EV Digest 6378
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: anyone selling T-125?
by "Matt Kenigson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: EV digest 6372
by "Peter Gabrielsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Where did the RAV4 go?
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: The Series Hybrid Debate
by Robert Lemke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: The Series Hybrid Debate
by "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) hillbilly hybrid
by <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: my battery fire
by Danny Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Weird Battery Problem
by Danny Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: EV digest 6372
by "mike young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: LPG/LNG/CNG, diesel, enviromnent.
by "Dale Ulan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Series Hybrids eff, Re: EV digest 6372
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Electric Racecar
by Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: LPG/LNG/CNG, diesel, enviromnent.
by "Osmo S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) BBB, where was Steve Clunn
by <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
I just managed to snag one used and one new (with a tiny cosmetic defect)
from my local Trojan dealer for $25 apiece. Give all the dealers within
your driving range a call. You might come up with something!
On 2/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyone have 1-3 T-125's to sell in somewhat used condition to sell
(ideally
about 1 year old?)?
I'm near Philadelphia, so being nearby would be another need.
Ben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm generally clueless on this topic, but I can't help noticing that
my gas heater as well as my oven exhausts straight into my home. Given
that I'm not dead yet despite extensive use of said heater I can only
presume that the exhaust of burning natural gas is very clean. So
wouldn't a CNG powered turbine or vehicle be just as clean?
-Peter
On 2/2/07, Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> I've also seen studies that indicate that modern gas powered cars
> have cleaner exhaust than the air in big cities... even when they
> are being run in big cities. This means that under certain situations
> their exhaust is cleaner than their intake.
No; it means that the particular pollutants they are measuring happen to
be lower in the car's exhaust than in the surround air.
They're lying with statistics. Figures don't lie; but liars figure. :-)
> When the exhaust fro a modern car is pretty miniscule to begin with...
Think so? Try running a car engine, even a Prius engine, in a closed
garage for a while and see how breathable the air is! Yes, the levels of
pollution have improved so you won't die immediately (the Hemlock
Society recommends against trying to kill yourself with it). But it's
still horrible stuff!
> it's hard to get "much" cleaner. On the other hand, it's relatively
> easy to get worse.
I think it all depends on your definition of "much". The Prius emits
1/10th the pollution of the average new car -- I would call that "much"
lower, even though some of the pollutants went from 1 gram to 0.1 gram
per X amount of time.
> "Forklifts powered by propane, gasoline, and to a lesser degree diesel
> fuel, significantly contribute to carbon monoxide (CO) hazards in the
> workplace. Propane fuelled vehicles also emit potentially dangerous
> nitrogen dioxide (NO2)."
> http://www.labour.gov.sk.ca/safety/forklifts/section-c.htm
>
> "In 1998, the Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH) and
> Iowa State University (ISU) Extension Department, with the
> assistance of local health departments, investigated a
> series of carbon monoxide (CO) poisonings associated with
> the use of liquified petroleum gas (LPG)-powered forklifts
> in light industry. In each episode, forklifts emitting high
> CO concentration levels were operated in inadequately
> ventilated warehouse and production facilities, which
> resulted in high CO accumulations."
> http://list.mc.duke.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9912&L=occ-env-med-l&P=14762
>
> (isn't google fun?)
Good work! As I said, I was just going by anecdotal evidence -- I see
these propane- and CNG-powered vehicles being used indoors all over the
place. I assumed they were relatively safe, or there would be lawsuits
and regulations against them.
The way the above quotations are worded, it sounds like they *may* be a
problem under certain circumstances. I'd guess this would be
sufficiently poor ventilation, and sufficiently "broken" equipment.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--
www.electric-lemon.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK, let me try to get this straight, because I missed the mark
entirely on my earlier post.
Either there is confusion between two entirely different
RAV-4 EV sales around the same time, or someone is severely
mis-representing the sale that was performed.
I was contacted by a person I entirely trust, who clarified
that the auction was executed and the RAV-4 EV sold as announced
to the highest bidder.
However, when the beneficiary of the estate heard the amount
it sold for, the earlier promise was broken that the entire
amount would benefit the sellers' EV promotion organisation,
so they only received a fraction of the sales price in the end.
I do not know where the message came from that Chris quoted.
Possibly a standard warning by the auction site that in the
past illegal and counterfeit "second chance" offers have been
sent to all bidders by others than the seller, in hopes of
receiving money without delivering any goods and disappearing
before the transaction can be reversed. I know Ebay has already
changed their listing policy that above a certain bidding amount
the names of bidders no longer are shown, except to sellers and
the bidders themselves, to reduce the amount of spam sent to
bidders.
Chris, please send the info you have off-list to me, so I can
check if this is the same auction we are talking about.
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Cor van de Water
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 1:41 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Where did the RAV4 go?
"Proceeds to go to the EV Club"?
That sounds suspicious - who donates $67,000 to an EV club?
"to contact the cops" sounds like it was a scam.
Just guessing here - the people involved should be contacted
to find out the real cause, if you really want to know.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Christopher Zach
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 6:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Where did the RAV4 go?
Cor van de Water wrote:
> Chris,
>
> You mean the one in Menlo Park, CA, listing 300070153039?
> That is around the corner from here!
No. There was one being sold by an EV club out there. Proceeds to go to
the EV club, posted to a bunch of EV lists..
It wasn't ended early, it was canceled with a message to all bidders
saying that the seller has been suspended and if you get an offer to buy
the item to contact the cops. Which was pretty heavy-handed I think.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I agree. A series system would allow a very small (900cc) common rail,
turbo-intercooled diesel to be designed to operate at one load and constant
rpm. Diesels used to generate AC power are designed for a given rpm divisable
by 60, ie 900, 1800, 3600 rpms. I have crunched the numbers and even accounting
for a minor eff loss in the electric transmission, this in a compact car less
than 3000 lbs and relatively clean aerodynamically, would break the 70 mpg
barrier. That is how efficent a diesel is if designed for one load and fixed
rpms. And of course you want a 14 kw/hr battery bank to give you a 45 mile
range on the commute to work.
Joseph Lado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Peter VanDerWal
>To: [email protected]
>Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007
1:51:31 PM
>Subject: Re: Series hybrids (was Re: EV digest 6372)
>...
>Can anyone provide documented evidence of a series hybrid that can beat any
of the >current ICE vehicles?
Proof? You want proof?! I got your proof right here.
New Heavy-Duty Series Hybrid Drives from Enova
(GreenCarCongress)
The driver can
switch off the generator when silent operation is preferred. In an urban
transit or urban delivery cycle, Enovas SERIES HYBRID drive systems are
expected to deliver 4060% in fuel savings, reduced brake maintenance costs,
and significant reduction in NOx, CO,
and PM emissions when compared with conventional internal combustion diesel
powered vehicles in a similar environment. [Not a plug-in]
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2004/10/new_heavyduty_s.html
Oshkosh Truck
Unveils Series-Hybrid Refuse Vehicle (GreenCarCongress)
We are extremely excited to introduce this remarkable
technology to the refuse market. Our ProPulse hybrid drive system could
significantly reduce fuel costs. During extensive customer field tests, it has
shown improved fuel efficiency of 20 to 50 percent over the typical refuse
trucks. [Series trash truck with no plug-in]
Don Verhoff,
Oshkosh Executive Vice President, Engineering Technology
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/11/oshkosh_truck_u.html
Types of hybrid vehicle (Wikipedia)
The advantage of a series hybrid is the lack of a mechanical
link between the combustion engine and the wheels. The combustion engine runs
at a constant and efficient rate, even as the car changes speed. During
stop-and-go city driving, series hybrids are relatively the most efficient.
A
weakness is that the power from the combustion engine has to run through both
the generator and electric motor. During long-distance highway driving, the
electrical transmission can be less efficient than a conventional transmission.
[only over long distances, The average round-trip commute in the U.S.
is 20 miles according to the 2000 report from the Bureau of Transportation
Statistics and drivers rarely travel over 40 miles a day in a single day]
We all have to realize that the way things are today they
are ass backwards. Internal Combustion Engine cars are less efficient during
the driving that almost all drivers do in comparison to a series hybrid that is
only less efficient in the driving that we dont do but once or twice a year.
For example, where I live the beach is where I most would
want to go as a truly long distance trip. It is about 150 miles away. If I take
my ICE car it would be just a little more efficient than taking my series
hybrid, but my series hybrid is a plug-in hybrid. My first 40 miles are on
electric produced for me I might add from wind through a wind power contract I
have with my utility. The rest of the distance may be less efficient then the
ICE, but I coast a lot when I am going down hills, I stop at places that have
110 outlets to charge up while I am eating, etc. etc. Once my batteries are
over 70% I am back on electric mode not saving gas and not emitting anything.
The
over all use of gasoline is greatly reduced and while I am at the beach I am
back to using all electric plug-in power as I do around my home near the city.
Series
hybrids are a better solution when coupled with a plug. Dont get me started on
the Multi-Fuel Flexible Fuel Series Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle (MFFFPSHV or
Mufpishvee) concept where the vehicle can use any variation of natural gas,
liquid petroleum gas (LPG), gasoline, ethanol and electricity.
http://www.evworld.com/blogs/index.cfm?page=blogentry&authorid=46&blogid=192&archive=1
Saying that series hybrids are bad because it isnt perfect
for all situations is like saying that Penicillin is bad because it cant cure
all diseases. We have to shy away from the strong tendency in listserv and
comments to blogs to dominate by rhetorical skill. What we are really after is
a better understanding of what is best. For us on this listserv that believe
that EVs are a solution to many of our problems in terms of security (no
dependence on foreign oil, no money funding terrorism, no ability to harm our
economy through disruption of our fuel supply) in terms of environment (far
less production of particulates and VOCs right where we breath, less pollution
over all, less CO2 global warming gasses) in terms of piece of mind (less
noise) the plug-in series hybrid is the next best thing. Yet it is only a step
towards a day when long range EVs will be commonplace. Plug-in series hybrids
are a good thing for the future of EVs.
Sincerely, Joseph Lado
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Joseph Lado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
>
> Saying that series hybrids are bad because it isn't perfect
> for all situations is like saying that Penicillin is bad because it
can't cure
> all diseases. We have to shy away from the strong tendency in
listserv and
> comments to blogs to dominate by rhetorical skill. What we are
really after is
> a better understanding of what is best. For us on this listserv
that believe
> that EVs are a solution to many of our problems in terms of
security (no
> dependence on foreign oil, no money funding terrorism, no ability
to harm our
> economy through disruption of our fuel supply) in terms of
environment (far
> less production of particulates and VOCs right where we breath,
less pollution
> over all, less CO2 global warming gasses) in terms of piece of mind
(less
> noise) the plug-in series hybrid is the next best thing. Yet it is
only a step
> towards a day when long range EVs will be commonplace. Plug-in
series hybrids
> are a good thing for the future of EVs.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely, Joseph Lado
>
I totally agree.
Some of the best research I've seen on hybrids, comparisons between
series and parallel in particular, are in the following papers,
published by the SAE
Developing a Standardized Test Procedure for Hybrid Vehicles: The
Challenge of the SAE HEV Task Force.
(Terry Penney and David Christensen, National renewable energy lab)
(Stephen Poulos, General Motors)
Paper 950176
Technical Analysis of the 1994 HEV Challenge
(LeBlanc,Duoba,Quong,Larsen,Stithim, Argonne National Lab)
(William Rimkus, Ford Motor Co)
These papers should be available through technical libraries.
The 1994 HEV challenge was well represented by a lot of the major US
universities, and the cars were a mixture of parallel and series
hybrids.
Judging categories were emissions, and energy economy
The results show that _when well designed_ there is little to play
for, and in both cases of series and parallel hybrids fuel economy is
better and emissions are less than an ICE car.
The reports are in "Electric Vehicles, Driving towards
commercialization", Edited by Ron Sims and Bradford bates, published
by SAE International, the book is known as 'PT-58' from the progress
in technology series.
ISBN number 1-56091-751-2
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Has anybody tried a push motorcycle based range extender, Would like to compare notes, as a experiment repeat experiment I hooked a 75$ barn fresh honda 360 to the back of the ev ( after weeks building hitch and striping bike down to less then 300lbs,) just to see wahat it ill do. . The 360 gets about 20lbs of torque, the ev weight about 3200lbs 120v dc system. To make a long story short after about 800 miles on a very hilly section of I 75 south of Cincinnati the 360 produced what would be =to about 120 amps, In 6th gear on level ground the 360 would keep a speed of 60mph, at 65 it took about 25 amps . But their is less then 1 mile of level ground around here, The 40 mile test runs had at least 15 good size hills , 2 of the hills would take about 320 amps to stay over 60 mph but with the push motorcycle about 200, the longest run was 55 miles, but still had alittle left . I got a high of 55 mpg a couple runs ,a low of 51 on others, just ok but the honda 360 not known for mpg, (sorry I know it's not a green machine, just a experiment ok) In 5th gear at speeds of 40 to 55 mph the push motorcycle provided 100% power needed even up the hills...
Traction was alot better then I thought it would be, even in the rain never once lost its grip, weight on drive wheel is 175 lbs But under power their might be a wheelie effect? handling was no different then adding a 300 lb person. also I drove the speed limit , no shifting , throttle about 40% max never engauged under 40 mph . another reason the 360 was used 20lbs of torque is all she's got,
Now I have a long list of problems that would need to be fixed to make this work, and cost would go way above the 225$ cash spent not counting....time one problem" you can't tow a motorcycle" The tranny needs lub from the oil punp, so even when not using you must run the engine , wasted enegry....... If the drive wheel had a overrunning clutch like a bicycle... that could work. ? also a system that if unit ever got over say 15 * out of line it would cut power then freewheel, meaning you lost traction or are turning to sharp. .. the list is long but with a gsxr 600 at over 12 to 1 compression It could come close to 60mpg on e85, 50mpg on moonshine more without all these hills . So this experiment was put to rest, at least untill V.2 Crazy Hap
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ben,
What a drag to deal with that mess.
After charging all day in my non ventilated battery box I ran an errand
and was about a mile into my trip when I went to accelerate across an
intersection when the traffic light turned green and then all of a
sudden bang. A center battery in the middle of my pack blew its top off.
I could not find any lose battery interconnects anywhere . Yet something
ignited the freshly made hydrogen. I think I had an internal battery
failure and a poorly vented box.
Now it should be mentioned generally battery acid, after it dries on the
tops of batteries and other surfaces conducts electricity. This leakage
will run the battery down and create potential electrolysis problems or
other strange weird voltage to frame or ground issues. Clean the tops
with a solution of baking soda and water in a spray bottle, or I think
even better Windex because it leaves less residue (make sure its the
kind that contains ammonia - a base - which will neutralize the acid).
Obviously one can prevent this in an electrically isolated acid
resistant well thought out box design.
Cordially,
Danny Ames
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Battery acid, when it dries on the tops of the batteries, conducts
electricity. This leakage will run the battery down and create potential
electrolysis problems or other voltage anomalies to chassis frame or
ground , if your batteries have leaked in any way clean the tops with a
solution of baking soda and water in a spray bottle, or Windex (which
contains ammonia - a base - which will neutralize the acid).
Danny Ames
Fred Hartsell wrote:
The past couple of weeks I have been noticing a problem with my DakotaEV.
The batteries seem to drain down over a few days more than I thought that
they should. I also noticed that I got tickled a few times when I was
checking the batteries for water and the connections for corrosion. So I
started checking some things. The truck is a 91 Dodge Dakota with a warp 9"
motor and a Curtis controller. I am using 20 Interstate u-2400 batteries
for a 120 volt battery pack. Let me first say that I am a good mechanic and
I have been working on my own cars for many years. So I have verified my
finding and I am stumped.
1. When I first built the DakotaEV, several months ago, I checked every
battery connection as I made them to be sure that I did not have any bad
connections or any grounds. All connections and batteries checked ok at
that time. I also checked to be sure that there were no sign of voltage
between the battery pack and chassis ground. None showed up during any of
my checks. I have since check the batteries on three other occasions
without seeing any problems.
2. I started checking my battery pack today and notice that I had the
following values.
a. Negative connection of the battery pack to the positive connection
of the battery pack was 128.6 vdc
b. Last positive connection of the pack to chassis ground was 115.7
vdc.
I thought that I should not be showing any voltages from the battery pack to
chassis ground so I started investigating. I disconnected all of the
electronics including the motor and the controller to eliminate all of those
parts. The voltage measurement was the same. I then started at the very
first battery in the pack and one by one I removed the cables until I
finally was reading zero volts between the battery pack and chassis ground.
I then rechecked the last battery that I had disconnected, #8 in the pack of
20, and I noticed that I was measuring about 3.1 vdc from chassis ground to
the positive terminal on this battery without any cables connected to the
battery in question. Now, maybe I am wrong but I did not think that this
was possible. I then removed the battery from the battery box to be sure
that it was not shorting in some other manner. I also checked the water
level and the level was correct for lead acid batteries. With the battery
sitting on the ground beside of the truck, I again measure the chassis
ground and the battery positive lug. I was still reading about 3.1 vdc.
The battery and the truck had no physical connection. I do not understand
how this could happen. I would appreciate any ideas from the group as to
what caused this. I am going to replace the battery but I do not understand
how you can measure a voltage between two objects that have no physical
connection. The battery in question measured 6.3 vdc from the positive lug
to the negative lug.
Thanks, Fred
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I run a cng dodge van as well as my solectria ev and the cng websites all
claim cng vehicles are as much as 95% lower emissions (than petroleum-fueled
vehicles), and because it's not dependent on foreign oil its a win/win.
mike young solectria ev/cng dodge van
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: EV digest 6372
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
CNG/Propane is cleaner, when porperly tuned using all that expensive
emmisions testing equipment, but even then I don't think it's "Much"
cleaner.
Anecdotal evidence: CNG and propane fueled vehicles are run indoors all
the time. It is apparently legal and safe. I haven't seen any studies
linking indoor CNG or propane vehicles to any increased risks of health
problems. This makes me suspect they are *cleaner* than even the cleanest
gasoline engines, which are *not* allowed to run indoors.
Heck, my local convenience store even uses a propane fueled floor cleaner!
The store isn't any bigger than my house!
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not EV related directly, but....
>IIRC, Gas (not gasoline) powered vehicles burn up the O2 in the environment
>where they are, and produce mostly CO2 and some H2O and some relatively
>non-toxic (to humans) other stuff. AFAIK they don't produce CO, which would
.....
CNG and LPG can produce lots of CO if you set them up that way. Many
open-loop CNG/LPG systems are set up to run somewhat lean, which reduces
CO quite a bit. Newer systems need to be set up as a stoichiometric,
closed-loop system, which zaps CO and NOx at the same time, through
a miracle of modern chemistry (platinum, rhodium, palladium, and a
lot of rather fancy software to control it well enough). The new EPA
regulations are pushing many engines to catalyst + closed loop, just
as it did with cars.
A gasoline engine can be set up to run just as clean in steady-state or
transient driving, but the warmup period and power enrichment modes are
a problem. That assumes that the engine has been designed accordingly.
If the engine has a large amount of quench area (where the flame goes
out because of somes reason or other - it's too cold, or not windy enough,
or too windy) then you get lots of unburned hydrocarbons and the only
fix is an engine design change. Power enrichment can be designed out,
and is not used often for cars needing to pass the US06 heavy-throttle
test cycle anyways. It is sometimes used for catalyst overheat protection
by interrupting the oxygen available for oxidation - run really rich
and the catalyst cools down.
The warmup period is not very impressive for liquid fuelled vehicles.
They need to run over-rich so that enough gasoline vapourises and is
combustible. Also, a catalytic converter needs to be at least 300 C
before being active on CO, and another 100 or so to be active on NOx.
The temperature limits go up as the catalyst ages. The emissions on
an ICE with catalyst are best on the day it rolls off the assembly
line, and only get worse with age, never better.
Before it is fully warmed up and active, emissions are pretty bad.
The hydrocarbons are what you are smelling, by the way, not CO or NOx.
You can check the EPA site for emissions test data for production
engines. It is worth looking into if you're remotely interested in
this sort of thing. Usually cold results are separated out.
-Dale
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Peter and All,
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EV digest 6372
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:36:40 -0700 (MST)
>I believe that you are the one who is mistaken.
>
>For example, using a series hybrid does NOT eliminate the
>mechanical losses,
Come on Peter, reread this above and you know that's
not true. While the systems needed to replace it has more
losses, it does eliminate the transmission losses.
nor are gearing losses all that
>"enourmous". Total losses from Engine to wheels are
>somewhere around 10-15% for a standard transmission.
>Since nobody currently makes an affordable Hub motor, you
>STILL have losses between the electric motor and the
>wheels. With a single ratio transmission, these losses are
>around 5-10% between the motor and the wheels, so you save
>a whole (drum roll please) 5%...maybe. And that assumes
>you use a single ratio transmission.
5% is 5%, I'll take it ;^D. I'll get to the engine
losses later.
>
>Typical motors and (good)alternators run at around 80-85%
>efficient. That means that you loose 10-15% in each
>conversion, and then have the above mention mechanical
>looses. So you are already loosing 20-30%
Good motors/alts are 85-90% each so ends up at about
25% loss minus the 5% credit from no transmission means now
just a 20% difference in eff drive train wise.
>
>If you are going to store some of this energy in batteries,
>then you have the batteries charging efficiency to
>consider. Watt Hour efficency of Lead-Acid batteries when
>fast charged (i.e. in less than a week) varies from around
>15% to 35% and that doesn't count periodic equalization
>charges that run at 0% efficiency.
Just not true Peter. Lead batts being used in the
20-80% charged range as they must for this to work well are
very eff, in the 95-99% range in fast charging, per
AC Propulsion, Hackleman.
They even cool during this which probably means they
are turning some heat into charge!! It's only after they get
above about 80% charged does their eff drop but still no
where like what you say, still in the 90% range with a good
finish charge profile. One wouldn't go into the 80% above
charged range until home, charged from the grid for the
highest eff. But then you couldn't claim series hybrids are
less eff so you conviently leave that out.
>
>So now your total losses (ICE to wheels) are at best 35%
>and at worse 55% or higher. Compare this to the max 15%
>from a standard ICE with manual transmission.
>Granted you can gain some efficency by using a smaller ICE
>and tuning for max efficency, but not enough to overcome
>the above losses. At least not compared to a modern high
>efficency EFI engine.
Thank you so much Peter for that gem. Too bad it's
wrong. Your losses are around 25% in a good series hybrid
to this point.
>
>Furthermore using an off the shelf genset to power an EV
>will produce HUNDREDS of times as much pollution as a
>modern automobile. This is well documented at numerous
>sites, including numerous times on this very list (check
>the archives)
While true with junk generators, it's not that hard
to build an eff, low polluting gen either with an advanced
small motor from a MC or a Robin/Subaru to an eff DC gen.
And one can use a Geo Metro 3cyl car engine that only weighs
125 lbs in gen trim.
Where do you get the idea you need expensive
emissions gear to tune them? You can buy 3 gas antalyzer for
under $100 or have it tuned at a garage with their
equipment.
And saying a well tuned quality Propane/NG gen
pollutes badly is rather a stretch.
Instead of pointing out it won't work as he wanted,
why not let him know how to do it right? He needs a battery
pack and an eff gen, with care, his idea can work.
Now we have done the series hybrid, lets compare the
ICE car and it's eff. The motor, by idling, running under
partial loading, ascesories, ect, gets under 10% eff to the
transmission. Then lets say 15% losses in the drive train
brings that down to 8.5% eff, power to the road from the
fuel. Many say it's 7%.
Now a series hybrid ICE running steady at max eff of
25-35% powering a 90% eff gen, 85% eff motor/controller and
95% final drive eff, even at the low end is around 18% eff
of the fuel to the road, not including plug in battery
range.
So 8.5% eff for an ICE and 18% eff for a series
hybrid, I think I'll go series hybrid thank you. A Parallel
hybrid wouldn't be more eff enough to be worth the bother
due to part load eff problems, KIS.
Jerry Dycus
>
>If you can cite some reliable, documented evidence to the
>contrary, I'd love to see it.
>
>
>> Peter, you are mistaken. You are one of the people
>> readers look to for answers on this list, however, you
>> have got to get your numbers straight and really
>investigate your opinion on this mater, because you don't
>> have it right. Series hybrids are less polluting and are
>> more efficient than using a gasoline engine alone by a
>> factor of three without counting regenerative braking and
>> the advantages of using batteries. With ever improving
>> techniques to recapture wasted energy through the braking
>process and using the generator only at its optimum to
>> charge the batteries when they go below 40%, you in
>> essence have an electric vehicle that sometimes uses
>> gasoline to either keep going when the batteries are
>depleated or charge up the batteries when there isn't a
>> plug to be used. You are forgetting to count in the
>> enourmous lost of energy from gearing, called mechanical
>> losses. These losses are the reason you see people going
>back to the hub motor time and time again to see if they
>> can make it work. No gears, shafts and the like between
>> the motor and the wheel means energy saved that would
>> otherwise be lost to the mechanicals. Serializing an
>> electric vehicle may be the only way at this time to get
>electric like plug-in vehicles on the road to the general
>> public. It is the all important step to having a future
>> of electric vehicles. Your comments just kill that and
>> confuse people who otherwise might buy a series hybrid (a
>> range extended EV) who wouldn't buy an EV because of the
>> long charge up times and the fear of getting stuck on
>the road with no way to get back home. I have yet to see a
>> mobile quick charging recker on the road. Please think
>> again about what you are saying about series hybrids,
>> especially in the light that you are an EV enthusiast.
>>
>> Joseph Lado
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of
>legalistic junk at the end; then you are specifically
>authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message. By
>posting the message you agree that your long legalistic
>signature is void.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
An interesting article on an electric race car in the UK:
http://www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/batterycharger.pdf
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
---------------------------------------------------
See the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
Check the EVDL Archives: http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev-list-archive
Check out the EV FAQ: www.evparts.com/faq
Check out the EV Photo Album: www.evalbum.com <http://www.evalbum.com/>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Here are some figures from a book "Electric vehicle technology" by
James Larmine & John Lowry (2003). (The data is originally from
Hoogers (ed.) (2003) Fuel Cell Technology Handbook):
NOx(g/km) SOx CO PM CO2 Energy
(MJ/km)
Gasoline ICE 0.26 0.2 2.3 0.01 209 3.16
Diesel ICE 0.57 0.13 0.65 0.05 154 2.36
CNG ICE 0.1 0.01 0.05 <0.0001 158
2.74
Battery car UK 0.54 0.74 0.09 0.05 104 1.98
Battery car CCGT 0.17 0.06 0.08 0.0001 88.1 1.71
The first battery car uses current UK electricity mix, the second one
electricity from state-of-the-art combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT)
generators supplied with natural gas.
The CNG ICE was assumed to have the same energy use as the gasoline
vehicle, but with 10 % better efficiency, i.e. 16.5 %.
These are well-to-wheel figures.
--------
Timmermans et al in "Environmental rating of vehicles with different
fuels and
drive trains: a univocal and applicable methodology" (2006) developed
a tool that rates the cars based on their well-to-wheel impact on
global warming, air quality, ecosystems, human health and noise.
Bigger number = better:
Petrol 62.9-64.5
Diesel 50-63.2
LPG 68.4-69.5
CNG 75.8
Hybrid 75.8
Electric Belg 85.3
Electric CCGT 85
Electric Renew 96.7
Belg= Belgian electricity mix
CCGT=electricity from combined cycle gas turbines
Renew=renewable energy sources
terveisin,
Osmo
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I started getting ready for BBB 2 weeks before so how did I miss the first
event , friday night? Well here's my story ,,, Don's s-10 with the big 13 "
motor comes by my shop 2 weeks before and we did the last of the wiring and all
seemed good ,, Don's been planning BBB for a year and things where getting
together at the end now . I get a call from him about a week before about some
motor problems , and he's got to send it back ,,, Truns out the timing wasn't
set right ,, Its looks like it won't be back in time .,,BUT ... I have a 11"
motor sitting in my shop ,, Don's got the time off from work ,, And I'm
feeling bad that he's going to miss bbb .. So I say ,, bring your truck over
early friday and will put the 11 in and then head for bbb which is about 50
miles away... 8 am with start ,, the first dry day in 3 days ,,, I haven't yet
had a chance to try the parellel series shifting on my 2 9" porsche 912 so we
are off to the metal store to get plates for the motor mount and it looks like
a good time to test on my car ... I believe it did the shift ,, but the heavy
amp pull found the battery with a poor conection and we had a event ... Lots of
smoke , but as it was comming from the front where just batteries where I
wasn't to worried ,,, a few miniuts of rewireing and we where on our way ,,,
with 6 batteries out of the loop ... getting home we went right to work ,,, I
have the 925 hawkers wired with this ground strap cable that had some eyelits
that ended up being the week link , t... So in between helping Don ,. I
replaced them with regular cables ,,, and fooled around recharging the pack
that now was at two points of discharge ,,, along with the new battery I put in
( used the one from the lights as it had some brake in time on it ) .... We are
all working fast but the clock just kept on ticking . 3:00 with the leave time
but some how it came and went ,,, and before I know it its 9:00 ,,, I didn't't
have time to pick up a generator as planned and now face a 50 mile trip towing
the 912 with my ev work truck ,,, Yes it was late but we went anyway ,, I
needed to get there so as to be there saterday all charged up for the distance
event ,, so off we went ,,, Well I really needed that generater ,, and ended up
driving pretty slow to make it ,,, which ment when we got there it was over ,,,
I plugged in as soon as I got there but people where leaving and the place was
very empty .... ;-( Where dose the time go ,,, any way we where there ,, I
left the truck charging at the camp ground with the charger pulling 10 amp and
went to get some sleep ,,,, I missed seeing any of the cars run and the people
who made them ,,, bummer , but at least I'll be there for the saterday events
,, or so I though ,,,,
Part 2 ,,, how I missed the range event
Steve Clunn ,,,
> From: "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2007/02/02 Fri PM 12:13:29 EST
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: EV's ,Bullshit and Other Stuff WAS, Re: EVLN(Israeli EVs for Israel,
> Jordan & Palestinian buyers)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:23 AM
> Subject: Re: EVLN(Israeli EVs for Israel, Jordan & Palestinian buyers)
>
>
> > Give me a big f**king break here. Israel is a country that can make an
> > atomic bomb but not a viable electric car with current battery technology.
>
> Right on, Rod! I'm SURE Isreal IS working on it. There WAS an Israeli
> outfit;" Electric Fuel Propulsion" No relation to Bob Aronson, working on
> Zinc batteries, but I think it was a vaperware thing, also like Bob A. As
> for nukes, maybe they borrowed one of ours? We have too many as it is<g>!All
> kidding aside they have the techy people to build all the EV's they want IF
> they wanted them! Well, Hawai is a small island, where are the EV's?
> Bermuda? The Little Kennedy Held islands off Mass?Nantucket? NY's Long
> Island? A tad bigger but nice an' flat!Say "Hi" you Wrong Island guyz!
> Tryin' to "out" ya!
> > ["What prevents electric cars from becoming the perfect solution to the
> > problems of air pollution and the dependence on fuel," Melamed writes, "is
> > the lack of a good enough technology for the storing of electric energy.
> The
> > batteries that currently exist do not last long enough before needing to
> be
> > recharged, which itself takes too long..."]
>
> Or, lets tow the Oil Line here.
>
> Let's ship Madman over there
> > with some PFCs and low internal resistant "old school" lead acid
> batteries.
> > Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is 35 miles. The whole darn country is less than the
> > size of New Jersey. Like I said, Give me a f**king break. After a while
> > these totally ignorant and ridiculous statements in the press just make me
> > want to puke. Sorry for being so graphic. I am reaching the end of my
> > tolerance level for BS.
> >
> > Roderick Wilde
> >
> And the rest of the World! I just got back from BBB, by train, EVen!I
> had the pleasure to drive Charles Whalen's Rav-4's to the EVents. How do ya
> think the TWO of them got to the festivities? Renewing the love affair with
> working Store Bought EV's! Hell! They are Toyota's. They WORK. You are
> wafted off in elegent silence, up to 80 mph, if ya like. I hung around 55-60
> for a RT to Jupiter FAU Campus EVery day. Put on the (Gasp) Radio EVen! I
> wish you ALL could tale the Rav's for a spin, Charles is just generous
> enough to turn ya loose in one, but ya gotta bring it back<g>!Radio; glad ya
> asked,clear as a bell! BBB was fun, especially seein' you guyz that made it
> down.The racing was great. A 123's are a kick- ass battery. If I'm good
> would ,Santa.......?As long as they don't get bought up by the Oily Folks
> and squatted on? That poor little Orang Juice was JUICED! It screamed down
> the strip, scrabbling for traction. Gees! If we had a test an' tune, few
> hours, dream on, Yur lucky to get ANY passes among the snorting, roaring
> gassers! If I EVer got rich there would be Electric Daze at the Strips of
> our choice; Run, run ,run ,til your heart's content and battery trashed!
> Hmmm? Joliet, this Year?
>
> Back to Earth. By the time the Silly Meteor showed up at DelRay Beach
> stop it was 2 hours plus LATE. 70 miles out of the shoot !Sheesh! I would
> have been HOME , by then, on Jet Blue!But there ia an archaic charm of train
> travel, Dinner in the Diner,Chatting up interesting folks, a leasurly travel
> mode as nobody nowadaze rides Amtrak to GET there. You do because it's
> scenic cheap(for me), a slice of Americana, at 79 mph, til ya get to DC and
> the train screams along like Orange Juice, as it gets it's Electric
> Locomotive there and ya do 110mph, average about 100 for awile! It CAN
> happen in USA, will take a national energency for it to happen here!Ya fly
> by the Freeways, cars look like they are standing still, as ya fly on! This
> is a conventional train,16 cars, Like ya see in Podunk, or CA or OR,not the
> 150mph Acella Express!Now, if they, Amtrak, could buy out CSX, banish the
> @#$% freight trains from the RR and string catenery, like CT, at 25k
> volts??Commute to Miami from NYC<g>!Where the EV's should be Everywhere.
> What better place than FLA for them??Warm, flat. A Electric Car Expressway
> COULD be set up on I -95 Plugitin's set up along it every 50 miles so EVen
> home made conversions can play!
>
> Hey! Freedon Fans! Hang in there, It's coming!!!! Jerry has overcome alot
> of tech difficulties, a lot to go, but if ya saw it LAST year? Pretty soon
> It will go, getting the running gear bolted on to the vault like body
> structure. A dashboard is about to be fitted, Lee Hart is working on the
> instrumentation, We have the Alltrax and motor for the E drive, a D and D
> motor, pretty blue, EVen!Jerry has gotten a factory setup and some help,
> hired a guy to speed things. We COULD? deliver it up north on the Auto
> Train, by Amtrak, thing ya take your CAR on the train with you. The only
> example of this is between FLA and Virginia, sigh! You could drive yur
> Freedom to Sanford, FLA and off the train just south of DC. Hit the Power of
> DC guyz up for a charge when you hit town!Plug your way north to NY and
> CT!An EVenture!That's how I plan on getting mine.
>
> OK Enough ramblin' this AM.Thinking of Power of DC , and Joliet?
>
> Seeya
>
> Bob
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "bruce parmenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "evlist" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:28 PM
> > Subject: EVLN(Israeli EVs for Israel, Jordan & Palestinian buyers)
> >
> >
> > EVLN(Israeli EVs for Israel, Jordan & Palestinian buyers)
> > [The Internet Electric Vehicle List News. For Public EV
> > informational purposes. Contact publication for reprint rights.]
> > --- {EVangel}
> > http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=120552
> > Electric-Car Factory in Israel Discussed at Davos
> > 16:20 Jan 30, '07 / 11 Shevat 5767 by Hillel Fendel
> >
> > At the just-ended World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland,
> > Shimon Peres held informal talks about building an electric-car
> > factory in Israel with representatives of Toyota and Renault.
> >
> > The idea was originally that of Shai Agassi, President of
> > Germany's SAP, the world's largest business software company.
> > Agassi, a Raanana native who was chosen in 2003 by TIME/CNN as
> > its #1 Global Business Influential, shared the idea with Peres.
> >
> > Israel's Vice Premier told the car companies that the government
> > would be willing to provide grants and tax benefits for the
> > construction of such factories. Renault apparently showed
> > significant interest in the idea.
> >
> > Peres said that battery-operated cars manufactured in Israel
> > could supply Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority, thus
> > guaranteeing its viability.
> >
> > The main challenge of the project would be finding a way to
> > cheaply manufacture an electric battery with which to start the
> > car. Agassi expressed optimism that Israeli research and
> > development teams could produce solutions, and the knowledge
> > could help in building similar factories elsewhere.
> >
> > Israel's long-term interest is to reduce its dependency on oil.
> > To this end, the government is also considering encouraging
> > Israelis to replace their gas-powered cars with electric ones.
> > Subsidies would be provided for the purpose.
> >
> > Gil Melamed, Maariv's automobile commentator, explains that
> > Israel cannot realistically consider manufacturing cars, but
> > rather batteries that would power the electric vehicles. "What
> > prevents electric cars from becoming the perfect solution to the
> > problems of air pollution and the dependence on fuel," Melamed
> > writes, "is the lack of a good enough technology for the storing
> > of electric energy. The batteries that currently exist do not
> > last long enough before needing to be recharged, which itself
> > takes too long... If Israel invests in developing battery
> > technology and production of advanced batteries, we can
> > definitely become an important player in the car industry of the
> > future."
> >
> > Published: 09:13 January 30, 2007 Last Update: 16:20 January 30,
> > 2007 All rights reserved IsraelNationalNews ©
> > -
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce {EVangel} Parmenter
> >
> > ' ____
> > ~/__|o\__
> > '@----- @'---(=
> > . http://geocities.com/brucedp/
> > . EV List Editor, RE & AFV newswires
> > . (originator of the above ASCII art)
> > ===== Undo Petroleum Everywhere
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> > Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
> > in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
> > http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.15/659 - Release Date: 1/30/2007
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.15/659 - Release Date: 1/30/2007
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.19/663 - Release Date: 2/1/07
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
