Electric cars are a pipe dream

[adoucette]

Thanks for backing me up.

He didn't
Indeed he said you didn't really understand the situation.
You clearly don't.

Smaller engined vehicles would serve the needs of many US citizens fine. How does Canada's top ten cars compare?

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/03/top-20-best-selling-cars-in-canada.html

LOL,
They just list Cars separate from Trucks and SUVs.

The two best selling vehicles by a wide margin were LARGE TRUCKS.

The F-150 sold 5,508 1st place by far, 2,000 more than the best selling car.
The GMC Sierra sold 4,352 2nd place also by a good margin.
The Silverado sold 2,246 9th place
The Dodge Ram sold 2,177 10th place

Then there are the SUVs:
Ford Escape was 2,796 for 4th place
Honda CRV had 2,494 for 7th place
Dodge Journey had 2,365 for 8th place

So of the top 10 vehicles sold in Canada, only 3 were cars, four were big trucks and three were SUVs.

So I guess you now think that the Canadians are as ignorant as the Americans?

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/03/top-5-best-selling-trucks-in-canada.html
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/03/top-10-best-selling-suvs-in-canada.html

Do they have builder's merchants in DFW metroplex? Builder's merchants who deliver goods to their local areas? Am I missing something? Do you not have infrastructure geared up for building?

Sure, and homeowners who don't have trucks use those services, but a contractor who is on a tight time schedule couldn't wait on the building supply houses to deliver goods. Too many contractors and too much area to cover so in the US the normal practice is you go to the supply stores, pick out what you need and take it with you when you leave.

Arthur

 

[adoucette]

Our population is stagnant? LOL; Think we have done pretty damn well for the size of our country. We are punching above our weight in many of the worlds industries. Film, Music, Finances, Industry, Sciences.

If you were punching above your weight your GDP per person compared to the US would show it.
It doesn't.
UK GDP PPP = $35k, US $47K (you are doing better than the average EU though)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom

The fact we don't over procreate, filling the world with more over-consumers is a good thing, and representative of the important issues the world faces. Issues you clearly have little or no regard for.

Excuse me.

The fact that I post statistics that shows what our country is like doesn't imply that I'm necessarily supporting the trends that they represent.

I think our population growth rate is a significant issue that is not being addressed, and a big part of that is the much higher immigration rate we have then you do.
As the Map I posted to pointed out (top right), of the 100 million more Americans expected over the next 37 years, over half will be immigrants and their children.

Arthur

 

[adoucette]

Is the DFW metroplex a city or just a collection of settlements/counties all latched together? Individual areas of this "metropolitan statistical area" no doubt have their own infrastructure and means of supplying the building trade with materials within their borders. Driving oversize cars simply means people driving across this area would spend more on fuel than is needed. Wasteful, very wasteful.

Again, you just aren't getting it.
There are no borders.
It's one big area and tradesman work throughout the area.
More to the point, the population of the area was just over 4 million in 1990.
It's 6.3 million now.
That's a bit over 1 million new residents each decade and all the supporting infrastructure for that many people.
But to put it in your perspective, this ONE area of the US grew by the half the amount as the entire UK did over this same period.

BUT, the population at the end was only 1/10 that of the UK, which means that the Percent of people involved in construction would be at least five times that in the UK, but you know that understates it a great deal, because that population gain in the UK was but 3% per decade so in most cases you could simply absorb the growth, in contrast the Dallas area grew by TEN times that rate, or about 30% per decade and thus entirely new infrastructure had to be constantly built for this huge influx of people into this area.

Consider the Dallas Area Rapid Transit system:

http://www.dart.org/maps/pdfmaps/DARTSystemMap06dec10.pdf

DART didn't even exist before 1983 and ALL of those rail lines were built (Orange line is still being built) over the last 20 years. Again, that's a LOT of construction. Same with the road system, and schools, stores, office buidlings, hospitals etc etc....

Now to put THAT in perspective, the Houston area that Chimpkin is from, is growing faster than Dallas.

This kind of growth has to be lived in to be understood.
I can fully appreciate the fact that you live in a country that has a relatively stable population and very low growth and can't really imagine how different it is here, or the much longer distances we deal with on a daily basis.

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

In effort to return more directly to EVs, I note:

(1) Except for fleets of identical cars, like taxis operating from one base, driving more than 10 hours each day, with little day-to-day variation in swap demand, (only two batteries required for each car - one in car & other recharging) the automatic battery swap idea is DoA, as the cost of 2 or 3 batteries sitting at public swap stations (wide daily swap demand variation, especially when "out of towners" come for rock festivals and need a swap for trip back home, etc.) for every battery in a car plus the cost of precision automatic transfer machines at the recharge stations is much more than the cost of the cars, even if all cars used identical batteries.

Also system is totally unacceptable because of the two facts listed below, which make the typical wait for getting a swap is nearly an hour for most customers.

(a) Even the main company considering this approach in small countries with high population and only major density cities equipped with battery change machines, states that 5 minutes is needed for each swap. (They may need to first remove mud or tar caked to bottom of car, etc. to not jam the automatic machine. And must hope no loose bolt in the car falls thru the huge opening at the bottom when battery is removed, for same reason but at least a day out of service while machine is repaired.)

(b) The demand for swaps is highly concentrated in the period 5:30PM to 6:30PM as customers return home for dinner. But each swap station will have only a few (1 or 2) swap machines as their large capital cost cannot sit idle 90% of the time as would be the case if they had four or more. Thus, there will often be 10 or more cars waiting in line for their swap (50 minutes or more to wait). Note you must swap at least three times more often than a gas powered car fills its tank. - Effectively three, at least, times more visits to the swap station than gas tank cars makes, triples the demand for swaps. About five swaps per week is typical for most being using car to / from work only.

Some can reduce this wait by a 6AM swap before going to work. Some, whose work is not too far from the swap station, could leave their car at the station for swap later in the day when it has little demand for swaps, perhaps even getting a discount. (A station owned car drops them off at work and they take a taxi back to swap station at end of day to get their waiting car.)

 

[Billy T]

In 2nd effort to return more directly to EVs, I note:

(2) Except for slow moving, long “train-like,” “people movers” passing over a relatively short closed loop in locations like in a zoo, the inductive recharge by roadway coils idea is DoA because of its very low (5% or less) energy efficiency and extremely high capital cost (several times more than the cost of the cars using it) and ten times greater CO2 production (compare to gasoline cars).

Much of the high cost for public hi-ways use is the need for high step down (~1000 to 1) high peak power rated transformers at least every 100 meters along the roadway. To avoid excessive RI^2 energy loss as energy is delivered from the power plants to the roadway, via a typical high-voltage, low-current, transmission line is required (at least a 50,000V transmission line) running along side of the roadway.

Unlike the metal–to-metal contact systems of electric trains (or even tiny race cars running on a table with an electric track way) the inductive recharge magnetic field is created only by high currents (not by high voltages). Because some roadway coils will be saturated with ground water, no more than ~50V can be used to drive the currents of these coils. Thus the “ampere/turns” making the recharge inductive field is mainly ampere with few turns. It is also mainly amperes (and not many turns) as the inductance of each coil increase more than linearly with the number of turns. If the coils have large inductance, it is not possible to build up the current in them quickly (say in only 0.1 seconds) nor is it possible to turn them off quickly as doing so would send an high voltage spike back into the expensive high power, high step down ratio transformers, destroying them as effective as a lightning bolt would. (Lightning protection of each transformer is possible, and needed, but adds to the cost.)

A car traveling at 80mph (36m/sec) will be 50% over a coil of the same size as the car (1m wide, 2meters long) less than 0.03 seconds, during which time it must get the energy it needs to drive 100m meters to the next coil. (I assume only one 2m long coil every 100m to keep copper cost more than 50 times lower than if coils were adjacent to each other.) I.e. the coil is near the transformer feeding it. A coil 50 meters way or half way between transformers would need heavy copper wires, better called small diameter rods, for power connection to the transformer with low RI^2 loses. That is why copper requirement for a continuous coil sets would be significantly more than 50 times greater. Only the copper in the coil will cost more than $200 at current copper prices, but made into insulated wire coils, installed in existing road ways, each would cost more than $500. I.e. the one coil per transformer at 100 meter intervals cost a possibly affordable $5/meter but does require high peak power rated transformers to deliver ALL the energy the car needs per 100 meters of travel in only 0.03 second.

Continuous or adjacent coils would cost a totally unaffordable $500/m. Here, I have assumed the small rods of copper needed for 50 coils in the 100 meters, 49 of which are not adjacent to the transformers, have doubled the local high current electric power distribution costs compared to only coils adjacent to the transformers. (i.e. $500/m = 2 x $5/m x 50 coils instead of one, each two meters long to span the 100 m between transformers)

I don’t know the cost of these 50,000V to 50V step down, very-high-power, transformers (when ordered by 1000 units in each order for each 62 miles of induction roadway), but $10,000 is not an unreasonable guess. Thus in transformer cost alone, the induction roadway cost 10 million dollar for every 62 miles!

1000 coils (one next to each transformer) in 62 miles of roadway at $500 each installed, is $500,000 or half a million dollars. The high voltage power transmission line (and its towers) is also at least half million dollars for 62 miles. Thus the system cost (not counting anything for coils in the cars or the switching on and off of the coils, or the energy used, etc.) would be on the order of 11 million dollars for each 62 mile (62miles = 1000 coils every 100 m = 100,000 meters = E5m) I.e. the capital cost is greater than $11E6/E5 = $110/meter or about $30/foot of highway. Most of this high cost capital investment would be with very low utilization, especially at night when few cars are passing thru the system.

Note the very low (<5%) system efficiency is due mainly to fact that even with as rapid as possible turn on and turn off, the coils the coils will be on for ~0.3 seconds and are useful (for car traveling at 80mph) for only 0.03 sec. (90% wasted energy). Plus the fact that the eddy currents induced in the metal car bottoms will waste about the same energy as delivered to the recharging battery. There are all the RI^2 loses plus 1000 to one step down transformer loses, which are energized 100% of the time. I.e. this system will require at least 20 times more energy than gasoline powered cars. With half of the electric power generated by fossil fuels, this system will increase CO2 release 10 fold compared to gasoline cars (and 100 fold compared to cars using sugar cane alcohol fuel!)

SUMMARY: Induction roadway system is AT LEAST:
10 times too costly, 10 times less LESS efficient and 10 times more CO2 pollution producing!
I would say that certainly makes it DoA even if my assumed/ discussed system design could be improved 100 fold.

 

[universaldistress]

He didn't
Indeed he said you didn't really understand the situation.
You clearly don't.



LOL,
They just list Cars separate from Trucks and SUVs.

The two best selling vehicles by a wide margin were LARGE TRUCKS.

The F-150 sold 5,508 1st place by far, 2,000 more than the best selling car.
The GMC Sierra sold 4,352 2nd place also by a good margin.
The Silverado sold 2,246 9th place
The Dodge Ram sold 2,177 10th place

Then there are the SUVs:
Ford Escape was 2,796 for 4th place
Honda CRV had 2,494 for 7th place
Dodge Journey had 2,365 for 8th place

So of the top 10 vehicles sold in Canada, only 3 were cars, four were big trucks and three were SUVs.

So I guess you now think that the Canadians are as ignorant as the Americans?

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/03/top-5-best-selling-trucks-in-canada.html
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/03/top-10-best-selling-suvs-in-canada.html



Sure, and homeowners who don't have trucks use those services, but a contractor who is on a tight time schedule couldn't wait on the building supply houses to deliver goods. Too many contractors and too much area to cover so in the US the normal practice is you go to the supply stores, pick out what you need and take it with you when you leave.

Arthur

This backs up my premise that fuel prices dictate the size of the vehicle driven. Cheaper fuel = bigger cars. Countries with more expensive fuel drive smaller cars, and are more sensible with their consumption of petrol/diesel. Doesn't do anything to prove your assertion that average americans need to commute in over sized vehicles.

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2010/08/best-selling-cars-in-canada-2010-year.html

They may have large engined top sellers but the overall spread (average) is smaller engined than in the US (5 cars in top ten). Fuel prices in Canada are the same as US but the Canadians seem to be more open to economical issues.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_and_diesel_usage_and_pricing


Also Canada's population growth is comparable to the US. 2005-2010 both countries around 0.95 percent, Canada's slightly lower but only by 0.1%.
This doesn't tie in with the picture you present for present trends in the US. How come Canadians are coping with growth but not driving as many gas guzzlers? Probably because they are a little more frugal, and sensible.

None of this changes the fact all vehicles in the US could shave a litre or two off their engine sizes and still have vehicles fit for purpose.

 

[cosmictraveler]

None of this changes the fact all vehicles in the US could shave a litre or two off their engine sizes and still have vehicles fit for purpose.

Or perhaps use fewer cylinders when up to speed. There are a few vehicles that shut off one or more cylinders when the vehicle is traveling at 50 MPH steadily which reduces the gas used by not allowing gas to be put into those cylinders until more power is needed.

 

[universaldistress]

If you were punching above your weight your GDP per person compared to the US would show it.
It doesn't.
UK GDP PPP = $35k, US $47K (you are doing better than the average EU though)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom



Excuse me.

The fact that I post statistics that shows what our country is like doesn't imply that I'm necessarily supporting the trends that they represent.

I think our population growth rate is a significant issue that is not being addressed, and a big part of that is the much higher immigration rate we have then you do.
As the Map I posted to pointed out (top right), of the 100 million more Americans expected over the next 37 years, over half will be immigrants and their children.

Arthur

GDP isn't a true picture when funds are held off shore. London is the world's financial capital, or at least was for the last 5years at least (going from memory). The cultural influence is immense and is not reflected by GDP. You think it is all about money, which is a typical US attitude (well british citizens hold money and shares that would be impossible to attribute as it is globally spread).

Why do so many british directors and artists (actors and musicians) dominate? US money is used to fund British projects all the time because we have untold talent. Look at a breakdown of successful films over the last 5years or so. Dark Knight (british director, screen writer) slumdog millionaire (british film), Inception (british director, screen writer), King's Speech (british film). Simon Cowell and his artists. Well no point even looking at music because our success is legendary. The cultural impact of England on the world is second to none and we are a stagnant island of inbreds.

Superman is british. (english)
Spiderman is british. (Welsh)
Batman is British (english?)

The American dream, to make money (to be culturally out manouvered and skilled by a backward stagnant population).

LOL

 

[universaldistress]

Again Adoucette longer distances has no relevance to engine size. Weights needed to be hauled is more of a factor but like I said the US population is urbanised. UK firms deliver anything to the whole country. We have rural areas but delivery of heavy building materials is done to all areas of britain. So are you telling me that metroplex cannot supply the needs of its citizens?

You STILL do not need bigger vehicles, you just prefer them. I get it, I really do, but it isn't good for the planet. Shave down the sizes of those engines and watch your wallets contents increase. I know it will never be like the UK. But jeez, the litres could be brought done noticeably. You know it makes sense.

 

[adoucette]

This backs up my premise

Oh BS.
You claimed that your list from Canada was proof that we drove bigger cars than we needed.

Except you used the WRONG data.

Indeed the Best selling vehicles in BOTH countries (by far) were the exact same vehicles and both were BIG trucks with V8 engines.

Indeed 7 of the top 10 vehicles in Canada were SUVs or Trucks.

You were WRONG.

You have been consistantly wrong about nearly every topic you have brought up.

You are clearly incapable of having a discussion on this as you have NO IDEA what our country is like, don't really care to learn and just jump to conclusions based on your ignorance that feeds your Anti-American Bigotry.

Arthur

 

[adoucette]

Superman is british. (english)
Spiderman is british. (Welsh)
Batman is British (english?)

WTF?

Superman comes from Krypton, but was raised in the American Midwest (Smallville)
Spiderman was a kid from NYC (Queens)
Batman (Bruce Wayne) was an American Billionaire.

Superman was created by American writer Jerry Siegel
Batman was created by American writer Bob Kane
Spiderman was created by American writer Stan Lee.

Arthur

 

[universaldistress]

Oh BS.
You claimed that your list from Canada was proof that we drove bigger cars than we needed.

Except you used the WRONG data.

Indeed the Best selling vehicles in BOTH countries (by far) were the exact same vehicles and both were BIG trucks with V8 engines.

Indeed 7 of the top 10 vehicles in Canada were SUVs or Trucks.

You were WRONG.

You have been consistantly wrong about nearly every topic you have brought up.

You are clearly incapable of having a discussion on this as you have NO IDEA what our country is like, don't really care to learn and just jump to conclusions based on your ignorance that feeds your Anti-American Bigotry.

Arthur

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2010/08...2010-year.html

4 (small engined) cars in this list (CHECK THIS LIST, smaller engined cars than US's comparable list. US list has no small engined cars). And the point I was making was that (if you go back to the beginning of this debate) Americans only drive big cars because the fuel is too cheap. The fact Canadians drive big cars (but not as big as US) backs up my initial claim (as Canadians have cheap fuel too). You have said nothing to prove US citizens need to drive 5litre monsters. And said nothing to prove that Americans do not only drive big cars because they want to and they can.

You are consistently wrong because you can't face the truth that Americans over consume, specifically on fuel.

The actors employed to play Superman, Batman and Spidey are all of the nationalities I have listed, DDUUUHH. Shame you have no acting talent over there. Also took an englishman to reinvigorate the Batman franchise, hey? Just admit we are better at making realistic movies than you guys.

 

[universaldistress]

You haven't been wrong on anything I suppose. LOL a lot. The fact you skirt over the areas where I have defeated you shows your delusional tendencies. And this is all part of one bigger delusion that runs through this whole thread. The fact Americans can't bear to let go of their addiction to oil consumption, and are making little move to tackle the biggest global crisis the world will possibly ever face.

Quit driving bigger cars than you need is all I say.

Just because you want me to be wrong doesn't make it so. These kinds of tactics are used by your government, but will not work here. You have no hold over me LOL.

 

[spidergoat]

Gas in Brazil is dirt cheap, and they drive small cars.

 

[universaldistress]

US uses 44% of world's gasoline every year! Is that equatable to population distribution?

 

[universaldistress]

Gas in Brazil is dirt cheap, and they drive small cars.

They are poor. And anyway, this doesn't prove anything in this context. US are wealthy, gas is cheap= over consumption. Nothing can make it right going forward into the future. We wouldn't be having this debate if Americans were willing to change their ways, and showing keen. US are big consumers of gasoline and of all the nations in the world need to get behind EV. And they will as the tech improves. I know I will live long enough to see it so I'm not worried. I will have my day of reflection, look back on this debate and laugh.

 

[adoucette]

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2010/08...2010-year.html

4 (small engined) cars in this list (CHECK THIS LIST, smaller engined cars than US's comparable list. US list has no small engined cars).

You just make a habit of being WRONG.

Here's the list for the same 2010 year for the US

http://www.chicagotribune.com/class...op10-best-selling-cars,0,4506344.photogallery

First two vehicles are the SAME on both lists. Which basically says that us and the Canadians are more alike then different.

The next on the Canadian list is the GRAND Caravan followed by another big Truck the Dodge Ram.

In Canada those three trucks sold as many vehicles as all the other cars on the list put together.

But, while 3rd spot on the Canadian list went to the Grand Caravan (17-25 mpg), the third on the US list was to the much smaller and more efficient Camry (22-33 mpg).

While the 4th spot on the Canadian list went to the Dodge Ram Truck (14-20mpg), the fourth spot went to the much smaller and more efficient Honda Accord (19 -29 mpg).

The 5th spot on the Canadian list was the Honda Civic and on the US it was a comparable small car the Toyota Corolla (they get the same mileage).

So on the first half of the list clearly the Americans are being more frugal, and of course the numbers and importance lessen as you go down the list.

The 6th spot on the Canadian list was the Mazda 3 (20-28mpg), while it was the much more fuel efficient Civic for the US (26 -34 mpg)

The 7th spot on the Canadian list went to the Ford Escape SUV (19-25mpg) and the 7th spot on the US list went to the Nissan Altima (19 -26) a tie.

So NO, your premise doesn't hold.

Like usual, you see what you want to see and disregard the rest.

Arthur

 

[X-Man2]

Well I as an American am trying to do my share,I ride a scooter and a motorized bicycle 98% of the time.Believe me universaldistress there are many many Americans trying to change the US addiction to oil,gas etc.Their crusading,getting air time when possible,parading,picketing,writing those in the White house,giving speeches,online etc etc. Unfortunately the big problem we have is the powerful oil companies and politicians that are keeping the status quo.The whole Government is in bed together and resisting change at every corner.At elections there is no one to vote for who would be willing to make an effort towards fixing all that's broken.I believe California is the only State that is half way doing anything,even that is slow due to them being broke.

Only when oil and gas is either priced much higher or imports stop flowing in will the US change,of course thru forced circumstances.

 

[universaldistress]

You just make a habit of being WRONG.

Here's the list for the same 2010 year for the US

http://www.chicagotribune.com/class...op10-best-selling-cars,0,4506344.photogallery

First two vehicles are the SAME on both lists. Which basically says that us and the Canadians are more alike then different.

The next on the Canadian list is the GRAND Caravan followed by another big Truck the Dodge Ram.

In Canada those three trucks sold as many vehicles as all the other cars on the list put together.

But, while 3rd spot on the Canadian list went to the Grand Caravan (17-25 mpg), the third on the US list was to the much smaller and more efficient Camry (22-33 mpg).

While the 4th spot on the Canadian list went to the Dodge Ram Truck (14-20mpg), the fourth spot went to the much smaller and more efficient Honda Accord (19 -29 mpg).

The 5th spot on the Canadian list was the Honda Civic and on the US it was a comparable small car the Toyota Corolla (they get the same mileage).

So on the first half of the list clearly the Americans are being more frugal, and of course the numbers and importance lessen as you go down the list.

The 6th spot on the Canadian list was the Mazda 3 (20-28mpg), while it was the much more fuel efficient Civic for the US (26 -34 mpg)

The 7th spot on the Canadian list went to the Ford Escape SUV (19-25mpg) and the 7th spot on the US list went to the Nissan Altima (19 -26) a tie.

So NO, your premise doesn't hold.

Like usual, you see what you want to see and disregard the rest.

Arthur

Turns out the demographics of Canada are on a par with the US. Also predominantly urbanised population.

How does any of this effect the fact that the US are over consuming?

44% of gasoline consumption perpetrated by 4.5% of the worlds population.

Usa population is 4.5% of world total: 385,341 million liters motor gasoline 2005
Canada population 0.49% of world total: 38,615 million liters motor gasoline 2005

According to these figures Canadians consume slightly less gasoline per capita. And considering Canada's urbanised population is running at 80% and US's at 82% then there is a slightly more remarkable difference in fuel consumption? So Canadians are a little more frugal.

This doesn't change the fact however that US consumption is too high and is a symptom of the fact fuel is too cheap in the US and you still have said nothing to disprove that Americans only drive big cars because they want to and they can.

Americans and Canadians could both downsize their vehicles.

Both markets have grown fat on cheap oil prices.

 

[universaldistress]

Well I as an American am trying to do my share,I ride a scooter and a motorized bicycle 98% of the time.Believe me universaldistress there are many many Americans trying to change the US addiction to oil,gas etc.Their crusading,getting air time when possible,parading,picketing,writing those in the White house,giving speeches,online etc etc. Unfortunately the big problem we have is the powerful oil companies and politicians that are keeping the status quo.The whole Government is in bed together and resisting change at every corner.At elections there is no one to vote for who would be willing to make an effort towards fixing all that's broken.I believe California is the only State that is half way doing anything,even that is slow due to them being broke.

Only when oil and gas is either priced much higher or imports stop flowing in will the US change,of course thru forced circumstances.

I hear you X-man2. this is the type of attitude that needs to be adopted universally not just in the US but globally, if we are to stand a chance of bringing down CO2 emissions. I feel for those protestors. I also feel for the Americans who will be hit in the pocket by increased fuel prices, people like Adoucette who have a large vehicle for justifiable reasons. I just think that an 82% urbanised population doesn't need gas guzzlers as the norm.

It is unjustifiable. Most of these vehicles are proably not hauling anything close to an acceptable capacity even 1% of the miles they clock up, no doubt. Just big engines making noise (a nice noise I might add). In England we call them 'Chelsea Tractors' after the housewives who drive around 3litre 4x4s to take their kids 1 mile to school and back.

But 5litres uder the hood. Jeeezuuzzz. to travel long distances hey Adoucette, I laugh out loud.