EV Digest 5146
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Etractor, was Aircraft Gen. Motor etc.
by "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: how to ask to charge at work
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: E-Volks Geo Metro Conversion
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: E-Volks Geo Metro Conversion
by "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: how to ask to charge at work
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Killacycle voting
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Emoo ....E mows!
by mike golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) RE: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by paul wiley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Emoo ....E mows!
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
by "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Cor wrote -
> One of the problems with testing the Hybrid's emissions is
> that the current way of smog testing would need to be changed
> to allow testing the hybrids.
> Don't know if you ever stood next to the bench that the car is
> run at when testing for smog - what do they do? Yes: run it at
> constant (low) speed. What does the hybrid do when running at
> low (constant speed)? Bingo - switch off it's engine.
>
> They CANNOT test hybrid's smog emissions with the current
> test setup and protocol used in every smog station, because
> almost all tests would register 0 emissions, no matter how
> good or bad the engine actually is.
>
> (Prius was designed for lowest possible emissions, the low fuel
> usage is just a nice side-effect of focussing on the real problem)
>
Here in AZ, your put your wheels between the two rollers and the tester says
take it up to 55 and hold it there. So it is a high speed test.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
http://www.renewables.com/Permaculture/ElectricTractor.htm
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sean Albiston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I joined the ev list particularly in hopes of keeping tabs on the
> prospects of Etractors - I'm a small vegetable farmer. I've cc: a
> number of other folks who have in the past shown interest in the
topic
> of Electric tractors to Mr. Heckeroth at www.renewables.com . Did
an
> actual electric tractor lists serve ever get created? I would
likely
> purchase an electric tractor today, even if it cost twice a
standard
> diesel compact. I would build one myself, but am far too busy.
>
> thanks, sean albiston
>
>
>
>
> -----------below is a post from the Electric Vehicle list
> serve---------------
>
>
> Since the subject of this post appeared to change, I tacked
etractor on
> the front for folks
>
> that might be interested.
>
> Andre' Blanchard wrote:
>
> > I have recently discovered my next EV conversion, a John Deere
60
> > tractor with loader, about 6000 lbs of iron.
>
>
> Tractors are an excellent application for EV technology.
>
> > I use the loader for moving stuff around, putting logs on the
sawmill,
> > plowing snow and such, no real work like plowing the back 40 so
> > electric will be ideal anyway :) especially since starting the
beast
> > at 10°F could be a 2 hour ordeal.
>
>
> Lead-acid batteries will certainly be less than ideal at 10%F.
>
> > I have a good start on a CAD design for a 16 pole 4 position
manual
> > switch that I should be able to build for a few hundred dollars
in
> > copper and fiberglass board, and a few weekends in front of the
> > milling machine. Would use a contactor to break the circuit
before
> > changing the switch position between 6v, 12v, 24v, and 48v speed
> > ranges, and a rheostat on the field for fine tuning speed. The
6 volt
> > position may well not be needed but I want to ensure a real slow
creep
> > speed for positioning objects with the loader.
>
>
> ------------------
> John Lussmyer wrote:
>
> > Sounds like it would be cheaper and easier to just buy a low
voltage
> > controller.
>
> -------------------
> Yes.
>
> IMHO, it is more important to have a PWM controller on a tractor
that it
> is on an inexpensive
> road-going EV. You may find it next to impossible to do careful
work in
> tight spaces with a
> contactor controller on a tractor. (We tried it, not at 6V
though. :^D )
>
> > Question is how hard is it to electrically reverse an aircraft
generator?
>
>
> You mention retaining the transmission, would you _need_ to
reverse the
> motor?
>
> I happen to have what I'm betting is more experience than most on
this
> subject.
> Some links to etractors I have been involved with-
> http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/tracpage.html
> http://www.renewables.com/tracpage1.html
> http://www.renewables.com/tracpage2.html
> http://www.renewables.com/tracpage3.html
> http://www.renewables.com/Permaculture/ElectricTractor.htm
> We dump-charged one of the tractors regularly with PV generated
juice-
> http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/CSpage.html
>
> HTH!
> ----------------
>
>
>
>
> Andre' Blanchard wrote:
>
> > I have recently discovered my next EV conversion, a John Deere
60
> > tractor with loader, about 6000 lbs of iron. Seems the owner
fixed
> > the leaky coolant pump and filled it with water to check for
leaks but
> > forgot put coolant back in before the cold season.:( Rather
then name
> > names lets just say transporting the dead tractor to my yard did
not
> > present much of a problem.
> >
> > I use the loader for moving stuff around, putting logs on the
sawmill,
> > plowing snow and such, no real work like plowing the back 40 so
> > electric will be ideal anyway :) especially since starting the
beast
> > at 10°F could be a 2 hour ordeal.
> >
> > An aircraft generator would seem to be ideal for this
application with
> > its constant speed and regen breaking.
> > Something like this one
> > http://www.surpluscenter.com/item.asp?
UID=2006020217265170&item=6-936&catname=
> > running on 8 6 volt batteries. Will also needed an electric
pump for
> > the hydraulics and power steering and possibly a pump to splash
oil
> > around in the transmission.
> >
> > I have a good start on a CAD design for a 16 pole 4 position
manual
> > switch that I should be able to build for a few hundred dollars
in
> > copper and fiberglass board, and a few weekends in front of the
> > milling machine. Would use a contactor to break the circuit
before
> > changing the switch position between 6v, 12v, 24v, and 48v speed
> > ranges, and a rheostat on the field for fine tuning speed. The
6 volt
> > position may well not be needed but I want to ensure a real slow
creep
> > speed for positioning objects with the loader.
> >
> >
> > Question is how hard is it to electrically reverse an aircraft
> > generator? Nice for plowing snow.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
> Roy LeMeur
>
> My Electric Vehicle Pages:
> http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/evpage.html
>
> Informative Electric Vehicle Links:
> http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/evlinks.html
>
> EV Parts/Gone Postal Photo Galleries:
> http://www.casadelgato.com/RoyLemeur/page01.htm
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm going to repeat what I said last time this came up. Bypassing the
chain of command by going to PR or whatever is a very dumb move.
You're likely to motivate your chain of command to work against you.
Perhaps energetically.
There's another aspect. By example, consider something I read about
the negotiations between Reagan and Gorbachev regarding arms reduction
talks. Something happened, I forget what but maybe something to do
with Afghanistan, that would have normally put the US and the Sovs at
odds. Gorbie and Reagan had become friends. The word came from the
back channel begging Reagan not to say anything publicly that would
"force us to take a stand". In other words, he wanted to be able to
officially ignore things in the interest of higher goals.
The same applies in the corporate world. If you go to the PR people
or the division head or CEO or whatever, you're forcing the company to
take a position on the subject. It'll probably be one you don't like.
Once the company is forced to take a position, it has to formulate one
that is fair to all employees and good for the company, particularly
if it's a public company. Faced with the prospect of having to
install perhaps hundreds of charging outlets for every employee who
wants one, the easy answer is NO.
What you want to do is go in under the official radar and not piss
anyone off in the process. My approach would be to ask my boss what I
might do to gain permission to plug in. Then take his advice to
heart. If you do what he suggests, you've likely gained an ally,
someone who can help you gain access to an outlet with an unofficial
wink and a nod.
Another benefit of coming in under the official radar is that you
probably won't be asked to pay for the power. The actual cost of the
power involved is minimal. The symbology of having to officially take
a position company-wide regarding paying for power isn't. If you try
to go through official channels, you're almost surely going to have to
pay if you manage to get permission at all.
I've achieved all sorts of goals using these methods over the years,
some involving much more value than a little electricity. Of course,
anyone can take my actual experience for what it's worth to 'em.
John
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 05:36:06 -0700, Ryan Bohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Hi to you all,
>
>> Before you ask, put together a little press package. Have pictures of
>> you and your car. Gather copies of any press your car has received.
>> Find some nice press that other similar companies have received for
>> allowing folks like you to plug in. Calculate the cost of electricity
>> per day (at the rates that the company pays for electricity.)
>This article shows me plugging in at my day job. I think it has been a
>positive PR thing overall for them.
>
>It takes contacting the right person on the right day, mixed with a bit
>of luck. I think Bill's ideas are pretty sound, although I didn't
>contact the PR department first. I'm not sure if the outcome would have
>been any different.
>
>-Ryan
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo Emerson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Can't access photos. Must be a member of that Yahoo group.
----- Original Message -----
From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: E-Volks Geo Metro Conversion
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev/photos/view/a5fd?b=1&m=f&o=0
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Got pictures? 8 batteries shouldn't be hard to do. LR...........
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 03:16:42 -0600, Christopher Robison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think perhaps the hybrids should not be exempt from emission testing,
>but I think you'd find they do put out significantly less than cars
>unassisted by an electric motor.
No. Modern engine management enables either engine to run under most
conditions with zero emissions. Total emissions are so low now that
all the efforts at reducing them are concentrated on the first minute
of operation, before the cats and oxygen sensors light off. I've
personally stood in an emissions dyno room and watched a million
dollars worth of high speed emission analysis equipment come up all
zeros.
Of course, since I've been associated with two of the big three auto
makers, what do I know, right?
I also know because I've seen the efforts, that any of the auto makers
could match whatever economy is being achieved with hybrids if and
when the customer becomes willing to accept a different driving
experience and butt-ugly styling optimized for aerodynamics.
Specifically, an economy-optimized CVT.
I've spent some seat time in one of these cars. It is indeed quite
different, similar to a snowmobile with a torque converter. Focus
groups have reacted very negatively to the experience. Hybrids are,
IMHO, an expensive and transient gimmick, at least for economy. I
predict that hybrid technology, at least non-plug-in versions will
evolve to performance enhancements.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo Emerson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 07:04:31 -0800 , Cor van de Water
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>One of the problems with testing the Hybrid's emissions is
>that the current way of smog testing would need to be changed
>to allow testing the hybrids.
>Don't know if you ever stood next to the bench that the car is
>run at when testing for smog - what do they do? Yes: run it at
>constant (low) speed. What does the hybrid do when running at
>low (constant speed)? Bingo - switch off it's engine.
No. The car is run through the federal test cycle while the entire
contents of the exhaust are captured in large teflon-lined poly
bag(s). A sample is taken from this bag and analyzed for emissions.
Field tests, even the dyno version, do not really test for emissions.
They test to verify that the system is still operating the same as it
did when it left the factory. The dyno test simply tests more points
in the envelope.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo Emerson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm sorry John, though I understand you've had more experience with
engines and related technology than I'll ever have, in this case your
input alone is just not enough to convince me that even modern gas engines
are "zero emissions". There's just too much information out there
contradicting that statement.
Why would Toyota have developed a hybrid drive with the express purpose of
reducing emissions, if there were none to reduce? How do you burn
gasoline or any other hydrocarbon and get nothing out of it? And how is
it possible that running a gas engine in its most efficient powerband
(i.e. less gasoline per horsepower-hour) would fail to reduce the quantity
of exhaust gases produced over a given distance traveled? Like Mars tried
to market a 3 Musketeers bar with 30% less fat by making a candy bar
that's 30% smaller, less exhaust gas would seem to mean lower emissions.
If gas engines produce no emissions, I invite you to prove it to me by
standing in a closed, non-ventilated garage with a brand new Chevy or
Honda or whatever, running on a dyno at 20HP or so, as in usual highway
driving. Keep this up for a couple hours, maybe grab something to read or
some video games or something.
Though clearly I'd need some pretty high-tech batteries to hold that much
energy, I'll be happy to do the same in a separate garage, running a true
zero-emission electric car charged off of Austin GreenChoice wind power.
I'm not saying I won't be convinced, but you know what Sagan said about
extraordinary claims.
--chris
On Fri, February 3, 2006 11:00 am, Neon John said:
> On Fri, 03 Feb 2006 03:16:42 -0600, Christopher Robison
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I think perhaps the hybrids should not be exempt from emission testing,
>>but I think you'd find they do put out significantly less than cars
>>unassisted by an electric motor.
>
> No. Modern engine management enables either engine to run under most
> conditions with zero emissions. Total emissions are so low now that
> all the efforts at reducing them are concentrated on the first minute
> of operation, before the cats and oxygen sensors light off. I've
> personally stood in an emissions dyno room and watched a million
> dollars worth of high speed emission analysis equipment come up all
> zeros.
>
> Of course, since I've been associated with two of the big three auto
> makers, what do I know, right?
>
> I also know because I've seen the efforts, that any of the auto makers
> could match whatever economy is being achieved with hybrids if and
> when the customer becomes willing to accept a different driving
> experience and butt-ugly styling optimized for aerodynamics.
> Specifically, an economy-optimized CVT.
>
> I've spent some seat time in one of these cars. It is indeed quite
> different, similar to a snowmobile with a torque converter. Focus
> groups have reacted very negatively to the experience. Hybrids are,
> IMHO, an expensive and transient gimmick, at least for economy. I
> predict that hybrid technology, at least non-plug-in versions will
> evolve to performance enhancements.
>
> John
> ---
> John De Armond
> See my website for my current email address
> http://www.johngsbbq.com
> Cleveland, Occupied TN
> A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo
> Emerson
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Where do you guys post pctures ??
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Can't access photos. Must be a member of that Yahoo group.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:26 PM
> Subject: Re: E-Volks Geo Metro Conversion
>
>
> > http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev/photos/view/a5fd?b=1&m=f&o=0
> >
> >
> > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lawrence Rhodes" <ev@>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Got pictures? 8 batteries shouldn't be hard to do.
LR...........
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: how to ask to charge at work
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 12:14:38 -0500
I'm going to repeat what I said last time this came up. Bypassing the
chain of command by going to PR or whatever is a very dumb move.
You're likely to motivate your chain of command to work against you.
Perhaps energetically.
Just be sure you are working the right chain of command. In my building I
just talked to the head facilities guy. He said no problem I got a spot
right next to the forklift for you. This is the same guy that never throws
out batteries, cables, breakers etc... without checking with me first now.
The big cheese types around here don't even know or care.
damon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I noticed that Killacycle is not gaining much votes
and that voting on the Corvette has resumed, so keep
those votes coming on all electric vehicles!
http://www.dragtimes.com/Dragster-Motorcycle-Timeslip-7621.html
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mazda-RX-7-Timeslip-7519.html
http://www.dragtimes.com/Nissan-240SX-Timeslip-7382.html
http://www.dragtimes.com/Datsun-1200-Timeslip-7484.html
(Yes, you can continue to vote on White Zombie)
(And no, I won't list my EV on dragtimes :-)
Not only am I missing a timeslip, but the 1800 pounds of
batteries do not give a good 1/4mi time, combined
with the 50kW motor in this S-10 US Electricar.
It is a perfect commute vehicle though, plenty range.
And given enough time it reaches its top speed of 70 MPH
so it is not that I need to dodge out of the carpool lane
because I cannot keep up. All thumbs up here. EV grin in place.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Paul wrote:
> Infact, it also draws battery information out so it can be
> analayized as well. I suspect that is incase your pack is
> crap and the engine is running more and more.
I doubt it, because the battery has virtually nothing to do
with the emissions of the engine (only how long it runs, but
nobody is checking how long you are driving, right?)
My guess is that they check the battery info and history to make
sure there _IS_ a battery in the proclaimed Hybrid, and it's not
a smartly (badly?) re-registered Echo or Accord or so.....
Just like they check the history of the engine computer to avoid
it has been recently swapped from a good working car, just to
pass smog....
Who was that again that bought a car that had a broken computer
and no smog, so he had to fix the car to smog it, register it and
insure it before starting to drive it, but smog failed because
there was no history in the computer, so he could not register it
to drive it...... Can you say Catch 22?
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of paul wiley
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 7:53 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>One of the problems with testing the Hybrid's emissions is
>that the current way of smog testing would need to be changed
>to allow testing the hybrids.
Nevada has. Now for cars just a couple of years old...they us the OBDII
protocol and the new one that i cant remember. Basically the car does the
diagnostic of the engine and if nothing is wrong and all tests have been
run...the car passes. No probes, no dyno, nothing.
>I think perhaps the hybrids should not be exempt from emission testing,
>but I think you'd find they do put out significantly less than cars
>unassisted by an electric motor.
From what my mechanic told me, hybrids in Nevada are not subject to smogs
for 2 years like the rest of new cars. At 2 yrs old, they get the same OBDII
computer check as the rest. The smog machine cop-puter is preprogrammed to
get the correct info out of the computer. Infact, it also draws battery
information out so it can be analayized as well. I suspect that is incase
your pack is crap and the engine is running more and more.
Paul
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0600 (CST), "Chris Robison"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm sorry John, though I understand you've had more experience with
>engines and related technology than I'll ever have, in this case your
>input alone is just not enough to convince me that even modern gas engines
>are "zero emissions". There's just too much information out there
>contradicting that statement.
>
>Why would Toyota have developed a hybrid drive with the express purpose of
>reducing emissions, if there were none to reduce? How do you burn
>gasoline or any other hydrocarbon and get nothing out of it? And how is
>it possible that running a gas engine in its most efficient powerband
>(i.e. less gasoline per horsepower-hour) would fail to reduce the quantity
>of exhaust gases produced over a given distance traveled? Like Mars tried
>to market a 3 Musketeers bar with 30% less fat by making a candy bar
>that's 30% smaller, less exhaust gas would seem to mean lower emissions.
This is where your intuition fails you. Let's consider the abstract
case of a black box. No matter what goes in the black box, nothing
but air and water comes out. It follows that if more stuff goes in
during one session than another, the output is the same - nothing.
The black box is the three-way catalyst and the engine management that
keeps the output of the engine in the range that the cat can handle.
The cat isn't perfect so under some conditions, some emissions leak
out but not during the FTC. WOT is only loosely regulated so there is
significant emissions during full power operation. The (correct)
logic is that the vehicle spends only a small amount of time at WOT
and so it's not worth controlling.
The emission standards are the same for every engine in a particular
class and are specified in terms of grams/mile. What that means is
that the emission system on a large vehicle/engine has to be better
than on a small one.
The practical fact is that for any but the smallest cars, in order to
meet the emission standards, the system has to run at near zero
emissions during most/all of the FTC. The problem areas, the hardest
to control, are startup and transition from idle. Transition from
idle is pretty much under control but startup remains a problem.
If the feds continue with sillier and sillier standards, we're going
to get to pay for such expensive add-ons as cat and intake air
preheaters, phase change block warmers and other things that function
for perhaps half a minute. Having to look 5-10 years in the future,
the car company I know about have these systems developed and in long
term durability testing just in case. Part of the drive to 42 (36
volt really) electrical systems is to have sufficient stored energy to
operate the cat and air heaters.
I'm sure Toyota's motivations were many and varied. I'm not at all
familiar with that company so I have to speculate. I imagine that the
hybrid had been under development for quite some time as a basic R&D
project. It developed to the point that it could be commercialized at
a time when Toyota management detected an opportunity. They're pretty
good at that. BTW, you do know, don't you, that Ford and Toyota did
joint development on the project. I saw the prototypes running around
the test track a good 5-6 years ago.
There are several other ways of achieving the goals Toyota achieved
with their hybrid. A gas engine (Atkins or Otto) with a CVT is one. A
high speed diesel is another. Toyota apparently decided to make a car
with a driving experience as similar to conventional cars as possible.
>
>If gas engines produce no emissions, I invite you to prove it to me by
>standing in a closed, non-ventilated garage with a brand new Chevy or
>Honda or whatever, running on a dyno at 20HP or so, as in usual highway
>driving. Keep this up for a couple hours, maybe grab something to read or
>some video games or something.
>
>Though clearly I'd need some pretty high-tech batteries to hold that much
>energy, I'll be happy to do the same in a separate garage, running a true
>zero-emission electric car charged off of Austin GreenChoice wind power.
I didn't realize you were impressed with stunts. Might I suggest a
more meaningful "test". It's pretty hard to get into the major OEMs'
emission testing facilities but there are others. Why don't you take
a trip to either the EPA's or CARB's facility and witness an FTC
cycle? You too can see the instruments (practically) zeroed out most
of the time. They use the same equipment as the OEMs, normally the
Horiba test suite. It's an interesting and impressive thing to watch.
>
>I'm not saying I won't be convinced, but you know what Sagan said about
>extraordinary claims.
Sagan? You mean the publicity whore who'd say almost anything to get
attention and who was too proud to admit he was wrong ("nuclear
winter" for example)? Yeah, that Sagan. If he'd said that the sky
was blue I'd have had to go check before believing him.
As far as convincing you, I don't really care. That's your decision
to make. If you care about being right then you might listen to those
of us experienced in the field.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo Emerson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hybrids often classified as "Super Low Emission Vehicle", SULEV. That's
got bragging rights over Low Emission Vehicle designation (which I don't
hear much about).
They produce just as much carbon per gallon as any engine because carbon
in=carbon out. Ideally it's completely combusted into CO2, not carbon
monoxide or more complicated carbon compounds. Well designed hybrids
are great about turning it into CO2. That's in addition to the fact
that they don't use as much gas to begin with.
Danny
Chris Robison wrote:
I'm sorry John, though I understand you've had more experience with
engines and related technology than I'll ever have, in this case your
input alone is just not enough to convince me that even modern gas engines
are "zero emissions". There's just too much information out there
contradicting that statement.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have one of those electric 120vac plug-in lawn from
Black and Decker. The motor burnt up.
Does anyone recommend an upgrade?
I don't mind having to stay 120 vac...but any dc
suggestions would be helpful as well!
thanks
Mike
Fairbanks
--- Bob Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Jeff an' All;
>
> Been there, done that! You don't NEED a honking
> BIG motor, well, maybe
> Steve Clunn's 8 inch motor on a Dixie Chopper,
> excepted. I built several
> push mowers, starting off with a 12inch push mower
> in "Nam, with a little
> fist size DC fan motor, plywood bed and sharpened
> shipping steel banding as
> a blade. Later upgrades, stateside were Permag
> motors, starter size, 12
> volts and a Garden tracter battery, lightweight or a
> gp 22 dyehard. When the
> mower spins up, it doesn't use much juice especially
> if ya keep the blade
> SHARP!I had a great, wish I still had it, homemade
> permag motor with a auto
> 12 volt armature and a made up field.Ran this one on
> several differant
> mowers over the years. I THINK I gave it away years
> ago to a buddy , to
> build a go kart for his kid?
>
> So ya don't need a Ford Starter,Save that for a
> go kart! A modest 12 volt
> permag of shunt would work. I just had a battery
> clip thing to turn it on, a
> 12 volt solenoid, would work fine, I used a knife
> switch on my 'Deluxe" one
> later on.Radio Crap has small double pole knife
> switches, less wiring.If ya
> go with a series motor, go with a rather heavy, Gas
> mower blade with a bit
> of" Pitch" they call it, looks sorta like an
> Airplane propeller, it is a
> load for the series motor, so it doesn't
> overspeed.Range, with an Orb,
> probably better than an hour?I used to do about an
> acre.
>
> The only way to Mow!
>
> Bob
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Shanab" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List"
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 8:34 AM
> Subject: Emoo
>
>
> > I aquired a dead rotary mower for converson to
> electric and wanted to
> > ask the group if they had a range idea for such a
> beast.
> >
> > This is simply a walk behind 20 or 22" cut mower
> and my yard is track
> > house small. I would guess an hour of run time
> would be fine.
> >
> > I am also guessing about 1-2 HP electric to
> replace the 5Hp brigs (1hp
> > if I dont hook up the powered wheels)
> >
> > How many AH do I need?
> > 1 orbital and a 12V motor? easy to charge.
> > 10-20 BB600's? robust, won't mind the cold or
> winter monthes of sitting
> > off charge.
> > What about a controller? A ford starter solinoid
> isn't rated for
> > continuous duty, I should go to the golf cart shop
> and get something
> better.
> > Is Series wound ok, or will it's rpm be to wild,
> perhaps blowwing up due
> > to over rev?
> >
> > Thanks for any and all suggestions :-)
> >
> >
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Instead of asking my mechanic, a quick call to the emissions lab at the local
DMV proved me wrong. (775-684-3580)
Hybrids are tested, OBDII or should be called CANS style.
Any vehicle 95 and newer they do not probe. He cited the Clean air act.
If all the OEM OBD tests are not done, the car will fail. So if you
disconnect the battery, say replace it, and run to the smog place for a quick
smog, it fails. A drive cycle must be done.
I was wrong with the batteries, they dont care. The state doesnt care if you
run the engine in the hybrid 100%. Drive cycle tests are done with it as well.
paul
Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul wrote:
> Infact, it also draws battery information out so it can be
> analayized as well. I suspect that is incase your pack is
> crap and the engine is running more and more.
I doubt it, because the battery has virtually nothing to do
with the emissions of the engine (only how long it runs, but
nobody is checking how long you are driving, right?)
My guess is that they check the battery info and history to make
sure there _IS_ a battery in the proclaimed Hybrid, and it's not
a smartly (badly?) re-registered Echo or Accord or so.....
Just like they check the history of the engine computer to avoid
it has been recently swapped from a good working car, just to
pass smog....
Who was that again that bought a car that had a broken computer
and no smog, so he had to fix the car to smog it, register it and
insure it before starting to drive it, but smog failed because
there was no history in the computer, so he could not register it
to drive it...... Can you say Catch 22?
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of paul wiley
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 7:53 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Hybrid efficiency, was: Increasing Range
Cor van de Water wrote:
>One of the problems with testing the Hybrid's emissions is
>that the current way of smog testing would need to be changed
>to allow testing the hybrids.
Nevada has. Now for cars just a couple of years old...they us the OBDII
protocol and the new one that i cant remember. Basically the car does the
diagnostic of the engine and if nothing is wrong and all tests have been
run...the car passes. No probes, no dyno, nothing.
>I think perhaps the hybrids should not be exempt from emission testing,
>but I think you'd find they do put out significantly less than cars
>unassisted by an electric motor.
>From what my mechanic told me, hybrids in Nevada are not subject to smogs
for 2 years like the rest of new cars. At 2 yrs old, they get the same OBDII
computer check as the rest. The smog machine cop-puter is preprogrammed to
get the correct info out of the computer. Infact, it also draws battery
information out so it can be analayized as well. I suspect that is incase
your pack is crap and the engine is running more and more.
Paul
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, February 3, 2006 12:35 pm, Danny Miller said:
> Hybrids often classified as "Super Low Emission Vehicle", SULEV. That's
> got bragging rights over Low Emission Vehicle designation (which I don't
> hear much about).
>
> They produce just as much carbon per gallon as any engine because carbon
> in=carbon out.
This is exactly what I'm saying. Because of this, fuel economy and
emissions go hand in hand to some extent. *Less* carbon in == *less*
carbon out. Because the gallon gets you further, you're polluting less in
the same amount of distance. Maybe there are better methods such as
high-efficiency diesel, but the combined hybrid system does give you lower
emissions than just an ICE of similar output, if compared in a realistic
context.
> Ideally it's completely combusted into CO2, not carbon
> monoxide or more complicated carbon compounds. Well designed hybrids
> are great about turning it into CO2. That's in addition to the fact
> that they don't use as much gas to begin with.
As we tend to measure it, "Emissions" is more accurately phrased
"Emissions we care about". Fuel cell vehicles do "emit" water vapor and
lots of waste heat, but those two don't really concern us, so we label it
a ZEV.
CO2 may not be immediately poisonous or harmful to life besides displacing
oxygen, but it is a greenhouse gas. I personally don't believe that just
because it's CO2 and not CO or something else, that it can be discounted
as "emissions" no matter what the instruments say.
--chris
> Chris Robison wrote:
>
>>I'm sorry John, though I understand you've had more experience with
>>engines and related technology than I'll ever have, in this case your
>>input alone is just not enough to convince me that even modern gas
>> engines
>>are "zero emissions". There's just too much information out there
>>contradicting that statement.
>>
>>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 11:20:22 -0800 (PST), mike golub
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have one of those electric 120vac plug-in lawn from
>Black and Decker. The motor burnt up.
>
>Does anyone recommend an upgrade?
>I don't mind having to stay 120 vac...but any dc
>suggestions would be helpful as well!
You might want to take a look at this:
http://www.surpluscenter.com/item.asp?UID=2006020313451725&item=10-1938&catname=electric
If the URL doesn't work, look for item #10-1938.
I bought 4 of these when they first came into inventory. Nice motors,
especially for the price. I made an electric push mower from an old
gas mower deck. I use it at my vacation home. It does a very nice
job.
When I'm away from the outlet I use a homemade power pack that
consists of a pair of golf cart batteries and a 1500 watt inverter
mounted on a hand cart. I just wheel that out to the job and run a
light weight cord to the mower. Much nicer than wrestling around a
load of batteries mounted to the mower.
These motors are quite old - mid 80s manufacturing date - so you'll
need to open the case and replenish the lube that has dried up. You'll
need some red locktite to re-seat the bearings.
They bring the field and armature leads out separately to the switch
so that they can do dynamic braking. The switch shorts the field and
armature together. This is very hard duty for the motor with a heavy
blade attached. Great balls of fire emit from the brushes :-) I
modified mine with a resistor so that the blade stops in a second or
two instead of instantly.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo Emerson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, February 3, 2006 1:05 pm, Neon John said:
> This is where your intuition fails you. Let's consider the abstract
> case of a black box. No matter what goes in the black box, nothing
> but air and water comes out. It follows that if more stuff goes in
> during one session than another, the output is the same - nothing.
This conclusion is logical, but you have failed to present a convincing
argument in support of the original premise. Burn gasoline, and it doesn't
go away -- it turns into something else. Potentially several substances,
none of which are good for you.
> out but not during the FTC. WOT is only loosely regulated so there is
> significant emissions during full power operation. The (correct)
> logic is that the vehicle spends only a small amount of time at WOT
> and so it's not worth controlling.
Agreed.
> If the feds continue with sillier and sillier standards, we're going
> to get to pay for such expensive add-ons as cat and intake air
> preheaters, phase change block warmers and other things that function
Like the "silliness" of the standards that presented the public with the
unacceptable burden of paying for the development of cars that crush
during an accident instead of killing their occupants, this is a matter of
opinion, and opinions change over time.
> I'm sure Toyota's motivations were many and varied. I'm not at all
> familiar with that company so I have to speculate. I imagine that the
> hybrid had been under development for quite some time as a basic R&D
> project. It developed to the point that it could be commercialized at
> a time when Toyota management detected an opportunity. They're pretty
> good at that. BTW, you do know, don't you, that Ford and Toyota did
> joint development on the project. I saw the prototypes running around
> the test track a good 5-6 years ago.
I also know that Toyota has been losing money on the Prius hand over fist.
What "opportunity" did they see when they decided to produce the Prius? An
opportunity to lose millions of dollars producing unnecessarily complex
cars to mitigate a problem that no longer existed?
> There are several other ways of achieving the goals Toyota achieved
> with their hybrid. A gas engine (Atkins or Otto) with a CVT is one. A
> high speed diesel is another. Toyota apparently decided to make a car
> with a driving experience as similar to conventional cars as possible.
But what goal could they have had, if there is truth in what you've
claimed, repeatedly now, that engines were already producing no emissions?
None of these options solve the first-minute problem.
>>
>>If gas engines produce no emissions, I invite you to prove it to me by
>>standing in a closed, non-ventilated garage with a brand new Chevy or
>
> I didn't realize you were impressed with stunts.
No, I'm impressed with logical discourse, and the fact that you've chosen
not to even attempt to respond to my analogy rationally and instead
dismiss it by calling it a "stunt" does not impress me. The point that I
was making is that the stuff that running automobiles produce does not
support life. At the very least there's way too much of it in our
atmosphere now ... and those instrument measurements I do trust.
> Might I suggest a
> more meaningful "test". It's pretty hard to get into the major OEMs'
> emission testing facilities but there are others. Why don't you take
> a trip to either the EPA's or CARB's facility and witness an FTC
> cycle? You too can see the instruments (practically) zeroed out most
> of the time. They use the same equipment as the OEMs, normally the
> Horiba test suite. It's an interesting and impressive thing to watch.
Honestly, all the instruments output in the world would not convince me
that an engine's output contains no substances which have been considered
biologically or environmentally harmful by the majority of the scientific
community.
> Sagan? You mean the publicity whore who'd say almost anything to get
> attention and who was too proud to admit he was wrong ("nuclear
> winter" for example)? Yeah, that Sagan. If he'd said that the sky
> was blue I'd have had to go check before believing him.
Another dodge. Whatever personal flaws Sagan may have had are irrelevant.
Since you belittle the character of my example instead of the value of the
point itself, I'll spell it out for you. Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary proof. I don't care who made that statement, its meaning has
undeniable merit. And that describes a continuum; a statement like yours
requires proof beyond what I would accept from a set of instruments, no
matter how expensive they are or how well their operators are paid. Indeed
you're asking me to completely reevaluate my understanding of the nature
of matter.
Until I see the light, my argument stands. Hybrid vehicles produce "less
emissions" than ICE cars of similar performance, because their electric
motors allow them to run more efficiently so they use less fuel.
--chris
--- End Message ---
