Oil shock: a prediction for the future:
There’s a new report out that is predicting $7 a gallon gas by 2010 and a serious collapse of the gasoline car market by that time as people start to seriously give up having a car around.
This would force the working poor off the roads, but having them use public transport only works in places where such things are available. In most of the USA, ( Read more... )
>got behind it an FORCED the auto industry to
>partner with Tesla Motors.
The entire electricity grid of the US would collapse, with resultant chaos.
A stupendously enourmous amount of electricity is required, which means that the west needs to start building nuclear plants in great quantities about 10 years ago.
No, wind turbines and solar won't hack it - not by orders of magnitude.
The Tesla is a nice taster of what is *technically* feasible - the car is actually built in England by Lotus and the Chinese made batteries are assembled into the car in the US.
I'm very much in favour of electric or hybrid vehicles, having used an electric bike for the last 8 years (I only drive a few hundred miles per year), but you have to realise that all the batteries in the Tesla (production of which is, sadly, seeing all sorts of technical and mangerial problems) and similar vehicles are based on Lithium.
Commercially extractable Lithium is mostly in China/Tibet and South America. To change over the entire world to electric vehicles is going to need a LOT of *imported* Lithium. So the west will be competing with the rest of the world for limited amounts of Lithium, instead of oil.
Again, I'm very much in favour of electric and hybrid cars - but don't ever make the mistake of thinking that government can wave a magic wand and it'll all just happen.
Reply
Dermot, I honestly can't see the electric cars ramping up that fast - I've always understood that the real hold up has been in the battery tech, in particular the materials research and testing.
Someone who is better versed than I in the engineering questions can help on this.
Reply
By and large, we know a "Manhattan"-like energy project can succeed.
See my comment re solar shingles.
Batteries that are flexible enough to fold and store.
Coming out to recharge when a standard connection isn't available. We have them now, and they are becoming more efficient every day.
Reply
Yes, though it's from both regulation and de-regulation alike depending on where -- companies subject to poor regulation (in terms of quality of oversight, where regulated) or sloppy deregulation (where deregulated) didn't fund the grid, it being in their interest to not fund it. In the regulated-poorly case, the companies take all the profit they can, knowing that a failing grid won't affect their monopoly and can in fact be used as an excuse to argue for raising the regulated rates. In the deregulated arena, the maintainer of infrastructure has the cost of maintenance/improvement as a kind of albatross compared with all the competition to which they must (legally) lease access at regulatedly-low rates. Ergo, they cut corners to compete.
In the (few, I admit) places where regulation was/is done well (meaning infrastructure and not just price is managed and incentives for improvement exist), the infrastructure is reliable and solid; and in the (few, I admit) places where DE-regulation was/is done well (meaning the remaining oversight/regulations provide incentive to improve or maintain the infrastructure while encouraging competition among energy sources), the infrastructure is reliable and solid, and even improving. Such places are few & far between, I admit - but moving from poorly-but-heavily-regulated northern IL to lightly-but-insightfully-deregulated NH, I've experienced something like 1/10 the outages, despite 100-year-quality wild weather and the heaviest snows in 150 years; and I have access to grid-tie cogeneration (I can put back into the grid, even running the meter backwards if I produce enough to offset my immediate consumption), all while the market lets "green" energy compete as a source, and as prices shift, consumers can pay into the desired source or just "vote" their conscience.e All while the grid is regularly improved under a regime designed to improve power delivery, not just "outsource" it.
Compare with CA, where deregulation was performed in a less insightful way, and with IL, where regulation produces bizarre unintended consequences, and well, there's the results.
Reply
LiFe can charge (as little as 6mins for a full charge, if you have a big enough power feed) and discharge incredibly quickly - but the energy density is lower. LiPo has much greater energy density - ie range per charge - put is slower to charge and shorter life. The Tesla uses LiPo, the Killacycle (world's fastest electric motorcycle) uses LiFe.
For a reasonably streamlined car, a working figure for range of around 5 miles per KWhr is not a bad place to start. So ballpark is around 1 mile per Kg of the best Lithium battery. It is actually a lot better than that, since regenerative braking recovers quite a bit of energy. But that's what you'd get if you just converted a 'normal' car as opposed to a purpose-designed one.
There are some very interesting proposals to use grid-connected electric cars to buffer renewable supplies onto the grid, but it is rather speculative at the moment.
Lots of empty-headed politicians (and others) keep spouting off about windmills and solar-voltaics, but this guy has run the numbers - read them and weep (unless you favour nuclear!)
http://www.withouthotair.com/ - a good read, if you have any interest in the alternative energy debate. Should be required reading for any politician with decision-making powers in the energy field.
Another point that occurred to me as I bumped over some pretty poor roads(*) in Illinois a couple weeks back - I gather there are demands to drop the federal tax on your gas - isn't that the very same money that repairs your major highways? Crappy road quality will surely drop fuel efficiency.
(*) Yup, we have some pretty crappy ones here, too.
Reply
Simple applications of nanotech methods are producing near-perfect gel matrices for LIon (by a company called A123, a privately-owned startup in MA, with backing from typical silicon-valley venture-caps and the energy R&D division of General Electric), for NiMH (Panasonic) and even for lead-acid batteries. The batteries don't HOLD a whole lot more than their imperfect counterparts, but they can DELIVER it far more efficiently and they self-discharge less while charged. Gel matrix imperfections make for resistance, in effect, and so batteries heat up while discharging; with better matrices, they can deliver more energy over a short period of time without wasting energy as heat and risking overheating, making powering the car much more efficient and viable.
Those "36V" cordless tools on the market already use the A123 tech; the Volt will, too. Our ability to use batteries to deliver stored power efficiently has been improving on a sharp curve. An A123-type NiMH battery can deliver more energy over given period of time than a 15A 110VAC outlet. Storage per pound/cuft remains an area where we're making only linear improvement, however.
Shelly's kind of right that we can generate a lot more using more convenient solar tech, but note that things like solar shingles and solar tinted glass are actually LESS efficient than the current generation of solar panels - they are just more aesthetically pleasing and neater overall on install. We all need to note that massive arrays of panels will have some environmental side-effects that are only now being debated. And all the photo-voltaic systems are all environmentally dirty to produce, and even worse to dispose of, being in essence giant silicon wafers with a 25-year-or-so useful-life expectancy.
And though solar panels can make a homeowner almost electricity-independent (though not energy independent unless they live in the far South and don't care about A/C), solar systems placed in situ where consumption will occur are going to do only a little to help cities with a density of 13,000 per square mile. (It would practically take PAVING ONE SQUARE MILE with the most expensive current generation of solar panels to provide the total energy needs of just one square mile's population - on average - of Chicago, and that doesn't include the fact that solar and wind have extreme seasonal variance, which unfortunately go for the most part in the opposite direction of the northern US's energy needs).
Thus the need to massively improve the grid no matter what, as you, Jim, attest.
Maybe some day even our streets will be photo-voltaic collectors. We'll still want to create a high-efficiency national, or ideally trans-hemispheric, grid.
So in the end, nothing solves the delivery problem but improving the delivery situation (though cogeneration makes for a significant crutch). I DO think we will, as a whole, cogenerate more of our power, use less of it per capita, and - as you say - have to go through a LOT of pain to update/upgrade the grid, probably finally building a true national system (also improving the distribution of benefits from regional weather and use pattern differences).
Efficiency, cogeneration, improved storage, self-sufficiency.
I'm still holding out for my Mr. Fusion.
Reply
I should know, I have over 100 A123 cells powering my electric bike...
(I think the older 18V tools use NiMH)
Apart from the greatly improved lifecycle of LiFe, the *power* density is huge - a single cell weighing 70g can deliver 100A at 3.3V - that's over 3KW (not for long, of course) from something the size of my thumb.
I keep a 4.6AH 13.2V pack in my lab: I can easily carry it in one hand yet it produces enough current to start cars in winter when my colleagues have flattened their batteries.
It is also a greatdeal of fun to pull a battery out of my pocket and start a car with it(*).
The issue is still where do we get the power and where do we get the Lithium.
Filthy though ancient-tech lead-acid batteries may be, I think in excess of 98% of the lead can be recycled - it is not yet clear how Lithium will compare.
There are some new delevopments in SLA (sealed Lead Acid) using foamed-graphite plates - I've heard claims of 125Whr/Kg which if true would put them back in the race for automotive power.
Don't forget that James Drumm, 70 years ago in Ireland, developed the Nickel-Zinc battery that powered a train for 80 miles - my father rode on it! NiZn is still being developed, though in fits and starts, since EverCell went bust.
http://people.clarkson.edu/~ekatz/scientists/drumm.html
(*) OK, the heavy cables and croc clips are a bit of a giveaway, but the look on their face is still fun.
Reply
Older battery techs: yes, we will soon see lead-acid and NiMH systems of a power delivery capability like the A123 LIon, due to improvements in the mats and gel quality, and some of those old techs (not to mention the Nickel-Iron battery lasts forever and is making a comeback).
I actually think the "fuel" (energy storage/transport) problem is a lot less significant now than the energy generation problem thanks to the application of a number of technologies that have been waiting in the wings for the market to value them. Still a huge fuel problem in terms of building the infrastructure to move and/or support it, but we have the knowhow. Energy sourcing is particularly remaining a problem when Congress and White House are both wrongheadedly conflating energy sources with fuels.
Reply
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/us/27solar.html?ex=137230560
One likely consequence is a lot of solar manufacturers/suppliers going out of business in the interim - not just for lack of installation locations, but also for a loss of confidence in the solar industry as a whole (must be something wrong with solar, otherwise the government wouldn't have banned it).
So drilling in the Arctic is fine, but solar needs a two year environmental impact study?
It certainly sends the wrong signals.
It's not my government and it's not my blog - but I'm terribly tempted to be rude...
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
You need to take a trip to the Tesla Motors faq page.
And, as far as wind and solar?
We have barely scratched the surface of it's capability.
Solar powered roofing tiles
The Jacobs Wind Generator has been around since the 1930s (almost killed by the rural electrification project, you know, the one that presents an incredibly tempting military target) but it has been improving year by year.
I've seen wind generators that float several hundred feet above the ground that are stable and can be deployed in scant hours (helium) able to withstand 200 MPH winds.
I keep saying this.
To qoute Obama:
"Yes We Can!"
Yes we did build a transcontinental railroad.
Yes we did rebuild the country after the great depression.
Yes we did build an army an mobilize to help defeat on of the most horrific threats the world has ever seen.
Yes we did put a man on the moon.
I say again, YES WE CAN!
In this world, our only limits are set by fear and the greed of those who have a vested interest in keeping that status quo.
Reply
Reply
200?
300?
No where because there is no wind (well, that's unlikely..smile Mark, it's a joke).
But there's my point.
Re solar:
Bright sunlight generates MORE power using solar technology, but output is variable and improving everyday.
Also, it is a known fact that most high efficiency wind generators create MORE then they use and feed BACK into the power grid (for example, a judge ruled that the owner of e refurbished generator was entitled to payment for power deposited into the grid).
Reply
(1) The area around my house is LOADED with tall, mature trees.
(2) The trees very much block up the southern exposure.
End result: you'd have to get a pretty high mast for the wind turbine to get above the turbulence zone of the local trees, and the sun is blocked a lot.
Reply
Leave a comment