Re: Plug-and-play Prius Problems

[Jones Beene]

Jed,

 

Teaser: there is yet another 'one good battery' story at the end of this ruminating post, for the benefit of anyone who can manage a bit more chewing of the futurism-cud ....

 
>>I see your point. But the Prius ICE is 70 HP (52 kW), so it is the same.
>>The ICE is small, too. Much smaller than a regular engine. It is 34%
>>efficient. I doubt the Wankel is much better than that.
 
> The Prius ICE is derived from an earlier conventional Otto cycle Toyota
> engine. Even if a Wankel would be better in some ways, there is much to be
> said for using an off-the-shelf proven engine.

 

I am a big fan of Toyota and their top-notch quality control, but this is still a valved-engine and not multi-fuel or hydrogen capable. Valves are the weak point when going to oxidated fuels and the no-valve Wankel is far better for using either alcohol or H2 than piston engines - because there are no valves to corrode, and no pre-ignition risk.

 

Personaly, if I were to buy a new vehicle in 2006, I would not want to be tied exclusively to gasoline - if given a choice - for the lifetime of any automobile, knowing that all we need to do to allow the import of cheap ethanol from Brazil or wherever -now is to drop the import tarrif (and/or a "regime" change) following which this fuel savings could then be heaped on top of the other savings. With any new car the only guarantee other than the 20/20 warranty is exorbitant future gasoline prices. In 2008 it will surprise no one if gasoline is $5 gallon or more. Ethanol or aquanol could be the solution to that - but forget the valved engine. With the Wankel - just add plasma plugs.

 

BTW the cheap-end of the Toyota line has better historical quality control than any luxury car, BMW or Cadillac or even Lexus (which they also make). Actually I own, and still use on occassion a 1990 Corrola that has had zero non-scheduled maintenance over the past 15 years and runs like a clock even though I have not given it a tune-up in this millinium yet - and have been kind of using it as an experiment to see if a 10 year old car can be used for another ten more years without a tuneup (it has little trade-in value so why not?) 

 

And don't forget that Mazda itself had made hundreds of thousands of Wankels and although their quality control is not as good - it is very good... and any design using a Wankel is not going to be "radical" any more so than the Prius was a radical departure-  both are derivative. I just wish Toyota would start making the Wankel- now that most of the patents have expired. Maybe they could trade their hybrid IP for Wankel IP.

 
A light carbon body, as you mention, would be more raidcal and equally desireable for a hybrid, and especially with that oft-mentioned but seldom seen - 'one good battery'.

EEStor Inc. is a Cedar Park, Texas startup that has developed a supposed breakthrough battery technology - only is sounds more like a combination of UltraCap and/or BatCap. Apparently a prototype factory is supposed to be under construction now.

The company was only founded in 2001 by Richard D. Weir, Carl Nelson, and Richard S. Weir, who have backgrounds as senior managers at IBM and Xerox, not in automotive nor batteries. If the prototype plant is actually being built - this is a huge step as most of the other advanced batteries except "bipolar Ni" appear to be in stall-mode.

According to  "Utility Federal Technology Opportunities," EEStor claims to make a battery at half the cost per kilowatt-hour and one-tenth the weight of lead-acid batteries.

Did you get that ? cheaper than lead-acid per kw and 1/10 the weight for the same power? Specifically, the product itself weighs 400 pounds (why not smaller?) and delivers 52 kilowatt-hours on a fresh charge. Doesn't sound like that much really, but compare it to what is available.

The technology is basically a parallel plate capacitor with barium titanate as the dielectric, plus something else - but is a ceramic-based unit. EEStor was supposed to build (in 2005) an assembly line - to produce vet and supply them in modest quantity - and then license the technology to manufacturers for volume production. Selling price would start at $3,200 for low volume and fall to $2,100 in high-volume production. - about $5+ per pound. Lead acid is less per pound ($1+) but only a tenth as energetic per pound. NiMH is heavier per unit output and four times costlier for the same power.

But given the recent history of such announcements - don't get your hopes up too high yet. I hope Toyota is listening and gets in on the ground floor, if this is not another big flop-announcement... Details sparse, even for business week, and I can find no recent update on whether they have actually started construction or not, but you can (usually)bet your hat, that if K-P (the premier VC firm) is in on it - it will be a winner:

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/dealflow/archives/2005/09/kleiner_perkins_1.html