I've been wondering how Maryland will achieve it's goal of an average mileage of 47mpg. How do electric cars figure into the average? They don't use any gasoline at all, and are "zero emissions." Of course, zero isn't really zero at all, but that's another topic.
I looked into how many kWh of grid power are in a gallon of gas. Here's a good link:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
From Hyperphysics, one of my favorite enginnerding destinations!
Time for some more fun energy conversions. I get really into these.
Thirty thousand calories = one gallon of gasoline = 36kWh = 166 Tastykake Kandy Kakes = 86 slices of papa johns sausage pizza = 64 starbucks frappucinos (yum, I wish I could drive my car on those! and can you tell that i'm dieting this week?)
If the cost of grid power is $.12 per kilowatt hour, which is what mine was last month, then purchasing the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline is $4.32. I'm thinking that the "mpg" of an electric car would be the "miles per 36kWh." How far can you drive after you used 36kWh to charge your car?
Probably farther than 47 miles. Because if you aren't dragging that stinky old ball-and-chain, the ICE and its meathead mechanical posse, around with you. Just the weight savings alone will up your mileage significantly. And given the higher gas prices we've been seeing lately, the energy costs of driving an electric car compares rather nicely with a gluttonous gas guzzler.
Monday, March 5, 2007
Sunday, March 4, 2007
The Hype about Hydrogen
Because I'm a nerd, I read the book "The Hype about Hydrogen" by Joseph J. Romm. And because I'm even more of a nerd, I recently re-read the first three chapters. (those were the best chapters.)
The book was published in 2005, and the author used to work for the Department of Energy. He seizes on the fact that George W talked up "the hydrogen economy" in his 2003 State of the Union address, and points out that "the hydrogen economy" is a bunch of bullshit. I couldn't agree more, if I hear one more person tout the amazing future of the car, one that is "powered by water," and/or a car whose "only emissions are pure, drinkable water," then I'm going to scream. This is such a clusterf*ck of logic. The energy density of water is ZERO. As this blog points out, there are thirty thousand calories in a gallon of gasoline. There are NO calories in a gallon of water. Which means, you can not do anything that requires energy (ie, move, burn, heat) with water as your power source.
One of my favorite documentaries of all time, "Who killed the electric car?" refers to hydrogen fuel cells as a "bait and switch." Which it is, and a well-played one at that.
Romm's book is informative. HOWEVER I feel that he glosses over a two points which I beileve are crucial.
First of all, he does not mention that a hydrogen fuel cell car is an ELECTRIC car. Maybe he assumes that his audience already knows this, but I'm willing to bet that most people who know a little something about fuel cell cars still don't know how different a fuel cell car would be from what we drive today. Especially when people see images such as this one:
This is a picture of W refueling a hydrogen powered car. Looks like a gas pump to me. Looks like a normal car, too. But be wary. This photo is misleading you. There is no engine under the hood of that car. There is no engine in that car at all. Which means there is no Dual Overhead Cam, no VTEC, no fancy Allison Transmission. No need for high gear ratios. No catalytic converter, no muffler, no exhaust manifold. No oil pan, no oil filter - with no pistons, there is no need for lubrication and there are no oil changes required. No alternator. No brake pads. No brake fluid. With an electric car you can use regenerative braking.
Romm does not mention this, and I think it is important for people to be clear on this. A fuel cell car is an electric car.
In chapter 2, Romm reviews the types of hydrogen fuel cells and what their primary uses are. The PEM fuel cell is the one that is being developed for transportation. He mentions, but briefly, the fact that a PEM fuel cell is reversible. Meaning that when it's full of hydrogen and oxygen gases, it will create electricty and water. AND if its full of water, it can use electricity to create hydrogen and oxygen gas.
Take your fuel cell, plug it in, and what have you got? A RECHARGEABLE BATTERY!
Romm also points out the downfalls of PEM fuel cells. One is their expense, the other is the fact that they are susceptible to contamination. This is a problem if you plan to refuel it. But not if you use it as a closed system, and recharge it instead of refueling it.
"Refueling" your fuel cell car, as W is shown doing, is not required. It could be an option - but a pretty lame one. It would be better to treat your fuel cell stack like a propane tank and if you're driving a long distance, stop and swap your spent stack with a charged one. But if your car has enough range (and there's no reason why the range couldn't be very high, especially when you consider the weight reduction of the fuel cell car) then why would you ever want to waste your time stopping at a stinky dirty gas station? I wouldn't. No way. I'd recharge my car when it was parked. That way I'd never discover that I need to stop at the gas station (which always seems to happen when I'm already late for something....) I'd only run out of charge when I was driving for hours at a time. And I don't do that very often.
Now it's possible (maybe even likely) that some other type of battery will be developed that has a higher energy density that hydrogen. Lithium Ion, for example, is being developed like crazy for laptops and phones. Maybe that will be it. If so then hydrogen is all "hype." We don't really know yet.
Either one will do the trick. This is the kind of technology advancement is ripe, and that people would latch onto, because it will IMPROVE life. No need to waste time refueling, no need to spend $30 doing it. Yeah your electric bill goes up. But not by as much as you spend on gas. And God, do I hate it when I have to waste my lunch break going to Jiffy Lube. And feeling guilty because I've procrastinated too long and I'm at 4000 miles since my last oil change. (which reminds me...uuugh...my poor civic.)
Romm, tell your readers: No more jiffy lube on your lunch break! No more stopping at Amoco when you're already late for work! Yay electric cars!
The book was published in 2005, and the author used to work for the Department of Energy. He seizes on the fact that George W talked up "the hydrogen economy" in his 2003 State of the Union address, and points out that "the hydrogen economy" is a bunch of bullshit. I couldn't agree more, if I hear one more person tout the amazing future of the car, one that is "powered by water," and/or a car whose "only emissions are pure, drinkable water," then I'm going to scream. This is such a clusterf*ck of logic. The energy density of water is ZERO. As this blog points out, there are thirty thousand calories in a gallon of gasoline. There are NO calories in a gallon of water. Which means, you can not do anything that requires energy (ie, move, burn, heat) with water as your power source.
One of my favorite documentaries of all time, "Who killed the electric car?" refers to hydrogen fuel cells as a "bait and switch." Which it is, and a well-played one at that.
Romm's book is informative. HOWEVER I feel that he glosses over a two points which I beileve are crucial.
First of all, he does not mention that a hydrogen fuel cell car is an ELECTRIC car. Maybe he assumes that his audience already knows this, but I'm willing to bet that most people who know a little something about fuel cell cars still don't know how different a fuel cell car would be from what we drive today. Especially when people see images such as this one:
This is a picture of W refueling a hydrogen powered car. Looks like a gas pump to me. Looks like a normal car, too. But be wary. This photo is misleading you. There is no engine under the hood of that car. There is no engine in that car at all. Which means there is no Dual Overhead Cam, no VTEC, no fancy Allison Transmission. No need for high gear ratios. No catalytic converter, no muffler, no exhaust manifold. No oil pan, no oil filter - with no pistons, there is no need for lubrication and there are no oil changes required. No alternator. No brake pads. No brake fluid. With an electric car you can use regenerative braking. Romm does not mention this, and I think it is important for people to be clear on this. A fuel cell car is an electric car.
In chapter 2, Romm reviews the types of hydrogen fuel cells and what their primary uses are. The PEM fuel cell is the one that is being developed for transportation. He mentions, but briefly, the fact that a PEM fuel cell is reversible. Meaning that when it's full of hydrogen and oxygen gases, it will create electricty and water. AND if its full of water, it can use electricity to create hydrogen and oxygen gas.
Take your fuel cell, plug it in, and what have you got? A RECHARGEABLE BATTERY!
Romm also points out the downfalls of PEM fuel cells. One is their expense, the other is the fact that they are susceptible to contamination. This is a problem if you plan to refuel it. But not if you use it as a closed system, and recharge it instead of refueling it.
"Refueling" your fuel cell car, as W is shown doing, is not required. It could be an option - but a pretty lame one. It would be better to treat your fuel cell stack like a propane tank and if you're driving a long distance, stop and swap your spent stack with a charged one. But if your car has enough range (and there's no reason why the range couldn't be very high, especially when you consider the weight reduction of the fuel cell car) then why would you ever want to waste your time stopping at a stinky dirty gas station? I wouldn't. No way. I'd recharge my car when it was parked. That way I'd never discover that I need to stop at the gas station (which always seems to happen when I'm already late for something....) I'd only run out of charge when I was driving for hours at a time. And I don't do that very often.
Now it's possible (maybe even likely) that some other type of battery will be developed that has a higher energy density that hydrogen. Lithium Ion, for example, is being developed like crazy for laptops and phones. Maybe that will be it. If so then hydrogen is all "hype." We don't really know yet.
Either one will do the trick. This is the kind of technology advancement is ripe, and that people would latch onto, because it will IMPROVE life. No need to waste time refueling, no need to spend $30 doing it. Yeah your electric bill goes up. But not by as much as you spend on gas. And God, do I hate it when I have to waste my lunch break going to Jiffy Lube. And feeling guilty because I've procrastinated too long and I'm at 4000 miles since my last oil change. (which reminds me...uuugh...my poor civic.)
Romm, tell your readers: No more jiffy lube on your lunch break! No more stopping at Amoco when you're already late for work! Yay electric cars!
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Now I know why they say Maryland is the greatest state in the union
OK, so I'm a little biased, since I've lived in Maryland all my life. I never bothered to move anywhere else because, why should I? What do any of those other states have that Maryland doesn't? Nothing, if anything I suspect that Maryland is BETTER than most states.
And to confirm my theory, yesterday I found this article in the washington post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022001665.html
ahem, allow me to quote:
"The House of Delegates overwhelmingly approved legislation yesterday that could make Maryland the 12th state to force carmakers to slash emissions thought to cause global warming.
...
The law is designed to raise the state's average fuel efficiency for new vehicles sold in Maryland to 43 miles per gallon. The current average for light trucks and SUVs is 22.2 mpg and for cars, 27.5 mpg.
...
The higher standards are to take effect in 2009"
I was eating lunch in my cube at work when I read this article, and it put me in a good mood for the rest of the day. This is FABULOUS! I can't wait until 2009, just you watch, cuz I'm gonna buy me an electric car!
I've been waiting for the electric car ever since I was in engineering school, when worked on the University of Maryland Future Truck team. This was when I learned the difference between a motor and an engine. An important distinction. And this is when I learned that motors are way better than engines in many ways (more torque, more efficient with less waste heat and friction, fewer parts, easier to optimize since there is no trade-off between torque and power, smaller and therefore lighter, can be used as a generator - the list goes on...)
The only reason whey we didn't start out driving electric cars is because the batteries were so heavy. But battery technology is improving in leaps and bounds. Just compare the Razor cell phone to the old school Nokias that we had five years ago. Most of the reduction in size comes from the improvements that have been made to the battery.
The auto industry hasn't taken advantage of any of this new technology, however, because they are behaving like a stodgy old corporate stick-in-the-mud. What advancements have they adopted in recent years? ok there's been some stuff, like the vtec engine, ABS, maybe airbags. But nothing REALLY good. Nothing as life-altering as mapquest and GPS. Nothing as important as 47mpg.
I would buy a hybrid. But I want to be able to drive it in 100% electric mode. My commute to work is only 30 miles and if I bought a prius, and modified it (thereby voiding the warranty) I could have a plug-in hybrid. I'd never need to put gas in my car. I kinda like that idea, but the thing that I don't like about it is the fact that a plug in hybrid still has an internal combustion engine and all the paraphanelia thereby required (coolant system, transmission, exhaust system...) Even if you never drive the car in gas mode. If I can drive all electric, why should I shlepp all that heavy steel engine junk around with me, everywhere I go?
No, I don't really want a plug in hybrid. I want an electric car. If it's a fuel cell car, fine, but I don't want to have to stop at any stinking wierdo hydrogen pump to refuel, I want to recharge my car at home. I would LOVE to never need to go to the gas station again.
The problem is that nobody sells electric cars, excpet for one company but they are racing cars and they cost $100k. www.teslamotors.com
BUT if Maryland is going to get its average fuel economy up to 47mpg, they are going to have to sell electric cars to bump up the average and compensate for the Hummers on the road.
And to confirm my theory, yesterday I found this article in the washington post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/20/AR2007022001665.html
ahem, allow me to quote:
"The House of Delegates overwhelmingly approved legislation yesterday that could make Maryland the 12th state to force carmakers to slash emissions thought to cause global warming.
...
The law is designed to raise the state's average fuel efficiency for new vehicles sold in Maryland to 43 miles per gallon. The current average for light trucks and SUVs is 22.2 mpg and for cars, 27.5 mpg.
...
The higher standards are to take effect in 2009"
I was eating lunch in my cube at work when I read this article, and it put me in a good mood for the rest of the day. This is FABULOUS! I can't wait until 2009, just you watch, cuz I'm gonna buy me an electric car!
I've been waiting for the electric car ever since I was in engineering school, when worked on the University of Maryland Future Truck team. This was when I learned the difference between a motor and an engine. An important distinction. And this is when I learned that motors are way better than engines in many ways (more torque, more efficient with less waste heat and friction, fewer parts, easier to optimize since there is no trade-off between torque and power, smaller and therefore lighter, can be used as a generator - the list goes on...)
The only reason whey we didn't start out driving electric cars is because the batteries were so heavy. But battery technology is improving in leaps and bounds. Just compare the Razor cell phone to the old school Nokias that we had five years ago. Most of the reduction in size comes from the improvements that have been made to the battery.
The auto industry hasn't taken advantage of any of this new technology, however, because they are behaving like a stodgy old corporate stick-in-the-mud. What advancements have they adopted in recent years? ok there's been some stuff, like the vtec engine, ABS, maybe airbags. But nothing REALLY good. Nothing as life-altering as mapquest and GPS. Nothing as important as 47mpg.
I would buy a hybrid. But I want to be able to drive it in 100% electric mode. My commute to work is only 30 miles and if I bought a prius, and modified it (thereby voiding the warranty) I could have a plug-in hybrid. I'd never need to put gas in my car. I kinda like that idea, but the thing that I don't like about it is the fact that a plug in hybrid still has an internal combustion engine and all the paraphanelia thereby required (coolant system, transmission, exhaust system...) Even if you never drive the car in gas mode. If I can drive all electric, why should I shlepp all that heavy steel engine junk around with me, everywhere I go?
No, I don't really want a plug in hybrid. I want an electric car. If it's a fuel cell car, fine, but I don't want to have to stop at any stinking wierdo hydrogen pump to refuel, I want to recharge my car at home. I would LOVE to never need to go to the gas station again.
The problem is that nobody sells electric cars, excpet for one company but they are racing cars and they cost $100k. www.teslamotors.com
BUT if Maryland is going to get its average fuel economy up to 47mpg, they are going to have to sell electric cars to bump up the average and compensate for the Hummers on the road.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
This blog is hereby dedicated to Gasoline, the Ultimate Energy Drink
As a yo-yo dieter, a mechanical engineer, and an environmentalist, I think about calories a little bit too much. I try not to eat too many of them; meanwhile my honda civic totally pigs out every day (and never gets fat, which is so unfair....)
Here is a list of things that "Thirty Thousand Calories" could be used to describe:
I like to marvel over/torture myself thinking about what an amazing/inefficient invention the Internal Combustion Engine is. It's incredible that something with so many moving parts, operating at such a high temperature, is so reliable. My car has driven 90000 miles without a hitch. And it's like a rube goldberg under the hood. But what's equally amazing is that only about 30% of the gas that my car uses is converted into the motion that moves my sedentary ass from point A to point B. The other 70% is lost to friction and heat, mostly heat of course because the gasoline is being lit on fire inside the engine. Its almost immoral - that one vehicle could use so much energy. It's a good thing my car doesn't subscribe to any particular religion, because I'm pretty sure gluttony is considered a sin by all of them.
My car is a wonder of reliability and inefficiency.
Here is a list of things that "Thirty Thousand Calories" could be used to describe:
- fifteen days of sensible and most likely boring and unsatisfying eating.
- maybe 12 days of food, when not on a diet.
- 22 chipotle burritos
- 222 ten-minute miles on the treadmill
- 375 oreo cookies
- 4.5 costco-sized barrels of utz party mix, which, by the way, should come with a warning because it's as addictive as a drug.
- About 2500 brussels sprouts
- 30 pints of cherry garcia
- 900 strips of bacon
- ONE GALLON OF GASOLINE
I like to marvel over/torture myself thinking about what an amazing/inefficient invention the Internal Combustion Engine is. It's incredible that something with so many moving parts, operating at such a high temperature, is so reliable. My car has driven 90000 miles without a hitch. And it's like a rube goldberg under the hood. But what's equally amazing is that only about 30% of the gas that my car uses is converted into the motion that moves my sedentary ass from point A to point B. The other 70% is lost to friction and heat, mostly heat of course because the gasoline is being lit on fire inside the engine. Its almost immoral - that one vehicle could use so much energy. It's a good thing my car doesn't subscribe to any particular religion, because I'm pretty sure gluttony is considered a sin by all of them.
My car is a wonder of reliability and inefficiency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
