Are electric cars a net improvement?

Factual Questions
41

Great, now you lobby the car makers to do that. Every car maker will claim that their design is superior to the competition and that theirs should be the standard design, not the other guys. Also, how are going to handle the different demands that an SUV is going to have (as far as energy conumption goes) versus that of a compact? Is everybody going to have same size battery? How fast are you going to be able to change the batteries? The faster you swap them out, the more money you can make, but the more batteries you’ll need to keep on hand. Real estate in major metropolitian areas is expensive. Oh yeah, Rick, and the other professional mechanics here prefer the term “Iffy Lube” as those places have the annoying habit of screwing things up.

Don’t be too sure of that. Predicting the future shape of the automobile is prone to errors as can be see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and most especially here. (That, BTW, is a very short listing.) Note that many of the cars are alternative powered, or designed to maximize fuel economy.

Except, of course, those tanks are cheaper than a battery pack would be, and aren’t attached to things people have the kind of emotional investment like they do with their cars.

It’s more complicated than that. There’s issues of weight balance, structural integrity, cost, and shape.

Only when you’re talking about science fiction.

That box doesn’t need to meet crash safety standards, doesn’t have to stay on the road in 20 MPH crosswinds during a rainstorm, and isn’t chockfilled with computers that will need to be reprogrammed to deal with the new battery size.

Presently, Congress is battling with raising fuel economy standards, which one would think would be a no brainer given the high cost of gasoline, and yet car makers are opposing this fiercely, claiming that there’s no way they can meet the new standards. (Note that this is what they said back when emission controls and fuel economy standards were first mandated.) Many of the issues involving alternative fuels aren’t technological, but political. For what we’ve spent in Iraq so far, we could have had a government supported program to switch cars over to things like natural gas, hydrogen, or even electric, to name but three possibilities.

42

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t there a downstream issue on electric cars, in that the battery system has to be replaced every 2 years or so? And that is expensive, not to mention the issue of disposal of the batteries.

43

I didn’t know that Jacob Lohner was part of GM.

44

You’re quite right, other than the battery life is about 5-7 years. There’s also the matter of what happens to all of them when fuel cells become standard on cars. You suddenly have charging stations that are no longer needed, so there’s the expense of disposing of them as well. I should note that fuel cells might be close to coming in personal cars as Ballard, one of the leading fuel cell companies has just sold it’s automotive division.

guizot, the point is that hybrid electric vehicles are not new technology. They’ve been around for almost as long as the car, and the capabilities of them haven’t changed significantly

45

I know that; I saw one at the car show. I wouldn’t say the difference in range and maximum speed of modern hybrids from that thing is insignificant. I don’t think anyone today would buy a car that cruised at 10 mph and had a range of 30 miles.

46

Actually, it was only the first models which ran so slow or had such a short range. Admittedly, none of them until fairly recently could do 100 MPH like the Prius does, but then again, back in the early days of the automobile nobody could drive that fast.

47

A universal, plug-in battery pack makes about as much sense as dictating that every car should use exactly the same engine so they can be plugged in and out quickly.

Different cars will have different power needs, and battery packs will be sized accordingly.

Different cars will have different packaging requirements, and batteries will be shaped accordingly.

Battery packs will suffer varying amounts of abuse and different amounts of life left in them, so they will never be treated as commodities. I wouldn’t swap out my battery pack that got tender loving care for some random pack at a gas station.

The hope for short-term recharging lays in a new generation of ultra-capacitors, which might be able to build up a charge in a few minutes that would take you 10-20 miles, or hopefully even further.

48

A better analogy would be dictating that every car should use flammable liquids for fuel. Wait…

Or cars with greater power demands will have shorter ranges and/or a larger number of standardized cells. Like we do today with larger fuel tanks on less efficient vehicles or ones that require long haul ability.

Unnecessary. All that undercarriage space where bits of drive train and exhaust system currently reside can be replaced with cell mounts.

You’re not dropping $5000 ($4860CAN) every week to have a major energy system overhaul. You pay, say $30, and they yank your expended cells and pop in some charged ones. Off you go. The regulation on cell maintenance and replacement specifications would be overseen in the same way the Dept of Weights and Measures can do periodic and random pump and fuel tests on gas stations.

You have much sentimental attachment to a given tank of gas? Do you worry how well refined it was?

In which case perhaps the cell-swap model turns into something more like an oil change than a fill up?

49

Apparently many people do – there have been quite a few past threads about the quality of refined gasoline and is there any difference between brands, etc.

50

That’s nowhere near feasible. First off, there’s no such thing as a common platform across a single car manufacturer, let alone every single one of them. But even imagining that in some fairytale universe we get every one of them to agree to a common chassis (body on frame) or platform (unit-body), how do you propose to properly distribute the weight? It’s not just a simple matter of utilizing the space once used by a fuel tank or a larger engine. This is the type of thing that product design engineers would have to consider from the very, very beginning. Weight and its distribution is critical to the handing of a car. You can’t just come up with one generic pattern that will apply to every vehicle on the road.

51

When you have to move around large mechanical forces, your design is constrained by the weight (and shape) of the powerplant and the weight (and shape) of the drive train that gets that power to the wheels.

With an electric design, the majority of the drive train becomes so much wiring. Depending on bearing design, you can place the motors themselves within the wheels. The chassis becomes little more than a battery pack and mounting point for secondary equipment. You could have an SUV with good ground clearance and a center of gravity below the tops of the tires. The stability polygon of a primitive design is better than what can currently be achieved when you have to deal with engines and axles and liquid tanks that change weight dramatically as fuel is used.

And you’ll see that whether they standardize on a cell design or not. It’s just not particularly difficult to standardize and make the cells accessible given the nature of the design.

52

What about the weight of the body? Passengers? Cargo? Right now, with infernal combustion engines it’s possible to have a relatively flat and low set up. The Smart Car uses it. It offers tremndous possibilities as far as making an easily reconfigurable design, but it’s not widespread because of the tremendous cost of coverting the production line over to such things.

Car makers can’t even agree on which side of the car to put the damn fuel door.

53

This manufacturer claims otherwise:

This could be unnecessary.

54

Do IC cars not have bodies, passengers, or cargo? Several of the various lines of compact SUVs out today use sedan chassis will big tires and a body kit. The Hummer 2 and 3 use light truck chassis. The trend of platforming a single vehicle core across multiple unrelated car classes is already in play.

Leave out a little?

Off board charger: 10 minutes to recharge to 95% capacity

On board charger: 6 hours to recharge from 220V plug-in

Not sure what the “Off Board Charger” involves, but I’d be concerned about house wiring and fires.

55

From FAQ:

They don’t give a description of this “special charger”.

56

Chargers are going to be transformers to convert whatever your line voltage to s safe charging current level for your battery. There are plenty of ways to pour a ton of electricity into something that may not be feasible on a typical household 220V line. They also tend to be heavy. An “offboard charger” could easily be much larger and handle far more current safely than a car mounted one.

57

I always thought skipping a step and mounting PV arrays on the car would make an interesting range extender and or pick up some charge while you are at work with your car sitting in the parking lot.

like so

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/05/solar_hybrid_ca.php

58

Again, these are not as universal as you seem to think, or even as simple to design and build. Car makers are reducing the variety of platforms they’re using, it’s true, but even when they share components, the automakers generally make a great deal of modifications to them. Even though a PT Cruiser is based on Chrysler’s minivans and Neons, you can’t simply swap any and all parts on them. In the late 80s/early 90s, Chrysler intended to go with a "modular’ body design, which basically would have allowed one to easily swap things like the front end, but had to abandon the idea as it was too expensive.

Why? Do you worry about the tankful of gas in your car exploding? I’m sure that such a system would be safe if it were installed by a qualified electrician. How long it would remain safe, of course, is another matter.