Even though the majority of GSE is still powered by internal combustion engines, the industry is definitely trending toward electric vehicles. But for being the new trend, it’s ironic that we’re still using battery technology that was invented in 1859. And today’s modern motive power battery hasn’t changed much from the early 1900s. There are some good reasons why the lead-acid battery has remained on top; it’s powerful, durable and inexpensive, at least relative to the alternatives.
But there are some significant drawbacks. Lead-acid batteries are full of hazardous material, require frequent maintenance, and take a long time to recharge. For these reasons, there’s a good chance a new technology is going to finally replace the old. There are more possibilities that can be noted here, but below are some good prospects.
The first prospect is an upgraded version of lead-acid battery called thin plate pure lead (tppl), which is exactly what it sounds like. The plates are so thin they behave like spaghetti during the manufacturing process. Its main benefits are power density and ultra-fast recharge time, and that it’s maintenance free. This could be the transitional step away from lead-acid, particularly for GSE since the industry has already adopted fast-charge technology. Many of you are already familiar with tppl, which is found in the Odyssey brand battery.
The second prospect is the Lithium-Ion battery, which has already become the dominant technology for cell phone, laptops, and on-road electric vehicles. Its main benefits are power density, light weight, and that it’s also maintenance free. The benefits to GSE may never outweigh the cost, but with so many new Li-ion manufacturing plants ramping up for electric cars, you never can tell.
The big story in electric vehicle technology is fuel cells. A fuel cell uses a gas, such as hydrogen, as a kind of fuel to create electricity. The only emission from a hydrogen fuel cell is water and there is no “recharge” necessary. You will still have to “fill up” the tank when it’s empty, but that should only take a few minutes. Of course you’ll have to find a hydrogen fuel station, but let’s leave that for future post. There are many competing technologies within fuel cells. Hydrogen is clearly the most popular, but be looking for methanol fuels cells as well - they may be a faster path to widespread adoption.
All of these new technologies will be viable. In fact, they are all powering vehicles today. And in all probability, the price will eventually drop enough to compete with today’s lead-acid battery. The question is, which one will it be the dominant technology for GSE? I’m also curious how well our vehicle manufacturers keep up with electric technology. So we may have to wait a few more years, but I know of at least one battery company with a few surprises in 2009.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Saturday, November 1, 2008
The Myth of Electric
I was having a conversation with a friend about this blog. I said, “I think I’m going to write about the myth of fast charging.” He immediately fired back, “how about the myth of electric?” Well that was just rude. Electric vehicles have a lower cost of ownership and zero emissions. What could he be talking about?
The reality is that electric vehicles don’t really have zero emissions. They just transfer emissions from the vehicle to the power plant generating the electricity used to recharge the batteries. I’ll eventually get to the fast charging topic, but for now let’s look at emissions. There are many definitions of “carbon footprint.” For our purposes we will define it as the amount of greenhouse gases produced, specifically the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) produced.
Today’s diesel engines have very low carbon dioxide emissions compared to those of just a few years ago. I’m going to compare an electric bag tractor to one of the new diesel bag tractors. Two assumptions: (1) the diesel engine is 65hp and produces 800g CO2 / hp-hr. (2) The power plant producing the electricity generates 650g CO2 / kwh, which is the U.S. average.
The electric tractor will generate 10,439 pounds of CO2 per year.20kwh/day x 0.650kg/kwh x 365days/year x 2.2lbs/kg = 10,439 pounds
The diesel tractor will generate 74,534 pounds of CO2 per year.
3.5hr/day x 65hp x .51ave hp/rated hp x 0.8kg/hp-hr x 365 days/year x 2.2lbs/kg = 74,534 pounds
Clearly there is a huge difference in favor of electric vehicles. Over the course of 10 years, the diesel tractor will produce 640,950 more pounds of carbon dioxide than its electric counterpart. That’s a huge carbon footprint!
Do you disagree with my numbers? Enough to make up 640,950 pounds?
There’s no “myth of electric.” It lowers your cost of ownership, it lowers your carbon footprint, and it’s still zero emissions at the airport. GO GREEN!
The reality is that electric vehicles don’t really have zero emissions. They just transfer emissions from the vehicle to the power plant generating the electricity used to recharge the batteries. I’ll eventually get to the fast charging topic, but for now let’s look at emissions. There are many definitions of “carbon footprint.” For our purposes we will define it as the amount of greenhouse gases produced, specifically the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) produced.
Today’s diesel engines have very low carbon dioxide emissions compared to those of just a few years ago. I’m going to compare an electric bag tractor to one of the new diesel bag tractors. Two assumptions: (1) the diesel engine is 65hp and produces 800g CO2 / hp-hr. (2) The power plant producing the electricity generates 650g CO2 / kwh, which is the U.S. average.
The electric tractor will generate 10,439 pounds of CO2 per year.20kwh/day x 0.650kg/kwh x 365days/year x 2.2lbs/kg = 10,439 pounds
The diesel tractor will generate 74,534 pounds of CO2 per year.
3.5hr/day x 65hp x .51ave hp/rated hp x 0.8kg/hp-hr x 365 days/year x 2.2lbs/kg = 74,534 pounds
Clearly there is a huge difference in favor of electric vehicles. Over the course of 10 years, the diesel tractor will produce 640,950 more pounds of carbon dioxide than its electric counterpart. That’s a huge carbon footprint!
Do you disagree with my numbers? Enough to make up 640,950 pounds?
There’s no “myth of electric.” It lowers your cost of ownership, it lowers your carbon footprint, and it’s still zero emissions at the airport. GO GREEN!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
