Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Hybrid or Biofuel cars


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 aeromotacanucks

aeromotacanucks

    Real Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 22 November 2012 - 07:02 PM

my question is simple. if you have a choice between a Hybrid car and a Biofuel car (powered by Etanol or Biodisel) what would you choose?



Biofuel:

Many people say that biofuel cars are cheaper, more simple, easy to get used and the tecnology already exist. it will reduce the necessity of gasoline and diesel and the consequence would be a country independent from the high prices of petroleum...

many countries use this tecnology so the tecnology is there. in fact many countries use cars with 3 fuel options at the same time ["flex fuel"] (gasoline, etanol and butane)




Hybrids:

the engine is more eficient and gives more KM/liter or MPG using a conventional engine with a KERS. you wouldnīt need use biofuel soo many countries would need just sell cars instead create new facilities and production lines.

a high number of hybrids would decrease the gas cost and people could buy more cars boosting the economy...






personal opinion:

Iīm used with biofuel cars and I like them, BUT I would like to see a Hybrid car with biofuel tecnology, the fuel cost would decrease since you would be able to do more km/liter ( or MPG).
  • 0
Shup up and fly! you´re not payed to think, you´re payed to fly!

#2 MC Fatigue

MC Fatigue

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,568 posts
  • Joined: 13-March 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 10:24 PM

Just my take on the information i've read/seen on this topic:
Biofuel is an intersting thing. in order to decrease greenhouse emissions (to almost nil) we can use carbon based fuel. pretty cool. however, the amount of plant matter needed to run simply say, BC's cars, would require ridiculous amounts of acreage to produce. land would have to be cleared to make room for fuel-creating crops.
hybrids on the other hand are also intriguing but the use of deadly chemicals and heavy metals in producing them at this point make them a hazard once the life of the battery has run its course and in the meantime they do create greenhouse and carbon emissions, albiet much less than most fossil fuel burning vehicles.

I like the idea of a biofuel hybrid. I'm not sure one is on the market at this point or in the production stage. Its an intriguing idea (if its not already out there) that you could run a vehicle on absolute zero greenhouse (etc) emissions and at the same time use much less of these biofuel alternatives.
  • 0
" I don't understand, can somebody tell me what's going on? Why is there a drunk Chinese man doing push-ups on my front lawn?......and why's he wearing lipstick??"

#3 Armada

Armada

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,990 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 23 November 2012 - 12:12 AM

Neither.

My V6 or Hydrogen.
  • 1
Posted Image
______________Eat, Sleep,Posted ImageRave, Repeat

#4 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:33 AM

Neither.

My V6 or Hydrogen.


Right on brother


Hydrogen Cars Now

Hydrogen cars are not only the future, they are here, now. When hydrogen cars become the status quo, the U. S. can lessen its dependence upon foreign oil, achieve lower prices at the fuel pumps and cut down on the greenhouse gases that produce global warming. The future of H2 cars is not a pipe dream, as there are already many hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCV's) and H2ICE (hydrogen internal combustion engine) vehicles on the roads. California, Japan and the European Union (especially Germany) have many H2 cars being used as fleet vehicles now.




Posted Image
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars


In 2005, Honda leased the first commercial FCV to a family in Redondo Beach, California. In 2008, the Honda FCX Clarity became the first production line built fuel cell lease vehicle rolled out to the same family plus dozens others.
For the past 28 years, the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) has been conducting research on fuel cells for use in transportation, industry and residential use.
Unlike many of the hybrid and "green" vehicles currently on the market, hydrogen fuel cells can offer the promise of zero emission technology, where the only byproduct from the automobiles is heat and water vapor. Current fossil-fuel burning vehicles emit all sorts of pollutants such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide, ozone and microscopic particulate matter.
Hybrids and other green autos address these issues to a large extent but only hydrogen cars hold the promise of zero emission of pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that fossil-fuel automobiles emit 1 ½ billion tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere each year and going to hydrogen fuel based transportation would all but eliminate this.
Not only that, H2 cars will lessen the United States' dependence upon foreign oil. The so-called "hydrogen highway" will mean less dependence upon OPEC, the big U. S. oil companies, oil refinery malfunctions and breakdowns and less resistance from oil-selling nations like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia or from hostile nations who would rather sell elsewhere.
Posted Image

Consumers will finally get a break from the never-ending rising prices at the gasoline pumps.


President George W. Bush, when he was in office, allocated approximately $2 billion in hydrogen highway research funds. Former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was pushing to get 200 H2 fueling stations built by 2010 stretching from Vancouver, British Columbia, all the way down to Baja, California (but had fallen short of this goal because of a poor economy and lack of political will).
Since Californians buy one-fifth of the nation's automobiles, this location is one of the world's hotbeds for FCV technology. This is especially true around the Los Angeles area.
New fuel cell technology could replace the current gasoline engine in what is called "disruptive technology" where something so innovative comes along it simply replaces the old technology very quickly (like the Internet or cell phones). A more likely scenario, however, is the slow, painstaking process of building a hydrogen refueling infrastructure in what is called a "cluster model".
This cluster model involves building H2 fueling stations in population centers like Los Angeles and San Francisco and rolling out hydrogen cars in the same locations. Afterwards, more large cities will get clusters of H2 refueling stations and fuel cell cars. Eventually these clusters will need to be connected through infrastructure.
The conversion from gasoline-powered internal combustion engines to hydrogen-powered internal combustion engines is agreed upon by most scientists and engineers to be a particularly easy transition and would buy time for fuel cell cars to be fully adapted.

But all 8 major automakers are pushing for fuel cell vehicles and each one has one or more prototypes or even lease vehicles to back this up.

Posted Image
Let's also not forget about hydrogen-on-demand vehicles are still contenders in the marketplance, avoiding the compressed or liquid hydrogen refueling scenario altogether. And, what about adapting hydrogen peroxide for fuel in cars since it is currently being used in race cars and jet packs as a propellant? These are other options to consider.
Hydrogen cars are the future, so why not take a test drive of this website right now and see what you'll be driving a few short years from now. With Germany, Japan, Scandinavia and the U. S. in the hunt, the hydrogen economy is just around the bend. Will you be ready?
  • 2

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#5 Offensive Threat

Offensive Threat

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,498 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 03

Posted 23 November 2012 - 03:06 AM

Biofuels have a lot of drawbacks to overcome. The whole "food vs fuel" debate has merit and there still needs to be huge improvements in the amount of resources expended to create each unit of biofuel. The amount of clean water used to create each litre of biofuel from planting to end production is far to high and thats just one of the many resources.

A biofuel hybrid would be nice to see. With constant improvements to the biofuel production methods and cost effective hybrid battery recycling on the way it may be a viable choice in the near future.
  • 0

Posted Image


#6 Tystick

Tystick

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,509 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 12

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:04 AM

I agree with the Hydrogen idea. It would be the cleanest possible source, essentially running cars on water.
Bio-fuel and Hybrid are both great options, but I think if anything Hybrid will be reinvented to run on Bio-fuel and Electricity and possibly Hydrogen. The future is going green, I love it B)
  • 0
Posted Image

#7 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:37 AM

For now?

High efficiency gas engine.

In future?

Probably hydrogen fuel cell.
  • 0

#8 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:37 AM

I agree with the Hydrogen idea. It would be the cleanest possible source, essentially running cars on water.
Bio-fuel and Hybrid are both great options, but I think if anything Hybrid will be reinvented to run on Bio-fuel and Electricity and possibly Hydrogen. The future is going green, I love it B)


Except you need energy to produce the hydrogen in the first place. That would require a LOT of energy.
  • 0

#9 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,514 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:40 AM

Nuclear - the car might outlive refueling. :)

http://auto.howstuff...powered-car.htm

Posted Image
  • 0

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#10 Tystick

Tystick

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,509 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 12

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:47 AM

Except you need energy to produce the hydrogen in the first place. That would require a LOT of energy.


If it means cleaning up our footprint, I'll buy it.
  • 0
Posted Image

#11 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 23 November 2012 - 12:16 PM

Thing is that unless someone is providing the energy for their hydrogen or electric car from an independent green energy source it's carbon footprint isn't any better than a gasoline car. In fact a high efficiency gas car would have a lower footprint.

The hydrogen or electricity would require energy. Even the socket in the wall producing electricity has a greenhouse gas footprint.

But you would say "alas, BC Hydro is called Hydro for a reason!". And it is. However, right now, we're net energy importers. So while we produce hydro power, we buy a lot of whatever energy, including coal, especially at night when your electric or hydrogen fuel cell car would be fueling.

And since (for now unless site C happens) we're not exactly expanding green production (well not enough to even cover population growth) adding a new user to the system wouldn't be using hydro power. It's all already being used. It would have to be additional energy. Most likely extra coal power from the states.

So in effect by going non conventional (gas or deisel) fuel your using grid energy which in North America should you be figuring out your footprint would be primarily coal but increasing natural gas.

If you want to minimize your footprint buy a high efficiency gas or deisel vehicle and use the money saved to live closer to work in a smaller house.
  • 0

#12 aeromotacanucks

aeromotacanucks

    Real Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 23 November 2012 - 12:28 PM

one day I made this question to many friends:

"Imagine that you can have a car for 5000 dollars powered only by eletricity or by ethanol (very small tank, like 5 liters), the car could transport only 2 people and 50kgs of bags, a very small car indeed, smaller than the "Smart". now imagine this car with a range of 200KM. would you buy it? at least for urban use?"

95% of them said. "Yes"



like. why we need a V8 or an SUV for urban use and carring 4 people? if you donīt carry a heavy load or use for long trips you donīt need such vehicle. actually why do you need a 200HP car for urban/short trips use if you can have a 90HP car saving more fuel and doing the same thing?

recently I noticed that USA is buying Ethanol from us, actually we have huge ships (tankers) with zillions of liters of Ethanol heading to USA. produce ethanol from sugar cane is 5 times cheaper than produce sugar from corn like US does. however We donīt see many gas stations offering Ethanol in US...


perhaps we should see if we have the right car for or personal use...
  • 1
Shup up and fly! you´re not payed to think, you´re payed to fly!

#13 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:36 PM

one day I made this question to many friends:

"Imagine that you can have a car for 5000 dollars powered only by eletricity or by ethanol (very small tank, like 5 liters), the car could transport only 2 people and 50kgs of bags, a very small car indeed, smaller than the "Smart". now imagine this car with a range of 200KM. would you buy it? at least for urban use?"

95% of them said. "Yes"



like. why we need a V8 or an SUV for urban use and carring 4 people? if you don´t carry a heavy load or use for long trips you don´t need such vehicle. actually why do you need a 200HP car for urban/short trips use if you can have a 90HP car saving more fuel and doing the same thing?

recently I noticed that USA is buying Ethanol from us, actually we have huge ships (tankers) with zillions of liters of Ethanol heading to USA. produce ethanol from sugar cane is 5 times cheaper than produce sugar from corn like US does. however We don´t see many gas stations offering Ethanol in US...


perhaps we should see if we have the right car for or personal use...




  • 1

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#14 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,415 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:44 PM

I'd be happy if we could get the baby step of having manufacturers actually bring the small diesels they sell in Europe/Asia here. Right now we pretty much have a choice of VW or....
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#15 thedestroyerofworlds

thedestroyerofworlds

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,786 posts
  • Joined: 11-July 07

Posted 23 November 2012 - 08:37 PM

It would be nice if these green technologies were truely green. Most hydrogen is not produce by simply using electrolysis of water, and if it was, a significant amount of the electricity isn't really green. As for bio-fuels, how much land is used that could be used to feed us. As well, how much rainforest is slashed and burn so sugar cane can grow for ethanol production.

It's all well and good to get off the fossil fuel train, and some of these end products may provide a solution. The real prolem is how do we produce these end products in a big enough scale to power our energy needs, and do it in an environmentally sound way.
  • 0

#16 Tystick

Tystick

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,509 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 12

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:24 PM

It would be nice if these green technologies were truely green. Most hydrogen is not produce by simply using electrolysis of water, and if it was, a significant amount of the electricity isn't really green. As for bio-fuels, how much land is used that could be used to feed us. As well, how much rainforest is slashed and burn so sugar cane can grow for ethanol production.

It's all well and good to get off the fossil fuel train, and some of these end products may provide a solution. The real prolem is how do we produce these end products in a big enough scale to power our energy needs, and do it in an environmentally sound way.


We need to find a way to truly utilize solar energy, it can easily power the world.
That's when we full green. B)
  • 0
Posted Image

#17 لني

لني

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,310 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 08:21 PM

We need to find a way to truly utilize solar energy, it can easily power the world.
That's when we full green. B)


Not necessarily. In order to harness the power of the sun you have to have massive amounts of solar cells. Black solar cells attracting heat.
  • 0
Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.


Logic at its finest.

#18 Truculence

Truculence

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,310 posts
  • Joined: 09-March 04

Posted 24 November 2012 - 08:45 PM

Not necessarily. In order to harness the power of the sun you have to have massive amounts of solar cells. Black solar cells attracting heat.


And?
If you're concerned about global warming, solar cells have a couple of important benefits: 1. They don't spew CO2 into the atmosphere. 2. They absorb and convert into electricity the solar energy that would normally just be a part of the greenhouse effect.

Any engine that relies on internal combustion or an expensive and energy-intensive fuel source is going to become obsolete or illegal. Electric vehicles are the future. Battery technology just needs some innovation and research.

Edited by Truculence, 24 November 2012 - 08:46 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#19 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 25 November 2012 - 11:52 AM

Not necessarily. In order to harness the power of the sun you have to have massive amounts of solar cells. Black solar cells attracting heat.


We can find a negative in everything then. It is about what alternative makes the most sense and is more environmentally friendly. Humans also exhale and produce CO2 which is bad for the environment so maybe we shouldn't breath out all that pollutant.
  • 0

Posted Image


#20 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 25 November 2012 - 11:55 AM

And?
If you're concerned about global warming, solar cells have a couple of important benefits: 1. They don't spew CO2 into the atmosphere. 2. They absorb and convert into electricity the solar energy that would normally just be a part of the greenhouse effect.

Any engine that relies on internal combustion or an expensive and energy-intensive fuel source is going to become obsolete or illegal. Electric vehicles are the future. Battery technology just needs some innovation and research.


WE should make cars with removable Li-ion batteries. That should be the future if Li-ion batteries significantly improve in terms of providing more energy and lasting longer along with cars needing less power to run.
  • 0

Posted Image


#21 MadMonk

MadMonk

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 03

Posted 25 November 2012 - 04:29 PM

Not necessarily. In order to harness the power of the sun you have to have massive amounts of solar cells. Black solar cells attracting heat.



It is actually not a big deal at all. A detailed analysis can be found on realclimate, but the main points are:

1) Solar panels do not necessarily absorb more sunlight than other surface.
2) Ignoring (1), some back of the envelope calculations show that if we use solar panels for all electricity generation contribute to at most extra 6.66 trillion watts of energy.
3) Burning fossil fuel is not 100% efficient, so there is "waste heat" generated. If we assume all electricity is generated from coal, this amount is in fact comparable to the above figure. i.e. waste heat from solar cells is just as large as waste heat from fossil fuel burning. So even before you consider the warming effect of CO2, using solar panel is no different from burning fossil fuels.
4) 6.66 trillion watts of energy sounds like a lot, but that works out to 0.012 W per square meter of area. To put this into perspective, the warming effect expected from a doubling of CO2 is about 400 times larger.
  • 0

#22 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,782 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 26 November 2012 - 07:29 AM

Already have two hybrids so that's a pretty easy answer.
  • 0

#23 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,006 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 26 November 2012 - 12:24 PM

Renewables:

Wind
Solar
Tidal

Wind is becoming a very viable source of electricity, solar is behind only because the efficiency. Currently solar panels are at 21%. If that were to be improved through research and development it's been stated they can get up to 32% or more. Tidal is the least developed and potentially has the ability to develop a large amount of electricity. However putting turbines in the ocean isn't as easy. You have to deal with salt-water corrosion, sea life, and transmission of the energy, and possible erosion of the shoreline (depending on design)

In Nova Scotia we have the only tidal power station in North America, the Annapolis Royal Generating Station. Producing 50 Gwh of electricity per year.

Concepts like SeaGen might raise the possibility of more widespread use of tidal energy. Marine Current Turbines which built SeaGen, must be showing signs of great potential because Siemens bought up the majority of shares. Marine Current Turbines is working on a project to build 3 1.2 Mw Turbines in Campbell River.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaGen and http://en.wikipedia....urrent_Turbines

Hydrogen fuel cells are a great concept, but the earth doesn't have many natural sources of hydrogen. So that means we need to burn energy to make the fuel. Then there's the whole concept of storage, and that hydrogen is very flammable. Of course the holy grail would be to develop nuclear fusion.

Edited by Ghostsof1915, 26 November 2012 - 12:26 PM.

  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#24 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,006 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 26 November 2012 - 01:01 PM

Nuclear - the car might outlive refueling. :)

http://auto.howstuff...powered-car.htm

Posted Image


Robin: Atomic Batteries to power, turbines to speed!



How about a Nuclear Powered Plane!




Edited by Ghostsof1915, 26 November 2012 - 01:08 PM.

  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#25 canucklax

canucklax

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,832 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 09

Posted 28 November 2012 - 02:08 AM

Watch the whole video, offers a possible solution that would almost completely reduce emissions while creating an economic boom

https://www.youtube....h?v=FcoJt2KLC9k

Edited by canucklax, 28 November 2012 - 02:10 AM.

  • 0

6xFRVi3.png

Credit to bananamash for the sig. Credit to torts for being stubborn

Bring Back the Totems!
NHLSL Winnipeg Jets


#26 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,415 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:20 AM

If the research/tech could get there... I'd love to see the "gas station" of the future carry compact, swappable battery packs.

Imagine standardized battery packs that work across all vehicles that you merely swap out at stations so that you're able to travel far distances without recharging. You simply pull up and (depending on size/complexity) you/an attendant pulls your old pack out and slides in a new, fully charged one. You pay for the electricity used to charge it and a small charge for the station to pay employees, overhead for storing and maintaining packs etc and make a profit.

This would also allow for somewhat centralized (around the station) electricity delivery/creation. It would be fairly simple to have the entire roof of a station be solar panels for example. You could of course still charge your existing pack at home as well if you choose.

Larger vehicles (trucks for example) could simply have multiples of these packs so you'd pay to have two or three swapped out in this case.

This of course would require smaller, lighter packs, standardization across the industry as well as some way of easily accessing them from all vehicles for swapping.
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#27 Hobble

Hobble

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,651 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 07

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:23 AM

If the research/tech could get there... I'd love to see the "gas station" of the future carry compact, swappable battery packs.

Imagine standardized battery packs that work across all vehicles that you merely swap out at stations so that you're able to travel far distances without recharging. You simply pull up and (depending on size/complexity) you/an attendant pulls your old pack out and slides in a new, fully charged one. You pay for the electricity used to charge it and a small charge for the station to pay employees, overhead for storing and maintaining packs etc and make a profit.

This would also allow for somewhat centralized (around the station) electricity delivery/creation. It would be fairly simple to have the entire roof of a station be solar panels for example. You could of course still charge your existing pack at home as well if you choose.

Larger vehicles (trucks for example) could simply have multiples of these packs so you'd pay to have two or three swapped out in this case.

This of course would require smaller, lighter packs, standardization across the industry as well as some way of easily accessing them from all vehicles for swapping.


That is definitely an idea worth exploring. These stations would then just recharge the batteries they swapped out of cars, and when fully charged after a few hours, will put them out to be inserted into new cars.

However, I guess this would make battery warranties pointless, seeing as you'd have a new battery pack after every charge.
  • 0

#28 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,415 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:53 AM

That is definitely an idea worth exploring. These stations would then just recharge the batteries they swapped out of cars, and when fully charged after a few hours, will put them out to be inserted into new cars.

However, I guess this would make battery warranties pointless, seeing as you'd have a new battery pack after every charge.


Yeah, there's certainly hurdles. In this scenario the packs would have to almost be viewed as more of a consumable "fuel" than a "part". Perhaps that's where it has to come from? The energy companies would need to create the packs, and the infrastructure around them and supply them to the car industry.

Edited by J.R., 28 November 2012 - 11:53 AM.

  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#29 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,110 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:13 PM

If the research/tech could get there... I'd love to see the "gas station" of the future carry compact, swappable battery packs.

Imagine standardized battery packs that work across all vehicles that you merely swap out at stations so that you're able to travel far distances without recharging. You simply pull up and (depending on size/complexity) you/an attendant pulls your old pack out and slides in a new, fully charged one. You pay for the electricity used to charge it and a small charge for the station to pay employees, overhead for storing and maintaining packs etc and make a profit.

This would also allow for somewhat centralized (around the station) electricity delivery/creation. It would be fairly simple to have the entire roof of a station be solar panels for example. You could of course still charge your existing pack at home as well if you choose.

Larger vehicles (trucks for example) could simply have multiples of these packs so you'd pay to have two or three swapped out in this case.

This of course would require smaller, lighter packs, standardization across the industry as well as some way of easily accessing them from all vehicles for swapping


Building a better battery is obviously a goal of a lot of research. However existing chemical batteries are really already closed to max what being a chemical reaction and all.

There might be some neat things in the future using superconductivity but it's a ways off if ever.
  • 0

#30 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,415 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 29 November 2012 - 11:11 AM

Building a better battery is obviously a goal of a lot of research. However existing chemical batteries are really already closed to max what being a chemical reaction and all.

There might be some neat things in the future using superconductivity but it's a ways off if ever.


Yes, as I noted, battery tech would need to continue to advance to get the packs to manageable sizes so they can be somewhat easily be transferred in and out of vehicles.

Saying that, I don't think they're anywhere near "max". Things like nanotechnology and silicone storage are constantly evolving what batteries can do and with thousands of researchers around the globe discovering new efficiencies in charging, in storage etc I imagine that will continue for a while yet.
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.