Subscribe to the Blog
Solar Power Storage Options
Alternate fuel options for future vehicles?
It seems that the much touted hydrogen fuel cell won't be the savior that we once thought. It costs a lot of money to manufacture hydrogen, and it requires burning coal, which creates pollution (at the factory, not in the car), plus they can't store enough energy to make the car go over 50 mph. So what are we left with? Electric cars have same problem-storage batteries aren't sufficient to power a car for long periods of time. Solar power seems impractical (what if it's cloudy or raining?) and anti-matter is so expensive to produce it's nothing more than a pipe dream. So what will we use to power our cars in the future? Magnetic levitation? Nuclear fusion? Some technology on the drawing boards we haven't seen yet?
Don't write off the electric car yet - you can't cite 20-to-30 year old flaws in electric cars - considerable progress has been made with battery research in the last few years.
*
Take a look at this electric car:
*
http://phoenixmotorcars.com/models/fleet.html
*
The Phoenix travels up to 250 miles per charge, drives at 95+ mph carrying 5 passengers plus cargo, charges batteries in only ten minutes, and has a battery life in excess of 200,000 miles. It is a real car, based on battery research from MIT. Phoenix has taken its first orders and is building cars right now.
*
Likewise, the Tesla electric sports car:
*
http://teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1
*
This EV can do 130+ mph, and has been demonstrated beating a Ferrari in a head-to-head race. The Tesla can also get better than 250 miles per charge. Tesla has recently come to Detroit to build an engineering facility. They plan to design and build an affordable electric family sedan in a couple of years.
*
Electric vehicles do not create very much pollution, regardless of what power plants burn.
*
First, about half the electricity created comes from burning coal, so this is the major pollution worry. Only 3% comes from oil, so we need not worry about this. But the coal plants are base-load plants. They take a long time to start up, so they run all the time. When the grid is loaded, and new plants are started up, for the most part, these are cleaner plants. So adding load to the grid does not increase pollution very much.
*
Secondly, much electricity is wasted in the evening, and at night, because of those base-load plants, the ones that can't be turned off when demand goes down. Electric cars charge mostly at night. There is currently enough wasted electricity to charge millions of electric cars, before more plants will need to be built. No new pollution will be created by using electricity that otherwise goes to waste.
*
Third, how about when electric cars catch on, and new plants have to be built? Hopefully these will be clean plants. But even if they are coal plants, new designs for coal generated electrical plants are 85% efficient, far more efficient than your sub-25% efficient gasoline engine. Greater efficiency means more miles on less fuel, and therefore less pollution per mile.
*
Fourth: even if all the above were not true, electric cars would still produce much less pollution than gas cars, because of the greater efficiency of electric drive (electric motor, 95% efficient, gas engine, 25% efficient.) Delivering energy by wire to electric cars (95% efficient) is also much, much more efficient than trucking gas to thousands of service stations.
*
The proof of all this is right in the fuel prices. Gasoline costs about 10 to 15 cents per mile. Electric cars drive around for only about a penny per mile. The difference comes from efficiency. Much greater efficiency = much less pollution.
-----------------
Ask the Expert: Anthony Summers For many entrepreneurs, "going solar" is difficult to make a decisionto. We hear from solar energy, photovoltaic modules andphotocells and wonder if solar energy really worth timeand money necessary to make it happen.
