Fuel Savings from Roadbed Electrification Pays for the Power Plant In 14 Months

A busy freeway lane (1/2 safe following distance) dissipates 2 MW mechanical energy/mile/lane.
Now let's be complete morons and ignore the supply - demand curve for oil and ignore Obama holding the Fed by the short hairs and pretend fuel will stay at $2.50 gallon:
$2.50/gallon X 2,000 kW/mile / (13 kW-hr mechanical energy/gallon) $385/mile-hr = $3.2 million/mile-year for fuel.
If the cost of a power plant is $4/watt then the cost of the power plant/mile is $8 million.
In other words, the fuel savings from electrification would pay for the capital cost of the power plants in 2 1/2 years.
If you don't want to be a complete moron and assume crazy nonsense then assume the price of fuel will be $5/ gallon before anyone even has time to spread sheet the matter.
Then the system pays for the power plant in 14 months.
Before anyone even has time to set up a demo project the price of fuel will be $10/gallon and electrification will pay for the power plants in 7 months.
But spread sheeting isn't necessary to compare costs because we know the cost of doing nothing is infinite.
Inaction ain't an option.
Bret Cahill

On Sat, 30 May 2009 10:23:14 -0700, Bret_E_Cahill wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
You're assuming a busy freeway all day and all night long?
  Quoted Text Here  
What is the cost to run power conductors in the roads, and to re-work all cars to be electric? I'm not saying it is a bad idea; had we gone with electric cars from the beginning, this would be an excellent idea. But it sounds like a lot of re-work and the analysis isn't complete.

Marvin the Martian wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
It might work in a small community. Zermatt in Switzerland banned internal combustion engine vehicles (except for some special vehicles like fire engines) about 20 years ago, both to reduce air pollution (important in this tourist town) and because of the very narrow streets. Almost all vehicle trffic is electric, running off batteries. It would be much greener to have no batteries at all and run everything directly off the grid.

On Sat, 30 May 2009 11:29:52 -0700, Mark Thorson wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I once considered an electric car conversion, because electricity is cheaper than gasoline. The batteries are the killer. Cost of batteries per mile is about the same as gasoline per mile. That pushed the advantage to the gasoline powered car.
If you could dispose of the batteries, it would be no contest: electric cars would be the way to go.

  Quoted Text Here  
I usually chime in on Bret's ramblings on this issue but why not try with some new blood... If you build a car using wheelmotors, the lifetime cost would probably be cheaper, including batteries. For some reason, there is a fixation on the traditional drivetrain, which is understandable for the auto companies and their profitability goals, but not for people who claim to be interested in innovation.
Battery cost can be offset e.g. by eliminating transmission and brakes, and various maintenance costs. It can also be offset by standardization and commodification of parts, as happened with the PC model.
Think about it.
-tg
I
  Quoted Text Here  

  Quoted Text Here  
There's a minor issue about sprung weight but in general, all the significant waste of energy has been eliminated.
Tweaking 3% here and 2% there won't save the day when oil is going up 100% a year.
Sooner or later transportation will power off the grid, either with some kind of energy storage or directly.
  Quoted Text Here  
Retooling an auto line costs billions.
That's why it is often easier to prototype a new ship engine than a vehicle engine. Ship engines are all custom made anyway.
  Quoted Text Here  
In ten years you'll be able to go to a junk yard and get a perfectly good traction motor or 10 kW generator for $100.
Bret Cahill

  Quoted Text Here  
Chump change these days. But that's not the issue; it is the profit model that relies on proprietary design. Anyone can make wheelmotors that will fit on any platform. Anyone can write control software.
-tg
  Quoted Text Here  

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Really? Then show us the ones you sell, and the source code for the control software you wrote.

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Not up on the concept of metaphor? By 'anyone', I mean that people who make electric motors can make electric motors to meet generic specifications/standards, just like 'anyone' can make graphic cards for computers even if they don't make motherboards or assembled machines.
Think about the price of computers and their capabilities over the last couple of decades, and apply the same model to autos. The problem of battery cost goes away pretty quickly eh.
-tg
  Quoted Text Here  

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
In other words you don't know anything, but want people to think that you do.

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I know that people who know things aren't afraid to have concrete technical discussions, and don't resort to personal insults. If you or the other guy have something to contribute to the actual topic, why don't you explain what is wrong with what I am saying.
-tg
  Quoted Text Here  
I

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
YOU AREN'T SAYING ANYTHING! You are just claiming it can be done by 'ANYBODY" but you don't have a clue. If you want a real discussion post links to the designs you want to discus, but that have to have real numbers, not something you pull out of bret's ass. I know you can't do this, so you'll continue with more ignorant hand waving, like that inbred little idiot, cahil.

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
'Design' of what?
I have no clue what you are disagreeing with. Is it that there are more manufacturers of electric motors than of automotive internal combustion engines, and lower entry costs for getting into the business? Is it that electric motors and controls are far more interchangeable than ICE and transmissions?
I'm talking about a business model for the entire industry, not some specific vehicle. I know that one company has claimed to retrofit a Mini with wheelmotors, and to have a viable control system, but the point is that there is no magic in the technology; all the components are there already. Have you not heard of all-wheel-drive and fly-by- wire airplanes?
-tg
  Quoted Text Here  

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Sigh. Do you always start arguments without any clues?
  Quoted Text Here  
really? They why are their thousands of different electric motors, and only dozens of different types of internal combustion engine. You can't just grab any electric motor and any controller and make it work.
  Quoted Text Here  
How can you do that without solid business model, which requires hard numbers?
  Quoted Text Here  
You've heard, but have no details? Big deal. I've heard that there are honest politicians, but I'm not holding my breath till I find one.
If all the components are there, why isn't someone becoming filthy rich building your wet dream on wheels?
  Quoted Text Here  
What do either have to do with idiot cahil's fantasy to electrify the roadways? All wheel drive has nothing to do with electric powered vehicles, and unless you plan to put wings on an electric car, fly by wire has absolutely no connection to reality.
Aren't you late for your 'Tesla is god' fan club meeting?

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Because gas is still cheap? Because it isn't in the economic interest of existing car companies to become commodity manufacturers? What a silly question.
  Quoted Text Here  
Ah, I see why you avoid specifics as long as possible---you don't know what you are talking about. All wheel drive has everything to do with electric vehicles, since it is one of the major advantages of the wheelmotor configuration.
  Quoted Text Here  
Yes, I think maybe Bret is right that you don't have sufficient background to discuss these things---you apparently don't know what fly-by-wire means either.
-tg
  Quoted Text Here  

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
What a stupid statement. The first problem is the existing power grid. I heard on the news that 120 billion is needed right now to add capacity. An all electric transportation system would make that a drop in the money pit. You've been sold a bill of goods, and haven't done any research.
  Quoted Text Here  
Sigh. All wheel drive is no different than existing four wheel drive. You still don't know what 'Unsprung Weight' is, or the problems it causes. Your group also decries transmissions, yet they are used in machine tools with big electric motors because the electric motors have a different power curve than Internal combustion engines. This are large three phase motors, run off variable frequency drives, just like you need for an electric powered vehicle.
  Quoted Text Here  
'Fly By Wire' replaced mechanical linkages in aircraft with electronics and servo motors.
Bret is an expert at 'Fly By Night' tactics.

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Which has nothing to do with using wheelmotors. If you insist on endless dodges, then you are making it easy for Bret to dump on you.
  Quoted Text Here  
You must be living in some strange corner of the planet---AWD has been around for a while and is more sophisticated than the classic 4WD. Using pure electrical control is the optimal implementation of the concept.
  Quoted Text Here  
Ah, you are now picking up terms from other posters, and you probably don't understand those either. I've answered that poster; if you disagree with what I said give your specific objection---maybe you actually know more than he does; it wouldn't be hard.
  Quoted Text Here  
I don't know what is going to be the ultimate best motor type, but you are still thinking conventional drivetrain. The point is to have 4 small motors, that may weigh only 50-75 lbs each. The motor will not be a proprietary part of the vehicle, but as with my example of graphics cards in computers, manufacturers can compete to supply different quality and functionality. You can swap them out yourself if you decide to upgrade.
And what are you talking about with machine tools and ICE's and power curves? Machine tools have gearing to change speeds, because it has traditionally been difficult to change the speed of electric motors. What machine tools use ICE? Not a good idea on the factory floor I think.
  Quoted Text Here  
Very good, and do you see that if you have wheelmotors doing the driving and braking, that is the same thing? I don't suggest servo- steering--- it could be done I suppose, but why bother. If you had reversible motors, you could turn in place like a tank, though.
  Quoted Text Here  
Which makes him an expert at something, and quite amusing sometimes.
-tg
  Quoted Text Here  

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
bret shits on his floor, too. Big deal. He hasn't got a clue about the real reasons there are so few electric powered cars, and the price of oil isn't it.
  Quoted Text Here  
And you know nothing of the real world, just like your lover, bret.
  Quoted Text Here  
Unsprung means that it is detached from the chassis. The more unsprung weight, the more stress on the vehicle suspension, which affects the handling and stability in a turn, or on a rough road. That is another advantage of a conventional drive train.
  Quoted Text Here  
Right. The motor has to fit inside the wheel, and on the existing mounts. How do you upgrade, with those limitations? How many horsepower do you think you'll get from a motor that size and weight? How long do you think they will last, inside a hot tire & rim? You idiots have no clues about the design requirements for a production vehicle that will pass te required safety tests in the US. As far as swapping them out yourself? Have fun. You will be doing it quite often.
  Quoted Text Here  
Sigh. Before electicity was availible in some factories they ran Steam or Internal Combustion engines to drive driveshafts suspended from the ceilings. Heavy leather belts ran to a flat pulley / flywheel at each machine. A wire brush company in Cleveland, Ohio still has them, but stopped using them long ago. The old machines were modified to a motor per machine cofigurations, and all new machines were built that way, from the ground, up. The owner posts on rec.crafts.metalworking, but don't start any crap there. They will ream you a new asshole as they tell you why your ideas are useless, and they aren't polite with morons.
  Quoted Text Here  
It would play hell with your tires if you did. So you want to eliminate the steering mechanism, as well. I hope you get to drive that abomination some day, on a bad road. Like the two lane between Fairbanks and Delta Junction, Alaska. You would never suggest it again. In fact, you would likely drive off the road, and down the mountainside where many have died while driving much safer vehicles.
Also, I would never drive any vehicle without real brakes. Your idea is suicide when you have a motor or controller failure, which would be quite common with millions of poorly designed crap vehicles (That you and bret are insisting are the best design) on the road. You spit out a load of ignorant crap, and have no clue about the engineering required to produce a safe and efficient vehicle that will survive wrecks, severe weather, and last long enough for a decent ROI.
Have you ever seen a real US military tank up close? I have.
  Quoted Text Here  
Only if you find idiots amuzing. BTW, 'Fly by Night' is a theif.

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Wow. Then how is it a problem? It will just sit in the driveway when you go out, right?
Yup, you're a real technology guy.
  Quoted Text Here  
Huh? Who says? But what I really don't understand is how, if the motor is going to be unattached to the chassis, the car can roll along, since then the wheels would have to be unattached to the chassis.
  Quoted Text Here  
Wouldn't mounts have to be mounted to something? How would they be unsprung then?
  Quoted Text Here  
Yes I'm familiar with that. But then they've also been run by windmills and waterwheels and horses and oxen and humans. What does it have to do with transmissions and power curves?
  Quoted Text Here  
Well yes, but I don't think that makes me more or less qualified to evaluate auto designs. I've also spent a bunch of hours using bobcats and tracked excavators, and while it is fun to spin them around on the flat, the main lesson I learned was to wear a hardhat and don't try that maneuver in a narrow foundation trench.
Your replies are getting more incoherent as you go along. Look up my reply on unsprung weight in this thread, and if you have a sensible response I will deal with it.
-tg
  Quoted Text Here  

snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Your ignorance is depressing. Have you ever designed anything mechanical in your sorry life?
  Quoted Text Here  
Yes, i am. I built Telemetry equipment for the Aerospace industry. You, on the other hand, couldn't buy a clue if they were but a penny.
  Quoted Text Here  
If it isn't inside the wheel, additional load is applied to the motor bearings. Of course if you knew anything about Physics, you wouldn't make so many ignorant statements.
  Quoted Text Here  
Sigh. Did you fail third grade science class? You still can't grasp what 'unsprung' means. Heaven forbid you actually crack a book, and try to learn something.
Have you ever heard of intetia? Do you have any idea why you want to keep most of the vehicle's mass moving in one plane? I guess the sring inside your nearly empty head has snapped, at last.
  Quoted Text Here  
I gess that you're too stupid to live. If you weren't, you would know the answers.
  Quoted Text Here  
So, you're a dangerous fool, too. That is no surprise.
  Quoted Text Here  
Incohernt? That's a laugh. You know as little about physics as your butt buddy, bret.
  Quoted Text Here  
Does this mean your some kind of cross dresser or drag queen? I know you aren't a dairy in Florida.