F9QQ

...very little noise? :bugeye: ...

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/jay_leno_garage/1302916.html

Unlike most drivers of steam-powered cars, Leno's proud to still have hair on his eyebrows and forearms.

I've always been fascinated with the last days of old technologies. And that's why I'm aware of a guy named Abner Doble. Who? Don't be upset if you're not familiar with that name. Plenty of modern automotive engineers don't know him either. Doble created a revolutionary steam-powered vehicle back when steam was a real alternative to gasoline.

You see, Stanley Steamers, mine included, have some inherent problems. It takes at least 20 minutes from a cold start to get going, and you can only go about 30 miles before you have to fill up with water. Plus, you're carrying an open fire and the volatile fuel for it. A Stanley is one of the few cars where you can burn to death and get scalded at the same time. When you talk to good steam men, you see that they have no hair on their arms or eyebrows. Walk up to one of them and you'll catch a whiff of burned hair.

Doble addressed the Stanley's problems. With my 1925 Doble, I get in, turn the key, and in under a minute I can pull away. And it pulls away silently, whoosh, just like that. It's an amazing feeling. With 1000 ft.-lb. of torque, it's effortless.

Before you can start a Stanley, you've got to heat up 15 gal. of water. How long d'ya think that takes? But with a Doble, you're only heating up 2 quarts at a time. The Doble has about 525 ft. of coiled piping and one spark plug. There's a carburetor, like on a gas car, and an electric fan. You turn the key and the fan blows gasoline over the top of the carburetor. The gas goes through a venturi, into a burner, which Doble calls the generator, to the spark plug and pow!--a 2 million-BTU flame. It's like a blast furnace and it heats up 2 quarts of water in seconds. You could warm a building with this thing. The water goes through the long coil. And as the heated water goes out, more water is coming in, so there's no chance of a boiler blowing up.

I've blown the boiler on my Stanley. What that really means is a tube cracked and water leaked out. There's not enough water to literally blow up, and there are safety valves. Although boilers have blown up for other reasons, a steam boiler itself is safe. Things would break or crack internally before they'd explode.

Besides the cylinders that the steam goes into, Dobles have a draft booster, which is essentially a steam turbine, to blow gas into the generator. It's almost like a supercharger. Boom, boom, boom--you're heating the water just as fast as you can get it in there.

Now, a Stanley has a 2-cylinder engine, but the Doble has a 4-cylinder compound engine. The cylinders are cast in pairs, each with a high-pressure piston and a low-pressure piston. First, steam goes into the high-pressure section. Then, what's left over goes into the low-pressure cylinder. This makes it extremely smooth. At 60 or 70 mph in a Doble, the engine's turning no more than 900 rpm. There's no sense of vibration or anything. And it's direct drive to the rear wheels. There's no transmission.

I took the Doble to the smog station to have its exhaust certified and its emissions are 13 parts per million, which means my 1925 Doble with its 80-year-old technology passes all current smog laws. Nothing like 2 million BTU to burn up all the fuel. There's nothing left over, literally. It's just pffft. Gone.

But best of all, it's wonderful to drive. It's like a fast train. You go down the road and it makes no noise at all. This car is quieter and smoother than conventional classics. Don't forget, there's no shifting--no grinding gears. And there's no gas pedal. To change speed, you just turn the throttle wheel, which is made of ebony with a polished, cast German silver spider insert.

 

EV history

30 years of history is OK, but electric cars have over 100 years of history. Here's an ad from 100 years ago for an electric car with 125 miles of range:

megawattmotorworks.com/resource.asp?func=display&resid=1315&tree=651&id=675

EV batteries are not an ecological disaster. New designs (like Altairnanos) are both biodegradable and recyclable. Here's a link from DEQ showing Li-Ion batteries are not an environmental concern:

deq.state.or.us/lq/pubs/docs/hw/Success/OnToTechnology.pdf

Ethanol may be less expensive than gas, but is not even in the same league as electricity. My own EV gets about 4 miles per KWH, and I get a special off-peak overnight electrical rate of 3 cents/KWH. That's less than one cent per mile.

 

I know that electric and steam cars both have early initial use. As you probably did understand, I was speaking of average of several million on the roads in daily use for 30 years. In WWII there were also quited a few "wood" powered cars, (destructuve distolation to gas vapor for regular motor) but again much less than 0.1% of the miles driven on alcohol.

I am sure the energy cost of operating an electric car is very good, but how does it work out when the cost of the battery is amortized over the miles dirven? I do not know, but guess that doubles the real per mile cost of operation.

Have you had yours long enough to have replaced the first battery set?
If yes, what did the replacent cost and how many miles did you get on the origina battery?
If no, do you know at least what the replacement will cost? And, What is the maker claiming the battery life is? (Is it stated in miles, or years, or some combination etc. - I.e. how do they make their claim and if you do not get their claim is their compensation?) Finally, what is the chemisty? and is replacement a "trade in" where maker claims to reprocess the toxic metals, acid paste, etc. instead of just dumping them on the environment?

Thanks in advance for any data you can supply.

 

EV costs

Good questions. My EV is 25 years old, and uses conventional lead-acid batteries. The good news is that this is a cheap technology, and buying at the wholesale rate (since I am buying lots of batteries) my battery pack costs about $850. I haven't made it through my first battery pack yet, but 20,000 miles is what I'm expecting (lifespan is 10,000 to 30,000 miles depending on how well they are cared for.)

So that amortizes out to about 4 cents/mile. Added to electricity, total cost is about 5 cents per mile.

There is a deposit on the batteries as well, to encourage recycling.

When comparing per-mile costs and EV batteries with gasoline, engine maintenance costs should be added to the gas vehicle. Electric vehicles require no oil changes, filters, coolant, tune-ups, engine repairs, etc.

Electric motors have only one moving part. The motor and electronic controller in my 25-year-old vehicle has all the original parts - it has never required service in all those years. (Though I will need to replace the motor brushes soon, a $50 item.)

Something else to consider when looking at new technology electric vehicles like the Phoenix (see phoenixmotorcars.com) is that those batteries should never need replacing during the lifetime of the car (good for about 250,000 miles.) So the high initial purchase price (about $45,000) can be offset by fuel savings during the period of ownership.

 

To ape week:
sounds pretty good, and your point about greater maintance on liquid fuel car are valid I am sure. If you have had it 25 years and less than 20K miles, it is doing very light duty by most standards. I.e. not necesarily a solution for people who visit family in the next town etc. You did not say the deposit but let me guess $150 so total capital tied up in the batteries is $1000 In 25 years at 6% interest that is about $4000 if it had been buit in the bank CD instead. This should be included in your cost also I think that is $4 for every 20 miles or 20cents per mile to bring the total to 25 cents per mile, do you not agree?

 

Oops, I should have pointed out that I bought the car used, I have only had it a couple of years. Old EVs do tend to rack up fewer miles, because of shorter driving ranges. In 25 years, the car has put on perhaps 150,000 miles. I drive it probably 5000 miles per year, so I expect the batteries to last me about 4 years.

I don't think I need to count the interest I lose on my $1000 battery pack , unless you also want to count the interest you are losing on the $4000 worth of gasoline you will burn (5000 miles/year, 20 cents/mile, four years) before my battery pack goes dead.

 

Yes, both should be counted if one is making a purely economic analysis of the liquid fuel vs electric alternative.

For the economic comparison, it really does not make any difference how many or few owners their have been. (True often the cost to the first owner is higher in fact as cars depreciate much more rapidly in the first 100 miles than at any later increment of 100 miles, but this does not effect the cost of the car over its life.) I think we should take a reasonable miles /year for light use say your 5000/yr and some reasonably secure invetment alternative, say my 6%/yr. And perhaps for a period equal to two sets of battteries (10 years?) for all. Also one should consider the "taxi" alternative. - I did this once years ago, and it turned out the taxi was the cheapest (but I bought car anyway). I am too lazy to do it, but here is a start:

COST analysis table:
ITEM & type....................TAXI...... GAS.... .ALCOHOL.....BATTERY
INITIAL COST: .................0...
INTEREST LOST at 6%/yr: ..0...
REPAIR / REPLACEMENT $:...0...
INTEREST LOST: --------------------------------------------------
On batteries at 4.5%/yr**:..0............0............0...............
On fuel cars at 2%/yr***: ..0.........
MARRIED MAN INSURANCE:...0...
COST of "fuel" OR "rent": ...BIG1
INTEREST LOST at 3%/yr*:..?
TOTAL COST: ..................BIG1
TOTAL COST / MILE:.........

NOTES / ASSUMPTIONS:
(1) Taxi 40% of trips are 5 miles, 30% are 10 miles, 15% are 20 miles, 10% are 40 miles, 5% are 80 miles. Short trips by bike or walking.
(2)*Effective interest rate on fuel or rent of taxi is half (3%) as applied for full use period but continusly expended.
(3)**Effective interest rate on batteries is 4.5% as half is for full period and half for only half period. Note also battery car sold at end with dead battery.
(4)***Effective interest rate on repair of liquid fuel cars is 2% as most is in last third of period.
(5).....

Perhaps should start new thread so others can argue for changes in this cost model?

PS when Brasil first introduced fully "flex fuel" cars about four years ago, they had slight (~US$100) extra cost, but now that they are most (or in some model cases 100% of all sales) there is no differece, but in the used market, the gas only car is 7% to 10% lower in resale price than the identical car with a flex fuel motor.

 

All good points. I once did something similar - I did an experiment several years ago, and showed the wife exactly how it made considerable economic sense to go down to one car from two - and rent a car for the occasional day we needed two cars. We did it this way for a year or so, but people looked at us like we were crazy for renting cars twice a month instead of buying another car. My Dad finally gave us one of his old cars because he thought we were broke or something. This is exactly the line of thinking that led me to find an electric car for our second vehicle.

I went through the same thing with health insurance. I did a spreadsheet of all our health expenses, and it showed that an inexpensive high deductible policy made the most sense - so most of our health expenses are now paid for out-of-pocket, unless a major illness occurs. Extra bonus: we use it with an HSA (health savings account), which makes most health expenses tax deductible.

I can show exactly how this saves us money (much lower premiums and tax benefits more than offset the medical expenses), but I still get puzzled glances when I try to tell other people how this works. Doctors don't care for it much either, when I negotiate with them for lower medical costs.

 

You can imagine how far along we would be in battery tech if we had continued to develop it for cars during the last 100 years.

Instead society chose to go with the most inefficient, toxic and noisy solution - the internal combustion engine.