This is a copy of an email I sent in response to the Cycle World article. The article was published in the April Issue along with a picture of my EZE.
Dear Editor
I am a long timer reader of your magazine and have always found CWs research to be excellent. Februarys "The Electric Myth" however, has me steaming. The way Kevin Cameron is comparing gas/diesel efficiency to electric is ridiculous.
Using Kevins argument that electric power loss is cumulative and only 22% efficient, is unfair. A proper comparison would adjust the efficiency of the gas/diesel engine to include the costs to pump the oil out of the ground, store it, ship by pipeline or tanker, refine, upgrade, store, ship by pipeline, store, transport to your local gas station etc.
Here in
Alberta where we have more oil than Saudi Arabia and spend billions of dollars on oil/gas ever year. We have huge industrial plants and we build huge power stations to run these plants. Plus, we have pollution. If you are comparing engine efficiencies, great, but it is hogwash to say that electricity has cumulative efficiency losses but gasoline just show up at your local station without energy costs.
I have been riding conventional motorcycles for 30 years. I am also an engineer and have built electric powered conversions, so my experience is first hand. My converted Honda CBR600F4 EZE (Electric Zero Emission) accelerates like my Yamaha 700 Virago, handles like my Honda F4I and weighs 410lbs.
Unlike what Kevin believes, there is a future in electric vehicles. The major shortcoming is range. Battery technology is advancing in leaps and bounds. Based on my experience, high
output rechargeable batteries are doubling in capacity every 3 years and prices are dropping by half every year or so.
Today, my EZE runs on lead acid main batteries and NiMh auxiliary batteries. As battery prices drop and battery capacity improves, this same bike will get better. A range of 200 miles is just around the corner.
Ray Wong P.Eng
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
lyle sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is the article in question:
February 2006 Cycle World page 50-51 by Kevin Cameron
The Electric Myth: Cutting the cord and other steps
toward the future of efficient motorcycling
Because fuel prices and transportation are hot issues
for Americans, political rhetoric threatens to wash
the facts right out of the discussion. This has led
to many people becoming impatient for the clean,
sensible hydrogen economy. Theres hydrogen in water
and the oceans are full of water, so lets do it! But
it takes just as much power to set that hydrogen free
from water as is released when the freed hydrogen
burns. This means the power to free the hydrogen
might as well be used to move the vehicle in the first
place. Hydrogen is not an energy source, it is an
energy carrier.
Similar misconceptions surround electric vehicles.
When originally proposed, people assumed theyd just
plug their cars into the wall and for a few cents
theyd charge up for tomorrows commute. Then
California had its brown-out energy crisis, suggesting
that powering that states millions of cars through
the electricity grid was a faint hope even if- as was
never proven- the cars could be made practical and
affordable.
So how much power do we need and how do we get it?
Small cars at highway speed use a steady 20-25
horsepower, motorcycle just 10-15. At a four-stroke
engines fuel requirement of 0.50 pounds of fuel per
horsepower-hour, at 65 mph that is 32-40 mpg for a car
and more than 60 mpg on some of the more fuel
efficient motorcycle. If we switch to diesel power,
at more like 0.38-lb/hp-hr, that becomes 42-53 mpg on
four wheels, 80-plus on two, (or even more, as diesel
fuel is denser than gasoline). In terms of conversion
of fuel energy to power, the gasoline vehicle may
achieve 25 percent efficiency, a diesel perhaps 33
percent.
Now lets do electric power. Efficiencies multiply, so
we must consider production, transmission,
transformers, storage and use. Totaling all this up
gives us 22 percent efficiency-no better than a
gasoline- or diesel- powered vehicles.
When public officials confront such figures, they
reply correctly, Yes, but efficiency isnt the point.
The point is to remove vehicle emissions from urban
areas.
Point taken. But we must also accept that electric
vehicles do not save energy. They just move the
pollution out of town, to whatever neighborhood hosts
our new electric powerplants.
Vehicle efficiency can be improved. It is
inefficient, for example, to take that 20-25 hp from a
big engine, running at low part-throttle. The reason
is that lubricating oil films are most efficient when
they are loaded to just short of failure. But if we
make our engines very small to achieve this, our cars
and motorcycles accelerate like cold syrup-no fun.
One way to restore the lost acceleration is to
turbocharge, which is what the Europeans do to make
their diesel autos both economical and fun to drive.
Another way is to somehow store energy on-board, and
use that energy to boost performance during
acceleration. A big rubber band is one way. In
practical terms thats what the new hybrids are. A
small combustion engine, operating at fairly heavy
throttle, drives the vehicle efficiently at highway
speed. Meanwhile some of its energy is used to charge
a battery, storing energy. Then, when you need to
pass or zoom up an on-ramp, opening the throttle also
calls on this stored energy, making acceleration
adequate if not actually thrilling.
Theres more. When braking in stop-and-go traffic, a
hybrid can slow itself by operating its electric motor
as a generator, putting some of the braking energy
back into on-board storage. When the vehicle
accelerates again as the light turns green, part of
the required is free in the sense that it was not
wasted as brake heat but stored and used again.
Stopped in traffic, the hybrids combustion engine
shuts down so no fuel is used in idling. The stored
energy in the battery is plenty for many cycles of
gridlock inchings-forward. When the battery needs a
charge, the main engine cuts and does the job,
operating at its most efficient rpm and throttle.
Hybrids are expensive because they have two power
systems-the combustion engine and the
motor/generator/battery system. Mass production can
reduce the price somewhat, but two powerplants will
always be more expensive than one. Figure the cost of
the fuel saved by the hybrids somewhat greater fuel
economy and see if it covers the added first cost of
the vehicle.
A hybrid motorcycle? Right now, roughly half of a
motorcycles weight is its engine, and room aboard is
hard to find. Cars are full of sofas, doors, and
sound systems, and there is plenty of extra room. How
can a motorcycle accommodate a second power system?
Aha, well just adopt a more upholstered and auto-like
styling and fill its streamlined plumpness with
batteries, rectifiers, controllers and the necessary
motor-generator, as Yamaha did with the Gen-Ryu that
debuted at last falls Tokyo Motor Show. Just get
your mind right about the 1950s Schwinn look. Itll be
fun.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
