Last week a blogger from Israel posted a video of the recently released 2012 Renault Fluence Z.E. electric car having its battery pack exchanged by a Better Place swap station now undergoing tests prior to the facilities’ June launch.
As most of you at GM-Volt know, Better Place Founder and CEO Shai Agassi is advocating a way around limited electric range by making provision for vehicles to replace a discharged battery with a topped off one. The experience takes place in five minutes, roughly the time it might require to stop at a gasoline station.
The Renault Fluence Z.E. (Zero Emission) went on sale about a month ago in January and is different from the standard Fluence in that it is electric, and its battery is compatible with the automatic battery exchange machinery being tested by Better Place. Naturally also, the vehicle can be plugged in as can a regular EV.
The one-speeder reportedly offers good torque and is going on sale in Denmark and other markets as well. The deal with this vehicle is customers purchase it without a battery pack and at the same time enter into a leasing contract for the battery and access to swap stations.
Prices for the vehicle will vary depending on local taxes, incentives and other factors. In Denmark, it reportedly will sell for 205,000 DKK ($36,423). Cost of battery leasing in Denmark is reportedly $270-$517 per month.
As for the video, the author said he used one of the test cars at the station which is having the bugs worked out prior to being opened in June.
“Driving into the station is just like driving through an automatic car wash,” wrote blogger “Brian of London” (on location in Israel), “Once you’re level with a big yellow sign you put the car in neutral, take your feet off the brakes and let go of the steering wheel.”
He noted the regular 12-volt battery stays in place, so in-vehicle electrics work as the machinery pulls, jostles, and aligns the car prior to lifting it a few centimeters for the battery exchange.
On his second run, he was able to observe the process on his GPS/info screen.
“It shows you when the old battery is being taken out (which you can feel as the car shakes a little) and when the new one is being inserted,” he wrote. “That you can certainly feel as the back of the car seems to give a tiny bump. There are a few quiet noises and the screen in the car seems to match up with everything that happens.”
… And here’s a more polished video that shows more details.
The writer said it looked like they were not pushing the equipment, and suggested that the five minute swap-out should be able to be shortened, although the time spent was no bother.
“All in all, however, it’s really a pleasant experience,” he said. “You don’t have to breath in petrol fumes for one thing and there really is nothing much to do before driving out with a full battery.”
This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 21st, 2012 at 7:32 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+15
Feb 21st, 2012 (7:42 pm)Seems to me that even $270 a month to lease your battery is awful expensive, over and above the $36,000 for the battery-less car.
Plus, I would not enjoy having to go have the battery changed every 30-60 miles. Too much interruption on long trips.
+10
Feb 21st, 2012 (7:49 pm)To me, the appeal of an EV (whether pure EV or EREV) is not being dependent on paying others to give me energy for my car (ie gas station or battery swap station). Charging at home grants an independence that this model seems to negate, so I’ll respectfully pass should it ever make it stateside.
+4
Feb 21st, 2012 (8:07 pm)As I understand the system, charging at home, or at Better Place charge stations located in parking garages, shopping centers, etc, is included in the $270 / month fee. The only time you need to change out a battery is for days when your driving exceeds the 100 mile or so battery range. So, picking a trip between two cities about 300 miles apart, say Detroit and Chicago, there would probably be 2 or 3 charge stations, each about 100 to 75 miles apart, along I-94. Starting out on a full charge, a Better Place car would stop 2 or 3 times to switch batteries, adding 10-15 minutes to a trip that is gas free.
I think the real problem is that the car is too expensive at $37,000. Maybe that is okay for a family sedan in Europe or Israel, but it is like the rest of the electric cars available today, too expensive for most folks. (That’s not to say I don’t love my Volt, but it is pretty pricey upfront.)
+2
Feb 21st, 2012 (8:54 pm)I like the idea, but $270-$517 per month just to lease the battery! If the battery has an 8 year life (like the Volt), that works out to $25,920-$49,632.
+10
Feb 21st, 2012 (8:58 pm)Sorry, i dont buy the “swap batteries” as being something at this point that would work as well as planned. This to me is very transient technology which will only really benefits from long distance travelling.
4 stumbling blocks I can see are:
1) Long distance travelling will make better use of this technology, but I can’t see these station in remote areas becoming the norm as there are too few electric cars. Creating a bit more than just a Catch 22 situation.
2) Until range exceed several hundred miles (on affordable electric cars), electric cars will hardly be used for long distance travel to make stations profitable.
3) I can see petrol replaced by bio-fuels sooner than electric cars becoming long distance travelling vehicles; or at least major competition which will already have infrastructure in place.
4) Before the above happens, I can see cars with a backup generator being more popular, making the whole concept of changing batteries as a non-issue.
This technology may work in confined areas where house garages are not so common, but for the moment this is not really feasible in the US, Australia, or other large land mass countries. One must keep in mind the price of operating a battery change over, and a premium on the electricity being purchased. Leasing a battery is a good idea, so there is a flat fee, but beyond this,
I would have to be willing to buy an electric car (not EREV), rent its battery, then actually use a battery changing facility if I happen to want to risk driving a long distance; which is rare in any case. Alternately, I could get a car with a generator (which I envisage will eventually use bio-fuels) and never need swap out the battery.
+1
Feb 21st, 2012 (8:59 pm)Great article Jeff. I just can’t see this in the states because there are so many different configurations and the great enjoyment of my Volt is I haven’t gone to a gas station in almost 5,000 miles… cool video though.
MrEnergyCzar
-1
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:18 pm)Nice that Better Place was given an article. This is an excellent project that is just starting to go live.
China opened their first swap station a few months back and they are rumored to be going all in, as soon as the testing is complete. The results thus far have exceeded all expectations. The system works great and Shai Agassi did an excellent job getting all of the pieces of the puzzle to work together seamlessly.
-1
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:22 pm)SharkVolt,
No, the cost is set to be equal to or less than a comparable vehicle in each market. Additionally, the costs for this system go down each year and with each increase in volume. On the other side, fossil fuels will just continue to get more expensive and harder to get.
The cross has already been achieved and they will continue to be the low cost transportation leader. It is a “take all prisoners” approach.
If you give a teenager a free car with a six year sign-up, they are not likely to turn that down. Not with gas getting close to $5 / gallon.
-2
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:32 pm)Tim in SC,
Excellent, that is your choice to not buy it. Of course, a normal EV is less practical and convenient than a normal gas powered car. You can only go 100 miles and then must wait hours for a re-charge. Also, you have to come up with the $40,000 for the vehicle and battery up front – like buying a tanker truck of fuel with your new gas powered car.
Of course, you can buy your Volt and get the best of both worlds (accept for the very high price, despite the government subsidy).
I believe a variation of the Volt – a Volt with a Battery Swap – may be used to gain critical mass for large markets like the US. This way investors can install a battery swap station when the volume of compatible cars reaches a set number. The more battery swap station are installed, the more incentive there is for people to buy the cars. Thus, the adoption rate is exponential.
China looks to be close to making a nation-wide decision for going with a Better Place -like system. Shai will be working with them to develop their own, home-grown, version. They already opened up their first swap station for testing. Testing is going great, just like in Israel, Denmark, Australia and Japan.
+1
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:36 pm)WVhybrid,
“I think the real problem is that the car is too expensive at $37,000″
This is less than the cost of a comparable gas powered car. Of course, the volumes are tiny and thus you must understand about that. Also, they are working on many new models that will be very inexpensive, like those tiny “box” cars.
Again, the total cost is set to be equal to or less than a comparable gas powered vehicle in each market. The margins improve every year.
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:38 pm)paul,
“I like the idea, but $270-$517 per month just to lease the battery! If the battery has an 8 year life (like the Volt), that works out to $25,920-$49,632.”
This is incorrect. The cost is for the battery AND the electricity AND the use of the swap stations. It is a total cost and that cost is set to be less than a comparable vehicle in each market.
+1
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:50 pm)xiaowei1,
4 stumbling blocks I can see are:
1) Long distance travelling will make better use of this technology, but I can’t see these station in remote areas becoming the norm as there are too few electric cars. Creating a bit more than just a Catch 22 situation.
*** The model has gone through extensive cost analysis, right down to how many cars are needed, how big the initial infrastructure investment is needed to cover the area (country), and when it starts to self-fund. Some of the best investment houses agreed with the projections and that is why Better Place is near 1 billion dollars of PRIVATE investment. ***
2) Until range exceed several hundred miles (on affordable electric cars), electric cars will hardly be used for long distance travel to make stations profitable.
*** The swap has been timed at less than 1 minute (see YouTube video). Yes, it will not be ideal for people who travel hundreds of miles everyday but for those who only need to visit grandma a couple of times a year, it works great. Additionally, the battery packs will get better over time and the range will increase, making the model more attractive for those “heavy” highway drivers. The initial demographics provide more than what is needed to get things up and running. ***
3) I can see petrol replaced by bio-fuels sooner than electric cars becoming long distance travelling vehicles; or at least major competition which will already have infrastructure in place.
*** There is nothing, even in the labs, that is ready for the scale you are talking about. Algae? Still $20 / gallon. Palm oil? Still $20 / gallon and cannot scale to what existing battery technology can do… Today. ***
4) Before the above happens, I can see cars with a backup generator being more popular, making the whole concept of changing batteries as a non-issue.
*** If you don’t provide for a way to get rid of the gas station, you can’t get rid of the gas station. Without a swap or quick charge, all those gas stations and their expensive gas have to stay in place. Only the Volt with a battery swap can ween in a way you are talking about. ***
+1
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:54 pm)Here is a much better video showing the whole system and it has cool music.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lp_6VyIeSY
The joke for this video is that the women driver got something extra at that swap station.
Feb 21st, 2012 (9:59 pm)Since you can charge as well as swap it seem like a good program. Looks like a viable way to keep motoring when gasoline is no longer cost effective.
Despite the recent spike in fuel cost, I think this solution is pretty far in the future for the US.
+6
Feb 21st, 2012 (10:01 pm)Such a huge amount of unneeded investment (over and above standard plug-ins) are needed for this (the switchout shops, the extra batteries that cost almost as much as the car to rent). Reminds me of that gargantuan investment that would be need for all those fool cell hydrogen stations.
Really seems like a solution (led by someone with the right political connections who got this pushed through) in search of a problem (Israel has figured out how to replace the gas station with the battery station instead of just eliminating the gas station entirely). JMHO…
+1
Feb 21st, 2012 (10:49 pm)Just does not work for me. But may for some. I wish them luck, but it does seem to be expensive.
Feb 21st, 2012 (11:14 pm)Sasparilla,
“Such a huge amount of unneeded investment”
*** Unneeded? How do you go past 100 km without a $30,000 battery pack? Also, the cost to get fully started is just ONE week of oil imports for each country. What the YouTube videos explaining how this works. One week, is that too much to get the basic system in place to get completely off of oil? What was the price of Brent yesterday? Oh yeah, $120 / barrel. ***
“Really seems like a solution (led by someone with the right political connections who got this pushed through) in search of a problem (Israel has figured out how to replace the gas station with the battery station instead of just eliminating the gas station entirely)”
*** I don’t understand what you mean. The idea is to be able to travel anywhere without having to stop for 5 hours to charge. Maybe in the labs somewhere there is a practical battery to do this but it is far from commercialization. When it comes, Better Place will use it and convert those stations. Easy and the power is already hooked up. ***
Feb 21st, 2012 (11:24 pm)I understand the Renault being used in the Better Place roll-out is a pretty nice car, probably comparable to a Buick Regal or a Chrysler 300, which are listed at around $27,000. I also think that $270 a month is a bit more than most folks would spend on gas for comparable car getting, say, 25 mpg. I understand very well the need for early adopters to pay some extra, but Better Place isn’t the first guy to plug-in market, so they are going to have to compete on price as well as “new and unique” type of marketing. Its really the same with all the green energy ideas, albeit wind, biodiesel, photovoltaics, etc., all of these technologies are going to have to be price competitive sooner than later.
+4
Feb 21st, 2012 (11:28 pm)I would prefer power in the roadbed, in the side rail of the fast lane, or overhead during interstate travel. The idea is to charge the battery while moving between cities. With a large capacity battery, the city travel would be handled without charging. If charging could be fast enough, there could be portions of the interstate highway where the charged battery would do the job. The faster the charging process, the fewer charge lane miles necessary.
+2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (2:57 am)Texas has done an admirable job and clearly knows his stuff about Better Place so I don’t have to add too much, more a few bullet points.
All cars in Israel carry 89% import tax (then a mark up by the local importer) then 16% VAT on top. It’s normal for cars to cost 120% of what the exact same model would cost in the US. Our occupy protests in the summer were about the high cost of living here when compared with anywhere else. Most of that is tax, hidden and direct. BP is only paying 10% import tax.
The local market is screaming that the car is expensive but, in my opinion, they’re comparing it to crummier models. As sold, the Fluence ZE is very well equipped. The GPS system is integrated with Better Place’s network, knows about traffic, where all the charging and battery switch stations in Israel are and can automatically re-calc your route to include those as necessary to arrive at your destination with enough charge. If you set a destination beyond your present range it tells you and with one push fixes your trip. The car price also includes installation at your home of a dedicated charing point connected to its own electricity supply and meter. That’s a few thousand dollars of work. I keep seeing comparisons with models that have no sat nav, or any of the nice touches that are in the Fluence ZE.
Fuel is $7.50 per US Gallon. It’s actually become cheaper than some parts of Europe now but that’s mostly down to the Euro’s collapse.
The prices quoted above for battery lease include all the electricity you put into the car. The attraction for me is fixing that price now for the next 4 years. Actually there has been a political fight because Better Place have lobbied for and received a directive from the electricity company (we’ve only got one) that bans all other plug in cars from using normal power outlets. I’m starting to understand why this happened and I hope I’ll write an article somewhere about it. Follow my blog
Israellycool http://www.israellycool.com/ and it’ll be linked there.
Shhh don’t tell everyone but they’re discounting now
I’m paying quite a bit less than those prices.
+3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (6:18 am)You guys are missing the bigger problem in all of this. Look how much real estate it takes for just one swapping bay. My corner gas station has 16 pumps that takes up a small area. There is no waiting. That battery station had only one swap at a time. Maybe you could get a place with two swaps at a time. That is why the cost is so high. If EV’s actually took off, this would not be viable. You would be sitting in line for 30 minutes or more waiting for the other guys getting the 5 minute swap.
+6
Feb 22nd, 2012 (7:54 am)IMO, that would only make sence if your talking about swapping a 300 mile + battery.
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:16 am)I’m not against the idea but I would like to know how BP will address the geography of the United States. This tech seems ideal for deployment along the interstate highway system. I suggest I-5, I-80, I-20, and I-95. But, even such a limited deployment would mean several thousand stations. Each station would need three or more lanes to accommodate the flow of traffic and minimize waiting.
It seems like quick charging would be more profitable and provide an opportunity to up-sell snacks or full meals. (Unless you built them into drive-through restaurants)
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:19 am)Marc,
This makes the most sense to me. Swap your lighter local everyday battery for a longer distance one. Fewer stops and you could quick charge them while eating lunch to relieve pressure on the local swap lane.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:36 am)I feel that typical driving range should be set to where drivers should stop for a break every 3-4 hours (225-300 miles max @ 75MPH) and quick charge in 30-45 minutes. Battery swap would continue to alow road fatigue, therefore I believe quick charge waits would lead to safer roads. The modern everyday american impatience would push for the battery exchange option.
As for pricing, it appears that overseas prices are comparatively inflated to US prices. Look at the overseas equivalent price for a Volt (Ampera) compared to US prices as an example. I would expect US pricing to be less.
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:40 am)Sasparilla,
Yes, lots of investment. I feel it is likely the Gasoline companies will be investing in this because EV’s threaten the existence of the gas station. They’ll need to find some way to stay in the game, and you can’t blame them.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:45 am)Great discussion. Too bad I’m a day late. When I saw the article I immediately thought about Texas as he is a big proponent of “Better Place”. Glad to see both Brian in London and Texas in the sway.
+2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:50 am)Nice looking car. Is there any information about its range?
Too many questions that need to be answered.
Will the monthly cost be associated with the number of times the battery gets swapped?
Will the driver be able to swap a battery that’s not completely drained?
Who’s liable if the battery falls out of the car while driving and causes an accident?
As always, the Devil is in the details. Read the fine print.
NPNS!
Volt#671
+9
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:59 am)There are many problems with this concept, but the one I have the biggest issue with is that it forces manufacturers to install a battery of a specific size and form factor. We need innovation in this space and new ideas, and different cars with different form factors for different requirements, NOT a one-size fits all approach that this mandates.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:14 am)Has anyone considered a better “range extender” than an small ICE? I wonder if there has been any prototypes of fuel cells that can run on different fuels, such as natural gas and ethanol vapor which are produced in America and are cheaper than hydrogen. I believe the fuel cell is better for converting chemical energy to electrical energy (probably about 60% efficient), instead of burning the fuel and running a generator (chemical to thermal to mechanical to magnetic to electric – less than 30% efficient) that waste too much energy as heat.
I hope GM and the other EREV manufacturers are considering the fuel cell as a option for energy storage and conversion for the range extention. Fisker will probably keep the ICE since they are using the engine as a second source of mechanical energy directly to the wheel.
Maybe in the future, Mr. Fusion will exist and allow us to have clean nuclear fusion energy as our power source for the next Voltec vehicles. A 75KW fusion generator would be a nice start!
Raymond
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:21 am)WVhybrid,
“I understand the Renault being used in the Better Place roll-out is a pretty nice car, probably comparable to a Buick Regal or a Chrysler 300, which are listed at around $27,000. I also think that $270 a month is a bit more than most folks would spend on gas for comparable car getting, say, 25 mpg.”
You are not taking into account what market that car is being sold in. Many other countries charge far more for such a car. Many have huge taxes that drivers have to dish out.
When the car comes to America, if it ever comes here, the car and expenses will be the same or less. That is their deal.
-1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:31 am)Voice of Reason,
“You guys are missing the bigger problem in all of this. Look how much real estate it takes for just one swapping bay.”
These are the same arguments that were being kicked around four years ago. They said the swap system would never work or that the car would be too weak, etc. Those people were proved wrong, dead wrong.
Believe it that they could easily design a massive and high-volume swap station that could swap faster than would be needed. It is all about the number of cars on the road. These swap stations are cheap and can be pumped out like cookie cutters spit out cookies.
Have you ever seen high speed robotics at work? Just YouTube a modern auto welding line. They can move as fast as you want them to.
Remember, no need for huge, expensive, dirty, tanker trucks with their high labor cost drivers. The fuel is fed in by wire which is many times more efficient.
-3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:39 am)Steven,
“I feel that typical driving range should be set to where drivers should stop for a break every 3-4 hours (225-300 miles max @ 75MPH) and quick charge in 30-45 minutes.”
I would prefer to have a magic battery that fully charged in 5 minutes when the sun came out but such batteries do not yet exist on the market. Better Place is good to go and practical with the technology of today.
If there is a super battery that makes it to market in the future, Better Place will easily adapt to use it. Until that happy day comes, they can use what we humans have at hand. That is the big difference.
Nobody is going to wait 30-40 minutes for a charge if they have the option to just swap out. You have to have a model that is just as convenient as what we have today or it is unlikely to be adopted.
Again, we just don’t know how to charge a 50+ kwh battery in 30 minutes for many years of service that is proven safe and can be had at a practical price. Does Not Exist!
+3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:41 am)Free Hydrogen??
Is there any truth to the story I’ve heard where out in the Midwest, wind turbines need to be off line at night to prevent overloading an underutilized grid? If so, why don’t they use that nightly surplus of free wind power to make hydrogen gas that can be easily stored for future use in fuel cells?
-3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:45 am)atl-jb,
“There are many problems with this concept, but the one I have the biggest issue with is that it forces manufacturers to install a battery of a specific size and form factor.”
As Better Place always says, talk to us early and the chances that we can use your designs are very good. If you wait, you will lose out.
Hey, just try to get a new battery out on the store shelves. Maybe a DDD? Good luck.
Of course, you can just install your own swap system like Better Place is doing. As businessmen out there trying to take out facebook, twitter, Google, Apple, etc., will tell you, it is tough to take out an entrenched product. Very tough. Just look how hard MS is working just to get their Windows Phone OS out there. They are spending billions and expect to take losses for years just to get back in the game.
So, do it now or forever hold your peace. He who gets there first, wins.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:47 am)They can stay in the game by buying or creating a company like Coulomb ChargePoint.
NPNS!
Volt#671
+5
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:49 am)Precisely. You need to factor in the price of the infrastructure so it’s costly.
With the Volt, you don’t need more infrastructure than what you already have available. So it’s cheaper and the range is limitless and not tied to a swapping station.
To me, for the time being, the Volt is implementing the best approach.
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:52 am)Raymondjram,
“Has anyone considered a better “range extender” than an small ICE?”
Just browse the forums here and you will find that just about every possible option has been tossed around. From air motors and fuel cells to bio-fuel mini turbines, all have been debated.
The thing comes down to cost. The tiny ICE is just very cheap because the volumes are so high and the technology is so mature. Also, it is not used very much and thus today’s technology is a perfect fit.
Forget about fuel cells. They are just too expensive and use fuels that take more energy to produce than they deliver, like hydrogen and bio-fuels. Fossil fuels can still be used but the infrastructure is set up for the ICE. Why build out a new infrastructure for a fossil fuel that will soon be going into decline? It is a waste of capital when we should be spending for our fossil fuel free future.
-3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:08 am)Tall Pete,
“With the Volt, you don’t need more infrastructure than what you already have available. So it’s cheaper and the range is limitless and not tied to a swapping station.
To me, for the time being, the Volt is implementing the best approach.”
No, the Volt is more expensive right now, depending on how you drive. The initial price is a killer and only a few people will pay that much for a new car.
The Better Place model will allow very cheap, and even free cars (just like free mobile phones with 2 year subscription).
The main difference is that, with the Volt, you are buying the oil tanker at the same time. This is very hard to explain to drivers, banks and wives.
Once again, the price in each market will depend on what a standard car costs. In many countries, the profit margins are already huge. The US still has cheap gasoline and very low taxes. So, maybe Better Place will cover the rest of the world first.
Even so, the current model will be profitable with current prices and taxes, just not as good as other countries like those in Europe.
+3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:11 am)Today we don’t, but I believe tech tends to provide eventually for the things we desire. Much of the limitations and doubtfullness of critics tend to forget about future development possibilities by locking current tech into today’s norms. Limitations of today tend to drive the tech of tomorrow.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:22 am)I like the battery swap idea. Changes I would make.
* Reduce the price of the car to $19,999 (no engine no battery, cost should be lower)
* Reduce the price of the battery lease to $150/month and charge for a swap (some people may just charge at home and not need to swap that often)
If they could get to these cost levels, after people ran the #’s, they would be lined up to go this route.
I don’t see these stations getting to rural America until battery ranges improve. A 100mile range battery is plenty for the city dweller or suburban commuter. How may of us drive across country everyday though?
Battery swapping would also help stranded BEV’s. A “tow” truck could show up, installed with battery swapping automation.
+2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:44 am)Seems like the best way to store naturally generated electric power surplus (wind & hydro) is to use it to split H2O and store the hydrogen for later use in hydrogen fuel cells. If I owned a wind farm I would use all the power it generated at night to create and store hydrogen, then use hydrogen fuel cells during the day make electricity and sell the power at a greater peak use cost. I’d be surprised if that’s not already being done.
http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/05/24/1502148/wind-energy-industry-demands-bpa.html
http://kleenergyecosystems.wordpress.com/2012/01/07/energy-giant-sse-hits-1gw-wind-power-milestone/
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015129713_apuswindenergyhalt1stldwritethru.html
NPNS!
Volt#671
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (11:01 am)Nelson,
Amen…+1
BTW…..Natural gas and it’s byproduct Propane can be used in any ICE type engine..AND USES NO OIL !!!
The US has at least 300 YEARS of NG reserves .
Harold
Feb 22nd, 2012 (11:03 am)Infrastructure for this to work nationwide is going to be a challenge. Without a national commitment that “this is the solution” I don’t think it will go anywhere.
-1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (11:13 am)Does anyone have a rough idea what a BP swapping unit can cost ? Over and above the land and location costs.
Just curious…….
HaroldC
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (11:18 am)Thanks for demonstrating/illustrating my point Texas.
Anyway – I appreciate the enthusiasm, but I’m good – I own a Volt. I’m already down to burning mere thimbles of gas on average and can travel long distances if need be. Today. Right now. No problem and no further investment needed.
And, hopefully, in the future I will be presented with many other possible form factors to meet my future requirements as the industry and technologies mature.
+3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (11:54 am)I don’t think this concept is feasible for everyday automobile travel – driving patterns are too random for there feasibly to be enough swap points.
Where I do see it as an interesting possibility is in commercial trucking applications where routes are more standardized and predictable.
However in the long run, the battery swapping concept will become obsolete as battery technology and range improves.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:15 pm)Hi everyone,
Had a bad case of keylogger infection which had erased many of my posts in the last few weeks.
I got another security system which found the problem immediately, and, I know exactly who did it. (He did in fact say he wanted to know what I was saying). Great security that ESET.
Haven’t decided yet what to do about it, but if keylogger reassembles, he is going to buy me another system.
Will get back to visit later,
Dan.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:20 pm)Read up on “Bloom Box”. Their fuel cells are more for offices & power companies now, soon to be for home. (maybe eventually cars?) They keep working on getting the cost down, and going to more mass production. They have several current customers (Google, Walmart, FedEx..etc)
-1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:24 pm)Battery Trailer? Sort of a new twist on the range-extender trailer. It would also leave more room in the car for people/luggage.
EDIT: I read “change” not “charge”, so I was thinking of changing a 50Kwh battery in a quick time.
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:26 pm)It is an interesting model with some advantages and might work well in some applications like: delivery service companies or situations where people don’t mind putting their eggs in one basket. You could charge some of these batteries over-night using wind as well.
I like the BVX concept more lately. When super-conducting material is developed and becomes practical to use on highways for powering EVs on long trips as well as maybe guiding the vehicle safely; that innovation will dramatically improve EV convenience JMO. I would have 2 power lines side by side; to be able to maintain 1 line while the other line keeps vehicles moving. We’ll never be done with road construction. LOL
+2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:30 pm)I think the RE is way to go right now as well. But eventually there will be more BEV’s. At that time, we will either have quick-charging, or battery swapping, or both. I think there are less hurdles for quick swapping, its just engineering. Quick charging has some physics that still need to be worked out. However, it’s anyone’s guess who will win the race. If Eestor (lol) comes out with a battery that charges in 20 seconds, Project Better Place will just be a memory.
-3
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:30 pm)Good bye. I’m identified as spam.
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:37 pm)Or store it in batteries. I don’t know the efficiency of cracking water?
Feb 22nd, 2012 (12:49 pm)Should we care about efficiency when using surplus wind generated power to crack hydrogen from water? http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2015129713_apuswindenergyhalt1stldwritethru.html
A battery charge will drain with time. That’s called Self-discharge rate. For lithium batteries I’ve read 1% discharge every 30 days. I’m not sure but I don’t think hydrogen can grow stale in a properly sealed tank and can be piped to its destination similar to natural gas.
NPNS!
Volt#671
Feb 22nd, 2012 (2:32 pm)When affordable batteries have 300 or 400 miles range, IMO that’s when swapping STOPS making sense. That’s when 99.99999% of all trips don’t require swaps, effectively making ghost towns out of swap stations (I made up that percentage by the way). And Israel is 263 miles long and 71 miles wide. Where would they travel with battery range that’s longer than the entire country?
Feb 22nd, 2012 (2:35 pm)The problems are with prices, not physics.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (3:10 pm)That is very good marketing point – “be safer” goes well with “be responsible”.
And at the end of the day battery swapping has to cost enough to cover the cost of extra packs, so maybe it is better to carry that extra pack in the car with you?
Finally infrastructure cost for few extra “extension cords” are bound to be cheaper that extra “washing stations” providing equivalent charging throughput.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (3:28 pm)Maybe in Israel.
In the US many people drive Interstate 95 on the East coast to get between the North and South. To give you an idea of distance, it is approximately 1,100 miles from New York to Orlando Florida. If I had an EV with a 400 mile battery I’d need to swap it out 3-4 times to make that trip. Did you also mean to say that by the time we have 300 – 400 miles Evs there would be a way to charge them in less than 10 minutes?
NPNS!
Volt#671
Feb 22nd, 2012 (3:57 pm)Nelson,
With all safety concerns aside, to charge 400 miles in 10 minutes today (assuming 10kWh per 40 miles), you could apply 10kV @ 60A. Now just figure out heating and cable capacity requirements (parallel charging of 10 connections, maybe) and a way to balance the charge, and BOOM! You have a lot of electrical potential in 10 minutes.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (6:55 pm)This battery swap idea is so brilliant, it should be extended to ICE vehicles too. Instead of refueling, I want to just swap my empty gas tank for a full one.
It should be equally simple. First we just re-design every ICE vehicle on the planet so they all use the same fuel tank size and the same fuel tank shape and the same fuel type and the same mounting brackets and the same fluid lines and the same monitoring circuitry and the same fuel pump controls and the same connection standards. That will happen fast, since I’m sure every manufacturer is eager to agree on all that. And while they’re doing that, we simply build 500,000 new gas tank swapping stations right next to our existing 500,000 gas pumps. That won’t cost much.
I would just love to pay 3X the price of fuel for this tank-swap service. Where do I sign up?
My only question … where will my 25 gallon Silverado tank fit in my Chevy Sonic?
-1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (7:04 pm)My bad, I happened to be thinking of the subject of Jeff’s post today when I wrote that.
…and yes I believe that is possible, though for financial reasons, very improbable.
Steven that cable you ordered is in transit…where would you like it installed!
Feb 22nd, 2012 (7:22 pm)I have a better idea. Let’s build electric cars when there are hundreds of millions of perfectly good gas burning cars all around us. Lets convince companies to spend billions of dollars in research, tooling and production for hybridized platforms, extended range platforms and brand new all electric platforms. Even though they are more expensive and the market risks are huge. Let’s convince governments around the world to spend billions on charging infrastructure and subsidies in hopes that consumers will pick up on the potential for long term savings and overall benefits. Why not, stranger things have happened?
Oh no, what will I ever do with that empty space in the front where the engine was when battery costs and performance improve?
Even better idea, don’t move to Israel, and don’t work for a company that’s slashing it’s vehicle expenses with EV’s, and you’ll never have any of these problems.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (7:28 pm)Where is the fuel cell that runs on Natural Gas? Converting it directly to electricity is much cleaner and efficient than burning it in an ICE.
Raymond
Feb 22nd, 2012 (7:28 pm)I’d say yes, if the battery is more efficient and will be used the next day; i’d rather see it stored in a battery. But again.. i don’t know which is more efficient.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (7:33 pm)Physics research is expensive. There’s also issues with getting the batteries to accept high charge rates, and maintain their charge for many cycles, and not overheat. I think the cables/charger/etc can be engineered, but the battery is the crux.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (7:36 pm)You might as go all the way with your sarcasm… Just have a car swap. You leave your car and jump into a new one. They sort of have this already with Zip Car.
-2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (8:46 pm)It is great to have dreams. However, Better Place works and is viable with the technology we have today. They can also include any new technologies that make it to market. They are basically a smart network that can balance the needs of millions of electric cars with the utilities’ abilities to provide that power. The swap is the part of the system that allows a driver to go unlimited distance, if they have to.
-2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:00 pm)Don’t worry, every car and contract will be priced to be equal to or less than a comparable gas powered car. If you go with the Better Place model, you will spend less money than if you drove the exact same car that was gasoline powered. Period.
They will also get to the point where they can give a car away for free with a 6 year contract, just like a cheap mobile phone. Tell me if you think that will not be popular with teens.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:11 pm)Perhaps that is because you do not understand about the inefficiencies involved? The lowest cost way is to store the generated electricity is in the actual EV’s battery pack. That has the lowest amount of losses.
Or, you can take your wind, using high loss electrolysis to make hydrogen (store that electron in a more massive way), then keep it cool and transport it over roads using a high labor cost, transfer that to another cooled chamber, then transfer that to an expensive mobile, high pressure carbon fiber tank in the auto then finally run that massive gas through an expensive fuel cell to finally get back that electron.
So, what do you think has more costs involved?
Hydrogen can still be used as will the production of liquid fuels for other applications but for ground transport, the EV is the lowest cost option to date. Electric trains are also excellent forms of transport to move people and products.
+2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:26 pm)Anytime someone says that we have 300 years of anything you have to just roll your eyes. If I have a bowl of M&Ms and say I have 60 days worth of candy do you nod in agreement or ask the most important question:
How many M&Ms are you going to eat each day? Can you provide me a chart?
So, do not listen to the GOP types that spout thousands of years of fossil fuels here in the US, as Newt just did today, without clear evidence and a projection of the production. It is all fluff and nothing.
Newt thinks we will become oil independent, and get back to exponential growth in those energy resources to continue our exponential growth in the global economy.
That is just plain fantasy that will never happen.
The NG story has only just started. Go over to The Oil Drum and get in on the discussion about the details of these newly fracked resources. It is not nearly as rosy as the oil companies say things are.
Don’t forget, to convert our entire transport system over to a new fuel will take no less than 25 years. Going this route will use massive amounts of capital that is very likely to be a bridge to nowhere.
The only real solution is to control our population levels and match that to our renewable resources. Yes, that goes against what humans today believe but that is what is going to happen, our way or Mother Nature’s way.
-1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (9:48 pm)The big question is – When?
Since there is nothing even in the lab that is working and has even a small chance at being cost effective, you have to go with what we have.
The Better Place model works with our current technology. Today. If that great battery makes it to market, it will be used by Better Place. The swap stations will become quick charge stations. It can be a very smooth transition. Use the swap, then quick charge in the swap bay for safety and finally quick charge under your children when it is proven very safe. I feel that could take at least 10 years and probably 15 or more years.
Thus, the Better Place model is ready today and can help us transition away from fossil fuels in a smooth way using today’s technology.
-1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:04 pm)No, those swap stations will still be needed for people that need a charge because they forgot to plug in or if they want to go on a trip. The same fear is there. Also, it could be more than a decade to get that battery pack cost down to where people can afford them.
The Better Place model is cheaper than driving with gasoline, today. Right now. We will just have to watch what happens in the first countries. China has their own swap station and are happy with the performance thus far.
Imagine trying to compete with China if they have a full EV system and the US is still using fossil fuels? Good luck with that.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:13 pm)Now, where is your analogy for all the standard batteries out there? Do you only use rechargeable? What about the toys for your kids? Let us talk price.
You see, your “joke” is only funny if batteries can be fueled like gas tanks. Do you see the difference? Liquid fossil fuels are called Black Gold for a reason. They are fantastic, high energy dense liquids that have allowed humans to reach 7 billion people.
However, those liquids are a one-shot deal. They are non-renewable and we have already reached global peak crude production back in 2005.
We humans have to get away from Mother Nature’s breast and go on our own, using the only resource that now comes to Earth – solar radiation.
So, nice try with your sarcasm but reality is even more funny.
-2
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:16 pm)How can you say it is cheaper to run through a fuel cell when the cheapest fuel cell out there costs about $500,000.
Hydrogen fuel cells cars will never be cheaper than EVs. Never, forget about it.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:34 pm)Not that I’m trying to make a financial case for the Volt, but I’d like to see the actual PBP #’s for a US operation over 10 years and compare that to the lifetime cost of a Volt. I’m curious.
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:37 pm)Why would I have to keep hydrogen gas cool while it travels to homes and hydrogen fueling stations through existing natural gas pipe infrastructure? Do you not live in the US? You must live somewhere that doesn’t pump natural gas to your home. Most homes in the North East have natural gas lines. I see a future where we will also have hydrogen gas lines that sends hydrogen gas not liquid hydrogen, to hydrogen fueling stations.
NPNS!
Volt#671
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:44 pm)Now I know you are totally confused. You can buy a fuel cell bus for less than $500,000
Go to the Ballard site and call them for their latest prices.
http://www.ballard.com/fuel-cell-products/Product_Portfolio.aspx
NPNS!
Volt#671
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:49 pm)Texas,
“How can you say it is cheaper to run through a fuel cell when the cheapest fuel cell out there costs about $500,000.
Hydrogen fuel cells cars will never be cheaper than EVs. Never, forget about it.?
Does that mean the honda FCX fuel cell car costs $500k+ ?
HaroldC
+1
Feb 22nd, 2012 (10:55 pm)I think there’s 2 things being talked about here. What Raymond was saying is its better to use hydrogen in a fuel cell vs. burning. What you are saying is a fuel cell car will cost more than a BEV. I agree w/Raymond on the better use of natural gas. The second statement, again, is debateable. Right now fuel cells are not cheap bet getting cheaper. Right now long range batteries are not cheap but getting cheaper. Who will win the race? It’s anybody’s guess really. I do know, however natural gas is a fossil fuel (yes there is methane gas out of land fills), but electricity is renewable, and can be obtained from many sources. So I would say, in the long run (how long?), electricity is going to win over any fossil fuel.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (1:35 am)Glad someone can relate to my sarcasm.
What can I say … I’m a conservative fan of liberal electric propulsion who also loves the Volt. I love liberal Mac computers too. But my two degrees in engineering prevent me from cheerleading ideas like this that I think are certain to fail.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (1:42 am)Battery systems are improving and getting cheaper very quickly. Even now the limit is not the batteries … it’s the rate at which our grid can supply power to them. IMHO, this is a complex expensive sure-to-fail solution to a charge-time problem that won’t be a problem five years from now.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (5:31 am)First thing you want to do is calculate the amount of energy in NG and then compare that to Hydrogen. You will find the NG, which is a fossil fuel, has a lot more energy. Next, compare the hydrogen molecule to NG. You will notice that the hydrogen is very tiny. That means you have to have special pipes and fittings so they don’t leak all that precious gas all over the place. Can it be done? Of course. Will we be able to use our existing NG lines? No way, not if they want to make any money.
So, look into hydrogen gas lines, pressurizing systems and hydrogen storage. All are expensive. Very expensive.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (5:36 am)Really? Can you point me to an automobile, like the kind we are talking about, that is on sale for less than $500,000? Thank you.
How about we wait to see those new production fuel cell cars on the market in the next decade and then see if they can compete. Here is the quick answer – they will not be able to compete against the EV or the EV hybrids (like the Volt).
Yes, there is a lot of talk, still a lot of government funding to eat through but when all is said and done, the fuel cell is only going to be used for niche markets. I still promote the research and development of said technology. We need the shotgun approach.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (5:38 am)Yes, Harold, that car costs over $500,000 dollars until they get the high-volume production line up and running and selling a lot of cars to many customers. That is how things work.
Will that happen? I have my doubts that it will ever make any amount of adoption that is significant. Think niche.
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (5:51 am)That is what they said five years ago and will say five years from now. The two major problems are that the driver must buy the whole oil well with the car and that you have to wait 5 hours to pump that oil using a tiny straw.
I think that even if the batteries get much better, they will never be as cheap as a Better Place model because the consumer gets to pay later. The initial price for the vehicle will always be cheaper, and in some cases, free. That is going to be hard to beat.
Also, the managed network is good for full implementation. It figures out a way to keep the flow of energy into the numerous battery packs in such a way as to balance the load, making it much cheaper for the utilities. The Better Place model is a win win for everyone and it is going to win the cost game. Simple as that.
Of course, we can argue all day, but how about we just watch and learn? They are live and will be turning up the juice. The critics get fewer as each milestone has been reached, on time and on budget. The whole system is operational and running customers all over Israel as I write this. It just works.
So, one poster said his engineering degrees are preventing him from believing. It is not the engineering degrees but his way of thinking. The engineering is all done and working as planned. The costs are cheaper than using fossil fuels, today.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (9:13 am)I’m not comparing battery-swap to fossil fuels. I’m comparing it to the option of fast-charging at Walmarts and convenience stores in 15 minutes, buying another 200 miles or so of charge for say $20. You will still be able to charge at home for half that price, but that charge will take many hours like today.
Battery swap may be working in their one car, but it’s not a scalable solution and its widespread adoption depends on a bunch of unrealistic assumptions.
Can’t wait to see who’s right.
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (9:28 am)Oh, I wasn’t aware that that technology exists yet. I also didn’t catch the cost of those battery packs or the charging infrastructure. Is there a company planning to do a nation wide system? If I was more of a dreamer I would just stay home and wait for EEstor to finish up their super battery. However, we must work with what we have today.
I fail to see what assumptions are unrealistic. Can you be more specific? The model has been vetted by some of the smartest investment people in the world and they voted with their mega millions. This is not some government funded scam. It is real investors putting down serious cash and working their butts off.
So, how about you list those assumptions and we can get right on debating them. Excuse me if I don’t tread lightly on your engineering degrees. I take no prisoners and require no quarter.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (12:07 pm)The biggest ones IMHO…
The assumption that other car manufacturers will be willing to design new vehicles around their proposed battery and swap infrastructure. It reduces their ability to innovate and differentiate their product. So it will never happen.
These battery swapping stations will be very expensive to build, they will require an expensive stock of batteries to be on hand, and the swapping mechanisms will be complex and dangerous and require highly trained experts to maintain. The cars need the stations and the stations need the cars. Which comes first? Neither, so it will never happen.
The French government owns 15% of Renault. Only a government bureaucrat could invent an idea like this. And they can easily line up “investors” too. The free market would not touch this idea with a ten foot poll. JMHO.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (12:40 pm)Texas,
What do you think about redox batteries?
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/02/metil-20120218.html
Could be similar concept. Just exchange of electrolyte without investment need for spare battery.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (12:51 pm)You are going too easy on me. I will point to Android OS, the standard 12 car battery, standard battery types, USB, Standard disk drives, WiFi and even the QWERTY keyboard.
Critics said Android would never be adopted for just those reasons you stated. Here is the lowdown. If a product or system comes along and it catches on, everyone else has to jump on, find a viable alternative or go home. Many have chosen to adopt Android and are doing great. MS, with their huge ego and massive war chest has decided to create Windows Phone. You can actually hear the creaking coming out of MS if you listen close enough. They just may pull it off but there are very few companies (no, not HP, no not Nokia) that could even get as far as MS has gotten. That is how hard it is to take over a facebook or a twitter.
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (12:53 pm)As Shai Agassi famously stated, maybe you didn’t hear it, give me one week’s worth of your oil use and I will build you an infrastructure that can get you off of oil, forever. Now, you may be skeptical at first but that is only because you have not thought through the entire model. Will that one week’s worth of oil spending totally convert you over? No, but it gets you fully up and running for the first batch of drivers. after that, the profits are reinvested and the model becomes self sustaining to complete the full implementation. More cars come on, and then more swap stations can be built, etc. This has been worked out in extreme detail for the investors, who were not afraid of complex Net Present Value analysis.
Three countries are already fully funded for this initial build-out – Israel (fully functioning), Denmark (near completion), Australia (will be completed less than one year after the other two). So, when you say it will never happen, it already did in two countries and soon a third. The money is already spent.
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (12:55 pm)Nice attempt but at least try to get the facts. Renault did not invent this idea, Shai Agassi did. Carlos Ghosn, who is also the CEO for Nissan and a certified genius, came on board and has invested billions on the electrification of transportation, not for the French government but because he understands where fossil fuels are going. He jumped all in and risked it all. Great men do great things. Simple as that.
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (12:59 pm)Great! Now you just have to take that idea and run with it, talk to thousands of people, secure about 500 million dollars of investment, build each piece of the puzzle and demonstrate it all working. Then sell a major car company to build you a car for the system and sell a few countries on the idea so they allow the infrastructure. When you do all that, you have just done what Shai Agassi and Better Place just did. Good luck because it takes a hard will and years of hard work.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (6:46 pm)I’m not against standards in general, I’m just questioning the viability of battery swapping because the battery is an integral part of the vehicle design. Except for Android, none of your examples are an integral component that impacts the rest of the design. That’s key. So let’s consider Android.
A bunch of phone makers have standardized on Android, and thus there’s not much they can do to differentiate or innovate relative to their Android competition. And some of their innovations fragment the standard creating headaches for customers and developers.
Meanwhile, Apple is free to innovate with their iOS, so they sell as many iPhones as all Android phone makers combined. And in the tablet space, iOS rules. The end result … iOS dominates Android in market share, software selection, developer satisfaction, and customer satisfaction.
Imagine how upset you’ll be when you’re stranded because some vendor’s innovation made you car incompatible with their battery swapper. Or maybe damages it.
A battery fast-charging standard is a simpler detached solution that solves the same problem. There are fewer variables, and car designers do not have to compromise their design to support it.
Feb 23rd, 2012 (7:06 pm)From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shai_Agassi
In January 2008, the Israeli government announced its support for a broad effort to promote the use of electric cars, embracing a joint venture between Better Place, Renault and its partner, Nissan Motor Company. Renault and Better Place are working on development of exchangeable batteries.
Shai might be successful, or he might be the next Solyndra.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra_loan_controversy
I wish him luck, but I think the first good fast-charging standard will destroy his business model. Who knows … maybe it will be this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHAdeMO
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (10:05 pm)A super tiny Mr. Fusion would be even better. Don’t you get it? that technology you say is the best way to go is not available! There are many breakthroughs in both engineering, manufacturing and marketing that need to happen before that system is a viable alternative to the gasoline powered car. Of course we would not battery swap if we had EEstor. That’s the point.
Not to worry, the Better Place model is fully functioning today and can easily transition to new technology tomorrow. What is easier, you trying to dispose of your $30,000 battery pack and buy a new battery pack with new technology that fits in your “integral” design OR for Better Place’s engineers to design in the new technology in such a way that the driver is never aware?
The old batteries are phased out and put out to pasture, literally, and the new stuff is phased in to gain the best business advantage. Think about that.
It all comes down to resources and the efficient allocation of them. That is the true power of the Better Place model.
It is the difference between Bob’s Homemade Burgers dealing with their used french fry grease and McDonald’s dealing, on a global scale, with their used french fry grease.
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (10:43 pm)There it is! I knew it! The Republican Solyndra reference.
Let us get one thing very clear – Better Place is a pure business venture that has real investors and did not get a huge subsidy like Solyndra did. Some governments have decided to provide some incentives in order to get their population off of oil but the Better Place model does not need it to work.
Of course, any new venture or project, like the Volt, Tesla, etc. have huge up-front development costs and tiny volumes. However, I don’t need to go on about that because you, as an engineer, should know what I’m talking about.
Now, for the rest of the “government support for new technology” “haters” out there. Let me first note the hypocrisy of your position to support the military spending to develop better weapons, NASA and their development of new technology, etc. Republicans are for that – better ways to kill and control people yet NOT for better ways to be at balance with Earth’s resources. Just plain insanity when viewed from outside the box. Either go in or out, don’t stand in the doorway.
If you hate Solyndra, you should love Better Place, a pure business venture.
Now, let us step outside the box for a moment and examine the situation. Humans are using fossil fuels to extract and transform Earth’s resources well past the planet’s ability to sustain such activities. We are in severe over-shoot with a population of 7 billion people, only possible because of that stored energy that took hundreds of millions of years to build up and cook.
Now, the most important of that Hammer-driver motive force, crude petroleum, has been in flat production since 2005 despite the price going through the roof. This is called Peak Oil. It is not debatable or something Republicans or oil executives can wave away. It is simply the max point of production of a non-renewable resource that is being consumed. It is not a question of if but when.
All the data and charts point to irreversible decline in the near future. The chances of it happening are a million times more likely than for the average person to have their house burn down or even get robbed. Yet, everyone has house insurance. Again, silly humans not making any sense.
Humans are unlikely to be able to completely solve the Limits to Growth problem but we just may be able to design a softer landing than what Mother Nature has planned for us.
For that, we need a shotgun approach to try to find any technologies that just might help ease the pain and suffering. I am not just talking about physical products but social and governance development. The global economy is simply a Ponzi scheme that requires growth for stability. It is unsustainable for any significant amount of time, especially now that we have really started to ramp up our resource use.
One the biggest factors, that is too taboo to talk about at this point in human development, is population levels. Controlling the population levels is the only way to achieve a balance that has even the slightest chance of retaining complex technology like flushing toilets and fresh running water. If you just let nature handle the resource allocation, you get the animal kingdom. It works perfectly but does not allow for a comfortable existence. The weak, old and young suffer the most. Can we do better than that? The jury is still out.
So, instead of politicians mocking out the other party for “wasting” capital on “frivolous” spending that just may find the required technologies to help humanity out in the coming great energy and resource crisis, how about we nibble away at the really wasteful spending like military and supporting systems that use fossil fuels. I hope that makes sense to enough people. Sadly, I am sure it does not.
We humans learn by failing and the Great Lesson is about to begin – exponential growth in a finite system is impossible in perpetuity.
One way or another, balance will be reached.
-1
Feb 23rd, 2012 (10:46 pm)
Feb 24th, 2012 (11:11 am)Incorrect. Please read the link I provided. Available now.
It both works and is installed at 1000 locations, mostly in Asia. Production vehicles like the Nissan Leaf already support it. The Leaf can be 80% charged with it in 30 minutes. A compatible Volt would charge in 20 minutes.
Feb 24th, 2012 (11:46 am)You keep trying to paint me into a republican corner. I’m registered as an independent because the republican party is too liberal.
And I don’t hate Solyndra, but I do hate politicians who show disregard for the taxes I pay and my effort that those taxes represent. They new Solyndra was insolvent but they didn’t care. So poof … $500 million of our money is gone.
Likewise I don’t think the government should be protecting big-oil so they don’t have to complete against viable transportation fuels like CNG and electricity.
And I don’t believe in an EPA that has declared the C02 in my breath to be a pollutant just so they can “regulate me”. The “global cooling” then “global warming” then “climate change” agenda is part of that same manipulation. Central planning doesn’t work … never has never will.
As for the military … the Constitution says our government is supposed to fund the military to provide national security. And like it or not, energy is now part of that equation. If you removed all oil/gas from this country today, within 30 days people will be eating each other.
The government (both parties) should be embracing all forms of energy and requiring them to compete with each other so that the best one wins. Not picking their favorites.
Feb 24th, 2012 (5:00 pm)Texas,
I used to swap out my propane tank on my grill, but I switched to natural gas. It’s attached to my house and is less fuss. No more swapping. I can see this being my desire with a swappable battery, so I feel the battery swapping is only a temporary range fixer.
Feb 25th, 2012 (6:12 am)No, 20 minutes is not as good as a gasoline powered car and nobody wants to wait that long. Again, the technology does not exist on the market at a cost that can compete with what is already out there. There is no production car that has it. Period. Until there is and it can charge in 5 minutes or less and then go on for 120 miles plus and the cost is comparable and the cycles last long enough to make the investment worthwhile, you cannot say it is the best way to go. EEstor is even better but that also is not on the market or in a production vehicle. That last mile to the high-volume production floor is where 99.9% of all great ideas die. Just look at how many ideas have been tossed around in the last decade alone. Most are already dead.
Feb 25th, 2012 (6:17 am)Our world views are just too far apart for a constructive debate. Let us just agree to disagree. However, when Better Place works, please come back and admit it. I will do the same if they fail.
-1
Feb 25th, 2012 (6:30 am)Agreed. The only thing we can’t know is when will that perfect, cheap, long lasting, light, electrical energy storage system makes it to market in high volumes. Don’t forget that even when that happens, it will take time for people to feel comfortable putting that much juice at that power level under the butts of their kids. So, I’m thinking ten years minimum for full adoption.
I have always claimed that the Better Place model is temporary until better technology takes over. All those swap stations can easily be transitioned to quick charge technology, at a pace that makes economical sense, when those batteries finally show up in production vehicles. Until then, Better Place is good to go today, as Israel has proven. Go there, pick up your Fluence EV (if you know someone because they are just getting up to speed) and travel all over with not a worry about range anxiety. Fully operational network today, country-wide.
Feb 25th, 2012 (11:44 am)No production cars? Again incorrect …is supported on production EVs from Nissan, Mitsubishi, Subaru, and Peugeot.
Can’t compete? Again incorrect … competing now. Many more cars and locations. And 90% cheaper to deploy than “Better Place” … $50K vs $500K
20 minutes not good enough? Lots better than the 3 hours it takes now. Good enough for me. Bet WalMart or McDonalds will be happy to oblige me while I wait. Also better to me than a $3000/year battery subscription. I wonder how long a battery swap takes in -10F weather when the bottom of my car is a solid block of ice & dirt.
Fair enough.
Feb 25th, 2012 (3:16 pm)The advantage of the Better Place model is that it makes the EV a realistic option for the average driver TODAY in those countries where it is being marketed. There is no need to wait for a super battery or a super charger. In those countries where it is being marketed, if you can afford to buy, operate and maintain a Toyota Corolla, you can afford to buy operate and maintain an all electric Renault Fluence EZ. That is because of the difference in taxes between the electric and fuel car and the Better Place model where the cost of the battery is deffered over years. And you can get to any location in those countries without waiting 20-30 minutes for a “fast” charge. I don’t think that can be said for either the Nissan Leaf or Chevy Volt in any country. That means that in Israel and Denmark EVs may be able to capture a large proportion of the new car markets in the next 2-3 years and not be just a niche vehicle for EV groupies. This will lead to increased mass production and lowered costs and the ability to introduce the model into new markets. This is the big difference. This is why Better Place is a game changer.
Feb 27th, 2012 (6:58 pm)Shai Agassi must be a master of mind control.
No matter how many times I point out that such statements are factually wrong, one of his battery-swap zombies repeats it. If Shai decides his zombies should “EAT BRAINS” … be afraid … be very afraid.