The Panda.org Report

Plugged in: The End of the Oil Age

This 200+ page report is available as a free download.

Once again, it should be clear that the Oil Age will not end for lack of oil, and in spite of the Peak Oil theory, we have more than enough geological hydrocarbons within our grasp at some price to decimate the climate system.

If you want, you can read and save the full report.

Below are some of the best passages. These got my head spinning.....this report makes so much sense.

The lesson to be drawn from the Great American Streetcar Scandal is that businesses respond entirely rationally, from their point of view, to external threats. Furthermore, it serves as a warning that when companies invest in product technologies which directly compete with their core business, it is not necessarily a moment to celebrate.

By 2006, China was home to approximately twenty-two million private motor vehicles. Around 6.4 million passenger cars were sold in 2007, with a further 2.5 million commercial vehicles, making a rise of 22% on the previous year. At this staggering rate of growth, the total fleet could increase more than ten-fold to 250 million by 2030.

Today, the US automobile fleet numbers roughly 250 million. By 2030, China’s vehicle population could therefore resemble the US in 2008, albeit in a nation with pitiful domestic crude oil supplies, vast coal reserves, stressed freshwater resources, advancing deserts, and a population of perhaps 1.5 billion to feed. The implications should be clear, not to mention shocking.

Knowing what we now know about the unsustainable nature of our present transportation model, how would we choose to redesign the future?

In Tianjin, a port city some 125 km to the east of Beijing, an electric vehicle factory is currently under construction which will boast a capacity of twenty thousand units per annum. Once again, as with the 19th Century horse-traders, it is frequently not the incumbent suppliers of the dominant technology who are successful in developing the disruptor.

According to the US Department of Energy (DOE)’s website dedicated to fuel economy – in a gasoline-dominated market – only 15-20% of the chemical energy stored in the fuel is put to work moving the vehicle (and powering the accessories).135 This assessment has nothing whatsoever to do with vehicle size, shape, or weight; it is simply a measure of how much energy is available to turn the wheels.

After one hundred years of continual product development and technological advances, vehicle efficiencies of the order of 18-23% should strike us as being quite dreadful!.

In distinct contrast to the ICE, electric motors are inherently energy efficient – across a much broader load range – converting some eighty-six percent of the chemical energy stored in batteries to power the wheels. For the purposes of this discussion, we will conservatively assume that a BEV’s electric powertrain could achieve 65% efficiency.

According to the US DOE’s fuel economy website, which enables side-by-side comparisons of historical vehicle performance data, the RAV4-EV (model year 2000) was 4.4 times more efficient than its ICEV contemporary over the combined test cycle.

The energy density advantage of liquid hydrocarbons grants dramatically superior driving range per kilogramme of energy carrier, despite the woeful inefficiency of the mechanical powertrain in converting that stored energy into kilometres. Moreover, the physical nature of liquids is matched by the extensive network of roadside service stations specifically developed to support them; it takes only a few minutes to pump forty litres of gasoline or diesel into the tank, as opposed to spending several hours plugged into an electricity outlet.

The most famous electric vehicle spawned by the Mandate is probably the General Motors EV1, which was developed from the bottom up as an electric vehicle and consequently has no ICEV equivalent against which to compare. However, the Toyota RAV4-EV and the Ford Explorer USPS Electric both had direct gasoline-powered equivalents. According to the US DOE’s fuel economy website,142 which enables side-by-side comparisons of historical vehicle performance data, the RAV4-EV (model year 2000) was 4.4 times more efficient than its ICEV contemporary over the combined test cycle.

Meanwhile, the Explorer USPS Electric (model year 2002) returned fuel economy figures 3.2 times better than its conventional sibling. These two data points indicate that, all else being equal, the practical energy efficiency of the electric powertrain can exceed that of its gasoline-powered mechanical counterpart by at least a factor of three to four.

The energy density advantage of liquid hydrocarbons grants dramatically superior driving range per kilogramme of energy carrier, despite the woeful inefficiency of the mechanical powertrain in converting that stored energy into kilometres. Moreover, the physical nature of liquids is matched by the extensive network of roadside service stations specifically developed to support them; it takes only a few minutes to pump forty litres of gasoline or diesel into the tank, as opposed to spending several hours plugged into an electricity outlet.

One technology option has emerged in recent years, which attempts to combine the convenience of liquid hydrocarbon fuels with the energy efficiency potential of the electric powertrain. The hybrid, in its initial incarnation and in its full development, can bridge the gap between ICEVs and BEVs.

The onboard range-extending generator will initially take the form of a downsized ICE running on liquid hydrocarbon fuels and is thus compatible with the same refuelling infrastructure upon which ICEVs and HEVs depend. The all-electric range is determined by the battery characteristics and technology – which is advancing apace thanks to the fast-moving ICT industry – as well as the particular driving conditions and ambient temperature.

Thoughts frequently turn to hydrogen, which may be produced via electrolysis when renewable power is in excess, stored in tanks, distributed via pipeline if necessary, and recombined as required in fuel cells to produce electricity. It's a neat idea which, as we discuss later,suffers atrocious energy efficiency losses - governed by fundamental physical laws which will not be breached by human ingenuity - in the conversion steps to and from hydrogen. Advanced automotive battery storage may make it a moot point.

For those remaining sceptics who still associate electric motoring with golf carts and airport terminal buggies, we close our discussion of BEVs in practice with this excerpt from an interview with Donald Sadoway, a professor in the department of materials science and engineering at the Massachusets Institute of Technology (MIT): I opened the sun roof, rolled down the windows, and I pulled out. It was like a magic carpet. You hear people laughing, talking, and you're interacting with the city. I returned the vehicle to the fellow at Boston Edison, and I came back here and said, "I've got to work harder. I've got to make this thing happen." The only reason that car isn't everywhere: it couldn't go more than 70 miles on a charge. But you make it 270, game over. Anybody who drives it will never go back to internal combustion.

Kangoo Electri'cité, the "all electric" version, is intended mainly for urban use. It achieves a range of 60 to 100 km depending on operating conditions. Elect'road does away with the hassles of pure electric power thanks to an onboard electric generator which extends its range to as much as 150 km in the urban cycle. With the introduction of Elect'road, Renault's electric vehicle range combines three advantages: low emissions, economy, and sufficient range for urban and suburban use.

Speaking of Sweden, at the 2007 Frankfurt International Motor Show the Swedish automaker Volvo also unveiled a series flexible fuel concept called ReCharge, based on the existing C30 model (figure 20d). Ford-owned Volvo’s performance claims even overshadow GM’s Volt: in-wheel motors propel the ReCharge up to 100 km on electricity alone, following which the fuel consumption may range from zero to 5.5 litres per 100 km.202 For a 150 km drive starting with a full charge, the effective fuel economy of the ReCharge would be 1.9 litres per 100 km (equivalent to 124 miles per gallon). In all-electric mode, Volvo projects operating costs around eighty percent lower than those of a comparable petroleum-powered vehicle.

In 2006, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) performed an impact assessment of PHEVs on electric utilities and regional power grids in the US.208 The headline conclusion of the study is astonishing: with the installation of no new electricity generating capacity, if charging off-peak, it would be possible to ‘fuel’ eighty-four percent of the nation’s cars, pickup trucks, and SUVs – roughly 198 million vehicles – driving an average of 33 miles (53 km) per day

Simple arithmetic shows that one million PHEVs consuming an average of 1,500 kWh per year would require 1.5 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity annually. In Germany alone, the total electricity consumption in 2005 was 586 TWh.211 Therefore, one million PHEVs introduced to the German automobile fleet would collectively consume around 0.25% of the country’s annual electricity demand. In the US, where electricity consumption is an order or magnitude higher at 4,047 TWh in 2005,212 one million PHEVs would demand a negligible 0.04% of the nation’s power. The clear message is that significant numbers of grid-connected vehicles would not have a significant impact on national electricity consumption.

Alternatively, the electricity required to power one million PHEVs would be satisfied with one hundred and ninety typical onshore wind turbines.

Over 200 pages of great information..on cars, batteries, oil. And it's FREE!

---

If you have a recommendation for stories to put on our website, please send it along.
John Penry
email:

Back to Top

---

Copyright - © 2009 TransTexasTrucks.com - All rights reserved.