True, lightweight high-strength containment materials may make such a
system practical, although they tend to be expensive. But there's no
need to wait. Both mechanical flywheels and compressed-air energy
storage share the same characteristics in this regard: stored energy
scales directly with the strength and size (and thus mass) of the
container. Both will have the same energy capacity as a superconducting
storage system; so why wait for ultraconductors? If Kevlar is
practical, go ahead and build flywheels into electric cars!
Mark Goldes wrote:
Los Alamos National Laboratory patented a lightweight containment
system using Kevlar. While the Patent was in force, our firm had
rights for use with our polymers. Now that their Patent has expired
we still expect to use that lightweight system of containment for UMES
electron flywheels.
Carbon fiber may prove to be an even better alternative and we are
watching wire development progress with that extremely light material
many times stronger than steel.
Mark
From: Bob Fickle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Room Temperature Superconductors and EVs
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:50:05 -0600
Much as I'd like to have some ultraconductor wire to play with, I'm
not convinced that Ultrqaconducting Magnetic Energy Storage will
replace batteries. Magnetic fields create a pressure equal to the
energy density- and therefore require a strong (read "heavy" and
"expensive") mechanical container.
Mark Goldes wrote:
Harry,
They can be made, but not yet in wire form.
Thin films containing Ultraconductors 1 or 2 microns in diameter
(1/50th the diameter of a human hair) can always carry 50 Amperes.
The Ultraconductors run through the film in the thin direction,
(i.e. normal to the film).
Wire is 3 years and $18 million in front of us.
Once available as wire, electron flywheels can begin to replace
batteries. Ultraconducting Magnetic Energy Storage systems are
expected to prove practical.
Electric motors made with Ultraconducting wire can be much smaller
and lighter, and may require no iron. Alll plastic motors may
therefore prove practical. Superconducting motors require no iron.
We suspect the same will be true of Ultraconductors.
Mark
From: Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Who Killed the EV?
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:29:14 -0500
If room temperature superconductors can be made they would also
boost the performance of electric vehicles.
If I remember correctly, a Time magazine cover from around '86 or '87
showed an artist's rendering of a futuristic electric vehicle as
one of the
promises of high temperature superconductors.
Harry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harry Veeder
>
> Do they mean the braking system did not use friction?
>
> <><><><><><><>
>
> It used both: disc in front, electric in rear. Here are the EV-1
specs:
>
>
http://www.evchargernews.com/CD-A/gm_ev1_web_site/specs/specs_specs_top.h
> tm
>
> or
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ckaju
>
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Try the New Netscape Mail Today!
> Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List
> http://mail.netscape.com
>
- Re: Lightweight Ultraconducting Energy Storage Bob Fickle
-