Who killed the electric car?

DrStink said:

Ummm, you're the one that chose to live in the middle of the Mojave desert.

Click to expand...

.....................and LOVING it!!!

Tin Man said:

so when the global warming/meltdown/drowning of our coastal overcrowding occurs, heck, Kentucky may be Shangrila!

TM

Click to expand...

May be true, but if you get divorced.............is she still your cousin??

VEGASTDI said:

May be true, but if you get divorced.............is she still your cousin??

Click to expand...

"Kentucky, 5 million people, 15 last names."

State Mottos

Alabama: Hell Yes, We Have Electricity

Alaska: 11,623 Eskimos Can't Be Wrong!

Arizona: But It's A Dry Heat

Arkansas: Literacy Ain't Everything

California: By 30, Our Women Have More Plastic Than Your Honda

Colorado: If You Don't Ski, Don't Bother

Connecticut: Like Massachusetts, Only The Kennedy's Don't Own It-Yet

Delaware: We Really Do Like The Chemicals In Our Water

Florida: Ask Us About Our Grandkids

Georgia: We Put The "Fun" In Fundamentalist Extremism

Hawaii: Haka Tiki Mou Sha'ami Leeki Toru (Death To Mainland Scum, But Leave
Your Money)

Idaho: More Than Just Potatoes...Well Okay, We're Not, But The Potatoes Sure
Are Real Good

Illinois: Please Don't Pronounce the "S"

Indiana: 2 Billion Years Tidal Wave Free

Iowa: We Do Amazing Things With Corn

Kansas: First Of The Rectangle States

Kentucky: Five Million People; Fifteen Last Names

Louisiana: We're Not ALL Drunk Cajun Wackos, But That's Our Tourism Campaign

Maine: We're Really Cold, But We Have Cheap Lobster

Maryland: If You Can Dream It, We Can Tax It

Massachusetts: Our Taxes Are Lower Than Sweden's (For Most Tax Brackets)

Michigan: First Line Of Defense From The Canadians

Minnesota: 10,000 Lakes... And 10,000,000,000,000 Mosquitoes

Mississippi: Come And Feel Better About Your Own State

Missouri: Your Federal Flood Relief Tax Dollars At Work

Montana: Land Of The Big Sky, The Unabomber, Right-Wing Crazies, And Very
Little Else

Nebraska: Ask About Our State Motto Contest

Nevada: Hookers and Poker!

New Hampshire: Go Away And Leave Us Alone

New Jersey: You Want A ##$%##! Motto? I Got Yer ##$%##! Motto Right Here!

New Mexico: Lizards Make Excellent pets

New York: You Have The Right To Remain Silent, You Have The Right To An
Attorney....

North Carolina: Tobacco Is A Vegetable

North Dakota: We Really Are One Of The 50 States!

Ohio: At Least We're Not Michigan

Oklahoma: Like The Play, Only No Singing

Oregon: Spotted Owl... It's What's For Dinner

Pennsylvania: Cook With Coal

Rhode Island: We're Not REALLY An Island

South Carolina: Remember The Civil War? We Didn't Actually Surrender

South Dakota: Closer Than North Dakota

Tennessee: The Educashun State

Texas: Si' Hablo Ing'les

Utah: Our Jesus Is Better Than Your Jesus

Vermont: Yep

Virginia: Who Says Government Stiffs And Slackjaw Yokels Don't Mix?

Washington: Help! We're Overrun By Nerds And Slackers!

Washington, D.C.: Wanna Be Mayor?

West Virginia: One Big Happy Family... Really!

Wisconsin: Come Cut The Cheese

Wyoming: Where Men Are Men... and the sheep are scared

[sarcasm]
oh yah, this is exactly the reason i started this thread.
[/sarcasm]

RC said:

There are alot of places that might become difficult to inhabit once the cheap, easy to obtain energy and water are cut off.

Gonna be interesting.

Click to expand...

Willis Carrier, the inventor of air conditioning was born in western New York and graduated from Cornell in 1901. The company that bears his name was headquartered in Syracuse for over 6 decades, and Carrier residential air conditioners are often credited for making the post World War II population boom in the Sunbelt possible. Now Carrier has shut down all manufacturing in New York in favor of plants in TX, NC, TN and Asia. Ironic eh?

I do wonder if small and midsized cities in the northeast will ever experience a resurgence as energy and water (in the west) becomes more scarce/expensive?

My wife's sister moved from central/eastern Pennsylvania to Phoenix; she acts like real estate out there is gonna keep on booming, but I don't how it's sustainable. When you take a population the size of Philly, and spread them out over 500 sq miles in a place that exceeds 100 degrees 89 days a year, something has to give. The urban heat island around Phoenix has already increased average summer time lows from 73 to 80 since WWII. The only question in my mind is whether it will be water or oil or electricity that gives out first.

I think other Sunbelt cities need to look at what Charlotte is trying to achieve in their 2025 transit plan. It seems like like somebody down there really gets it - just adding lanes to the interstate won't fix the problem.

Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory countered that the real impact of LRT travel will be seen on rush-hour commutes. "We can't ignore the growth that's coming. We can probably add just two more lanes to I-77 [interstate freeway], and then we have to start tearing down office parks and neighborhoods and churches. We're not going to do that."

Click to expand...

Of course, that still won't change the humidity....

DrStink said:

My wife's sister moved from central/eastern Pennsylvania to Phoenix; she acts like real estate out there is gonna keep on booming, but I don't how it's sustainable. When you take a population the size of Philly, and spread them out over 500 sq miles in a place that exceeds 100 degrees 89 days a year, something has to give. The urban heat island around Phoenix has already increased average summer time lows from 73 to 80 since WWII. The only question in my mind is whether it will be water or oil or electricity that gives out first.

I think other Sunbelt cities need to look at what Charlotte is trying to achieve in their 2025 transit plan. It seems like like somebody down there really gets it - just adding lanes to the interstate won't fix the problem.


Of course, that still won't change the humidity....

Click to expand...

This is a great plan and should be looked at by ALL cities. It can ease congestion, decrease the rate of increase in energy use, cut pollution, etc.

What it may also do is change the landscape for housing costs, making housing close to rail especially more costly and desirable.

TM

david_594 said:

Lead acid? Does any application where capacity and space are the 2 biggest constraints use lead acid?

Arnt most hybrid cars out there Ni-MH? So maybe you are the one who is a little off base.

Click to expand...

Pure Electric cars wouldn't use Lead either for the exact same reasons Hybrids don't. But all of that ignores the 97% recycle rate that Pb -Acid batteries enjoy.

There's no doubt who's off base here.

Variant TDI said:

... But all of that ignores the 97% recycle rate that Pb -Acid batteries enjoy.

Click to expand...

Really, that "where are all those batteries going to get dumped" arguement is getting old. Drop it.

A sobering thought:
What if GM's Impact / EV-1 does for electric vehicles what GM's 5.7 liter diesel V8 did for diesels?

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/07/03/phelan-mourns-ev1-as-costly-distraction-to-gm/

I agree with RC's response to my post....see posts 8 & 9.

Since this has progressed to a pie in the ski, wish list, worst case scenario banter, etc. I'd like to add that my dream car would be a diesel, hybrid, fuel cell, solar, electric, multi-fuel, etc. concept car.

Why diesel? So I can run Bio or stop at any D2 filling station. This takes care of the range and travel issues.

Why electric? So I can put solar on the car and make use of the energy generated from the sun and from regenerative braking-Hybrid technology.

Why Fuel Cell? so I can use fuel cells to power my electric motor when I want to.

I would want a place to plug in and recharge if I felt the need. A switch to turn off the gas motor and run only on the electric motor for short commutes and trips to the store. This solves the 90/10 problem. Electric cars work for ninty percent of the people ninty percent of the time. My car works for one hundred percent of the people one hundred percent of the time!

While we are at it let's use some of that new paint they are developing and convert all surface areas to solar panels!

Now we have a hybrid I would like to own! I'd bet a portion of my stock portfolio on any company that actually does this. I'm willing to bet that I am not alone in this world.

That said I'm perfectly happy with my TDI. I'd be happier if EVs like the RAV 4, the GM EV, the original Honda Insight, and those tiny little cars that Sybase used to offer to thier employees were still being produced.

The electic car is not the answer all of our problems any more than hybrids or BioFuel. Each is a piece in the bigger picture.

I subscribe to the "if you build it they will come" philosophy. Benny Seigel was a nutcase but he was also a visionary. I recently learned that the fellow who invented the EKG machine was discouraged by his colleagues! They told him there was no money in it. At that time there was very little heart disease. Hmmm, could it be that he was a visionary or was it just dumb luck. Either way technology will find it use in society if there is a demand for it no matter how small. The demand will increase once the product becomes available. The more the demand increase, the lower the production costs and so on.....

Variant TDI said:

Pure Electric cars wouldn't use Lead either for the exact same reasons Hybrids don't. But all of that ignores the 97% recycle rate that Pb -Acid batteries enjoy.

There's no doubt who's off base here.

Click to expand...

Concentrating on one aspect.........actually went back to school and read a book last week. I concede that I relied on some wrong sources concerning L/A batteries.

But without being a pompous dick, school me on the emissions benefits when CURRENTLY we are reliant on coal for our electricity, and everything I have read states there is little or no emissions differences....

After you teach me that, fix the range problem and the fact living out west a LOT of people would need to recharge to get home.


I've never said electric cars aren't in our future.........IMHO, what's been available recently may have been acceptable to 90% of the pampered celeberities but certainly not for main stream commuting.


Oh, and have a happy 4th.............

VEGASTDI said:

I've never said electric cars aren't in our future.........IMHO, what's been available recently may have been acceptable to 90% of the pampered celeberities but certainly not for main stream commuting.

Click to expand...

Main stream commuting? Maybe out where you live in the middle of the desert, but Arizona isnt exactly the perfect example of mainstream living.

At my house we have 5 cars in the driveway. Why? Because we have 5 drives who need to go different places every day. In any given day though 4 out of 5 of us could drive an electric car(even with its limited range) without having any issue or having to charge at work.

If you make an electric vehicle you will most likely be marketing it to your typical suburban middle to upper class family. 2 parents, 1.5 kids and a dog. Chances are all the families they are marketing to would have 2-3 cars in the driveway anyways.

Electric vehicles arnt positioned to be a familys 1 sole vehicle. They are positioned to be 1 of the 2 or 3 vehicles that a family owns.

VEGASTDI said:

Concentrating on one aspect.........actually went back to school and read a book last week. I concede that I relied on some wrong sources concerning L/A batteries.

But without being a pompous dick, school me on the emissions benefits when CURRENTLY we are reliant on coal for our electricity, and everything I have read states there is little or no emissions differences....

Click to expand...

I just moved from CT to RI two weeks ago. Just now, I looked up the electricity generation breakdown according to the most recent DOE data:

Connecticut is 50.7% nuclear, 25% NG, 13% Coal, 5% oil, 4.6% renewable and 1.4% hydro, while Rhode Island is 96.8% NG, 2.1% renewable, and 1% oil. In other words, a grid tied EV would be better in CT than RI with regard to power plant carbon dioxide emission, but your generalizations about coal emissions don't really apply in my case.

For you in Nevada, yes, an EV isn't a great idea as your electricity is 48.5% coal, 43.5% NG, 4.3% hydro and 3.4% renewable. It's even worse in Kentucky: 91% coal, 4% oil and 4% hydro.

But then on the other hand, you have Idaho with 77.9% Hydro, 15.7% NG, and 5.3% renewable. (For the record, I'm stunned ID has no commercial nuclear power given that it was home to the world's first power reactor and is the home of the NEEL and it's 52 reactors.)

But anyway, given the vast differences across states, sweeping generalizations about grid tied EVs and emissions are so misleading as to make them essentially worthless.

After you teach me that, fix the range problem and the fact living out west a LOT of people would need to recharge to get home.

I've never said electric cars aren't in our future.........IMHO, what's been available recently may have been acceptable to 90% of the pampered celeberities but certainly not for main stream commuting.

Click to expand...

It's easy to blame the car for lack of range when you chose to live in the land of sprawl. Sure, you may have done it when gas was $1 instead of $3, but it's still a choice you made. Don't blame the car for the choice you made. I say this not to pick on you - that isn't my point at all. I'm just trying to illustrate the point that Americans make choices and then like to complain about the consequences of those choices. When I lived in California, I chose to live 3.5 miles from work; some of my coworkers commuted 50 miles by choice. I do like cars, but I'd rather do other things with my time than sit in traffic

Oh, and those "pampered celeberities" driving grid tied EVs? California's electricity mix is 51.6% NG, 17.5% hydro, 15.5% nuclear, 12.4% renewables, 1.2% oil and 1.2% coal.

david_594 said:

Main stream commuting? Maybe out where you live in the middle of the desert, but Arizona isnt exactly the perfect example of mainstream living.

At my house we have 5 cars in the driveway. Why? Because we have 5 drives who need to go different places every day. In any given day though 4 out of 5 of us could drive an electric car(even with its limited range) without having any issue or having to charge at work.

If you make an electric vehicle you will most likely be marketing it to your typical suburban middle to upper class family. 2 parents, 1.5 kids and a dog. Chances are all the families they are marketing to would have 2-3 cars in the driveway anyways.

Electric vehicles arnt positioned to be a familys 1 sole vehicle. They are positioned to be 1 of the 2 or 3 vehicles that a family owns.

Click to expand...

I see that view.............I just can't accept a $20K(?)....$30K(?) car as a 3rd or 4th car being used as a grocery getter. There's too many 10K, 40MPG cars that fill that role.

What's funny is I really don't LOVE my TDI and I don't like diesels in general...that being said, the TDI is the wife's commuter car(aprox double the MPG of the 305HP sedan it replaced but less than 1/2 the fun. ) and I'm about to buy a MB diesel for the purposes you mention above............but for $3,000!!!

Parking the Super Duty will save me almost $300 a month. So the MB should be an investment that will pay for it self rather quickly.

At fuel's current prices, I have decided to keep all the high HP fast stuff relegated to recreation.............with the exception of the 190MPH bike which has limited cargo capacity...

DrStink said:

I just moved from CT to RI two weeks ago. Just now, I looked up the electricity generation breakdown according to the most recent DOE data:

Connecticut is 50.7% nuclear, 25% NG, 13% Coal, 5% oil, 4.6% renewable and 1.4% hydro, while Rhode Island is 96.8% NG, 2.1% renewable, and 1% oil. In other words, a grid tied EV would be better in CT than RI with regard to power plant carbon dioxide emission, but your generalizations about coal emissions don't really apply in my case.

For you in Nevada, yes, an EV isn't a great idea as your electricity is 48.5% coal, 43.5% NG, 4.3% hydro and 3.4% renewable. It's even worse in Kentucky: 91% coal, 4% oil and 4% hydro.

But then on the other hand, you have Idaho with 77.9% Hydro, 15.7% NG, and 5.3% renewable. (For the record, I'm stunned ID has no commercial nuclear power given that it was home to the world's first power reactor and is the home of the NEEL and it's 52 reactors.)

But anyway, given the vast differences across states, sweeping generalizations about grid tied EVs and emissions are so misleading as to make them essentially worthless.



It's easy to blame the car for lack of range when you chose to live in the land of sprawl. Sure, you may have done it when gas was $1 instead of $3, but it's still a choice you made. Don't blame the car for the choice you made. I say this not to pick on you - that isn't my point at all. I'm just trying to illustrate the point that Americans make choices and then like to complain about the consequences of those choices. When I lived in California, I chose to live 3.5 miles from work; some of my coworkers commuted 50 miles by choice. I do like cars, but I'd rather do other things with my time than sit in traffic

Oh, and those "pampered celeberities" driving grid tied EVs? California's electricity mix is 51.6% NG, 17.5% hydro, 15.5% nuclear, 12.4% renewables, 1.2% oil and 1.2% coal.

Click to expand...

Great info, ESPECIALLY concerning the sweeping generalizations which I think a lot of us are guilty of..............however, twice now you have commented that I may be "complaining" about the choice I've made.

That could not be further from the truth.....I'm not blaming the car for lack of range, not blaming it for anything. Just commenting that it would not work for me nor, IMO, 90% of the population.

My solution to the fuel costs? The TDI.........first time I've ever bought a car thinking about cost of ownership and re-sale etc....time will tell if it was the right decision or I just jumped on the proverbial band wagon.

At the risk of being redundant, with the exception of Ed Begly(sp?) the majority of the jerk off celebs that tout their contributions to earth and how they are greenies Blah.....blah...blah....waste more energy than 10 average consumers. It's just not too many consider their multiple homes, traveling, even making movies for that matter, to be wasteful.

VEGASTDI said:

Just commenting that it would not work for me nor, IMO, 90% of the population.

Click to expand...

Where do you keep coming up with this number? Oh wait, your opinion......

david_594 said:

Where do you keep coming up with this number? Oh wait, your opinion......

Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSBykAngDpY


Please watch at the 1 minute 37 second mark.

You're kinda correct; it is an opinion, just not mine.

Try to pay attention next tiime......

VEGASTDI said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSBykAngDpY


Please watch at the 1 minute 37 second mark.

You're kinda correct; it is an opinion, just not mine.

Try to pay attention next tiime......

Click to expand...

so at that 1 minute 37 second mark:
"Its not for everybody, it can only meet the needs of 90% of the population"

VEGASTDI said:

Just commenting that it would not work for me nor, IMO, 90% of the population.

Click to expand...

Lets see, video says it will meet the need of 90% of the population. You say it WONT meet the need of 90% of the population? I am paying attention pretty hard here and I think you are the one that is missing something. The opinion stated in that video is the exact opposite of what you are saying here in this thread. Maybe you should rewatch that video.

david_594 said:

so at that 1 minute 37 second mark:
"Its not for everybody, it can only meet the needs of 90% of the population"



Lets see, video says it will meet the need of 90% of the population. You say it WONT meet the need of 90% of the population? I am paying attention pretty hard here and I think you are the one that is missing something. The opinion stated in that video is the exact opposite of what you are saying here in this thread. Maybe you should rewatch that video.

Click to expand...

OMFG........do you have a hair up your up your ass for me or sumpin'.....


I AM 100% disputing the entertainer's claim when he states that the electric car will meet the needs of 90% of the people.

You asked me where I got the number from.............there it is.

Why are you having such a difficult time with this...........I don't believe the electric car is a viable alternative for even half of the commuters, much less 90% of them.................YET!!! (and yes, that 50% is an optomistic WAG)


Is that clear enough for you? Or you gonna keep bustin' my balls?

Honestly, I wouldn't say the electric car is dead quite yet. Its day may come. Its just on sabbatical.

http://www.teslamotors.com/

http://www.wrightspeed.com/

Like all things automotive and technological, the expensive vehicles get it first. Perhaps it will filter down and decrease in per unit cost when volume goes up.

TM

DrStink said:

... It's easy to blame the car for lack of range when you chose to live in the land of sprawl. Sure, you may have done it when gas was $1 instead of $3, but it's still a choice you made. Don't blame the car for the choice you made. I say this not to pick on you - that isn't my point at all. I'm just trying to illustrate the point that Americans make choices and then like to complain about the consequences of those choices.

Click to expand...

Here, here. Not intended for any particular person here, it`s a generalization about the standard amerikan whiner. I couldn`t agree more.

RC said:

Here, here. Not intended for any particular person here, it`s a generalization about the standard amerikan whiner. I couldn`t agree more.

Click to expand...

So high density housing and condos in the city are the only way people should live???


Won't even get into the social problems that causes....


I know you said it was a generalization..........again, I've never complained. I went pro-active and bought a TDI. When I have to do a 48 hour shift at a remote station (aprox 100 miles away) the wife and I switch cars.

I can't re-locate every time the job makes me change locations.

By not agreeing with Mr. Begly about EV's working for "only 90% of the people" seems to have gotten me into hot water with some of the liberal views here..............I should have known better.

Peace out and may Gore be with you.

I can't give a percentage, but I can say that among all the people I have routine contact with (Friends, relatives, co-workers, etc) I can only think of ONE who could make do with an electric car at current and foreseeable performance levels, and that's my retired father. Everyone else drives too far too often.

As for having an electric vehicle for short trips and a standard vehicle for other trips ... I have only driveway space for one 4-wheeled vehicle, I have only insurance budget for one 4-wheeled vehicle, I have budget in general for only one 4-wheeled vehicle, so that ain't gonna fly. Not in my case. The one vehicle that I have space and budget for, has to be able to do all required tasks.

i think we all understand that people in this club bought a TDI for a good reason. i DONT think RC was critisizing them, but instead people who live in 5,000 sq ft houses 60 miles from work and drive Hummers to work alone. generally the 90% rule could be applied to people who are willfully arrogant, ignorant and irresponsible just because they can afford it financially. that's the type of behavior that needs to be changed.

Off topic, very off topic

NFSTDI said:

I recently learned that the fellow who invented the EKG machine was discouraged by his colleagues! They told him there was no money in it. At that time there was very little heart disease. Hmmm, could it be that he was a visionary or was it just dumb luck.

Click to expand...

Maybe, just maybe, EKG machines CAUSE heart disease!

Apathy killed it

ABSTRACT
Details the conception of totally unique method of construction of a Structural Element Battery and its manufacturing process. Improves upon current state of the art laminate sheet web-press formed Lithium-ion polymer batteries with ultrasonic joining being employed in addition to enhanced interlayer adhesion by design: Takes advantage of the natural ‘fuzziness’ of graphite cloths for hook-and-loop assisted interlayer joining. Carbon nanorod functionalized graphite anode for improved lifetime cycling. Report includes case studies and examples of potential applications of the invention.


RELEVANT KEYWORDS (Optional)
Lithium ion polymer battery, multifunctional, carbon nanorod functionalized surfaces.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Project:

Description and claims of the uniqueness of the invention of a Structural Element Battery and some selected applications which will highlight the usefulness, efficacy, and completely novel, unconventional solutions to the existing set of problems and practical difficulties in designing batteries for mobile and highly mobile applications: especially those applications requiring motive power from their battery. It is intended to lay out clear and compelling evidence, argumentation, and case studies to develop in the reader the fundamental understanding, the unconventional synthesis of ideas, conceptions, and processes which lead to the elegantly simple solution to the existing difficulties of battery design—The Structural Element Battery (SEB.)

The SEB battery solution is without equal in its approach or conception.


Goals: Ever since the OPEC oil crisis of the early 1970’s, and again now, it has been highly desired to have personal vehicle powered by an electric battery. Historically, electrically powered cars were among the first to be produced at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries. Yet for all practical intents since then, the battery has been limited to small portable consumer electronics and low-power devices; it has been largely shunned as a power source for vehicles because of grossly insufficient energy density (how much range) and power density (how much acceleration.) Recent advances in Lithium-ion polymer electrolyte batteries have improved the energy and power densities to roughly 500 wh/Kg and 520 w/Kg, which is good. However, it is not good enough.

Electric Vehicle as Case Example:

It is generally accepted that no electric vehicle will reach mass-market penetration into the family garage until it can travel ca. 225-300 miles non-stop and accelerate to freeway speed in a reasonable time, ca. 14 seconds. With the current approach to design, a battery manufacturer would produce a battery to meet these energy and power requirements for a vehicles wherein approximately equal parts of added weight (mass) are required to accelerate and hold constant speed for an average family subcompact sedan. Now, the vehicle has gained much additional mass: 35% or more gain over its original weight. Therefore, a vicious circle is entrained wherein meeting one set of requirements (acceleration and cruising needs) adds significant new mass to the vehicle, increasing the horsepower needed to meet those requirements! This added mass in turn dictates that the other vehicle components: suspension, motor management and mounting, frame stiffness be upgraded to handle the additional weight, of course adding more weight to the ever-increasing conundrum. At some point, the engineer cannot satisfactorily meet either objective and must instead compromise one way or the other toward range that is more acceptable (barely) or acceptable acceleration results (even more difficult.)

What is the effective solution which removes the frustrations?

Background:

In the late summer of 1999, the author became aware of pioneering work in this field by researchers at Sandia National Labs. They had taken a commodity-grade textile fabric (polyacrylanitrile—PAN cloth) converted it to pure graphite form and then intercalated it electrochemically with lithium ions—thus forming the negative (anodic) electrode of a lithium-ion battery.

A different kind of solution gripped the author: Make the battery a structural, load-bearing element! If fully one-third of the three things required to make a battery: anode, cathode, electrolyte, can be made out of carbon-fiber—one of the lightest and strongest materials, then why can’t the other materials be carefully chosen to be effective chemically, but stiff and mechanically rigid as well?

There is no fundamental limitation or constraint which says a battery must fit inside the device it is powering, only mere convention. Therefore, why not make the net shape of the object—the package, or the outline form of the object, as it were,—its own power source?

In this way, the conundrum is defeated at its very root. There is little or no addition of weight/ mass because the new SEB battery is replacing the existing mass of two things: the OLD structure and the OLD battery with its heavy casing. In most cases it is expected that SEB design will accomplish the same structural rigidity and physical integrity while meeting both acceleration/ steady state power requirements using LESS mass than previous conventional designs.

The solution to the conundrum is simple: see the battery not in package form; see the package as battery-form. This reorganizing of the problem from a chemically limited technology to a packaging limited framework opens up a previously inaccesable, virtuous circle.

Now that the mass of the original body/frame of the case vehicle has been reduced, so too can the masses of the motors, brakes, generators, suspension. In addition, the power requirements satisfying the original demands can be downsized to meet the newly reduced mass.

Case Example of the Virtuous Circle:

If the original steel body and frame of a typical family sedan, as depicted in figure 1, were 2000 lb… traditional design incorporates the unibody or semi-unibody design. Unibody or unit-body design incorporates one or more frame or sub-frame assemblies made of steel, wherein the main body, known as the body-in-white, bears the torsional, lateral, longitudinal stresses and provides the attachment or ‘hard points’ for driveline, suspension, glass, trim pieces, etcetera. A typical mid to full sized, 4-door family sedan weighs 3200-3800 lbs, dry (no fuel, oil, fluids.) Of that, the unibody of steel comprises 1900-2000 lbs, depending on dimensions and sheet steel thickness.

If instead, the unibody were functionalized as a Structural Element Battery…

At 300 volts (for efficiency), each cell at 3.9 volts nominal requires 77 serially stacked layers (cells) of 0.65mm each, equaling ca. 5 cm thickness. A body design utilizing the Structural Element Battery approach can also utilize unit body, or modularized unit-body with detached/separate crash-safety crush zones. Since there is no liquid electrolyte to spill, there are no chemical or explosion hazards.

Moreover, in failure tests previously done, a lithium-ion stacked cell was penetrated with a nail fired from a nail gun while in discharge. In that test, cell voltage dropped to slightly more than half and then slowly recovered to ~70% of its prior voltage, discharging all the while. It did not explode, rupture, or fail. Its ability to withstand penetration trauma without complete failure and no compromise in safety while retaining some reserve power/energy discharge capacity makes lithium-ion polymer technology extremely attractive and safe.

To summarize the advantages of SEB design philosophy:

Inert mass replaced with power functional mass
Fewer hard mount points required (since not required to carry internal battery), and hence, fewer body through-holes. Body rigidity increased. Main body section integrity during crashes increased.
Less need for (inert) trim panels to hide ugly body and ugly body holes since SEB battery assumes net shape of exterior design, even for surfaces having complex or compound curvature.
Fewer inert body panels and trim pieces means a greater % of the vehicle mass is power-functional and a lower % is wasted, dead weight mass.
Because of these two significant sources of mass-reduction (higher functional mass% and lower waste mass %) lower the acceleration and cruising power requirements by way of the virtuous circle.
Lowering the power requirements means smaller, lighter motors, which in turn allows smaller, lighter suspension, electrical cabling, and braking components.
The increased surface area of the battery—achieved by ‘pushing out’ the Structural Element Battery to the net final envelope of the body—means that it can produce more current and yet stays cool. Combined with the reduced mass and power requirements, these two factors work synergistically to reduce the requirements of onboard rechargers.
The virtuous circle goes around again for another set of weight/mass reductions—in exact opposition to the original conundrum, reaching a final design which makes no compromises in range or acceleration—and yet is safer than conventional battery design.


Case example: Comparison of SEB hybrid to Toyota Prius Hybrid:

The Toyota Prius is a hybrid-designed car employing advanced motor controls and two power plants: a 44 hp electric motor powered by a nickel-metal hydride battery pack and a 1.5-liter 4 cylinder (4-stroke) internal combustion engine (ICE.) The Prius body is made of aluminum and is 40% lighter than a conventional steel body. A table of some selected weights and relative mass % gives a clear picture of the Prius:

Table 1: Selected component weights and their
weight relative to total.
Part
Weight (lbs)
% of Total Weight

Body
1847
66.8

Battery
110
3.98

Engine
194.7
7.04

Total
2766
77.82



Fully two-thirds of this vehicle’s mass is inert, dead weight!

Remember, from the battery mass calculations above (needs correction), that a car with similar weight needed 694 lb of lithium-ion polymer battery mass to meet the original range and acceleration requirements, unaided by onboard ICE generators. Thus, if we replaced the Prius’ aluminum body with a 700 lb. Structural Element Battery, then fully 1147 lbs are lost for a 41.5% mass reduction! Our SEB designed vehicle also loses the 110 lb. NiMH battery pack, for a net mass reduction of 45.4%

Now, the vehicle only weighs 1509 lbs and no longer needs as much power to meet the acceleration/range criteria, and entry into the virtuous circle nets additional positives. Moreover, the cost of ‘upgrading’ to the SEB design body is largely offset by the loss of the aluminum body (which is very difficult and expensive to form and weld.) Combined with the loss of the NiMH battery—an explosion and caustic crash hazard as well as an environmental pollutant, entry into the virtuous circle leads to unexpected benefits beyond mass reduction.

In fact, the case for larger SUV-type vehicles is even more virtuous because of the increased surface area= increased current and power delivery capacity. In addition, battery life increases because of lower heat (lower current/area density and more surface cooling) since SUV’s have a lot of surface area relative to their masses. Consumers prefer large, comfortable SUV’s. They are perceived as being safer also. Due to the outlined factors, and because manufacturers profits are greater from their sales, they are an ideal target market for SEB design.

Description of the Author’s Invention, the SEB Battery and Design Concept:

A method of construction for a lithium-ion polymer secondary (rechargeable) battery, which can be made rigid and strong to bear physical loads.

An outline of the general approach following a four-part scheme: The bulk production of ‘raw’ battery material, the processing of such raw material into rigid and strong final net shapes, the ‘finishing of the battery into usable arrays, and the operational control of the battery.

Production method for raw or uncured battery material.

A chemical/ heat treatment method for converting PAN cloth into graphite using Sandia’s methods.
A chemical treatment to prevent internal shorting wherein the inward-facing side of the carbon cloth anode is treated in a rarified environment and exposed to an acetylene ionizing flame. A process wherein the acetylene flame front converts the naturally occurring ‘fuzz’ or surface fibers on the order of tens of microns in length having an orientation normal to the graphite cloth plane to carbon nano-rods, having more compact dimensions. A method wherein the carbon nano-rod functionalized surface, placed toward the electrolyte layer, enhances the electron migration to and fro between anode lithium ions, expanding the battery lifetime.
A chemical and mechanical joining process wherein the carbon fiber graphite anode cloth is joined to an UHMWPE gel electrolyte layer utilizing ultrasonic-assisted mechanical joining.
A chemical joining process wherein a lithiated composite Lix:CoO2 + Liy:MnO2 cathode material is sprayed on the UHMWPE gel electrolyte on the side opposite the carbon anode.
A mechanical joining process wherein a polyphthalocyanine-copolymerized Kevlar® fabric is joined to the cathode side of the UHMWPE layer utilizing ultrasonic-assisted mechanical joining.
A chemical spraying process wherein an (commercially available) electrically activated, electrically conducting, polyphthalocyanine-based adhesive is sprayed on the backside of the carbon anode for interlayer joining.

A method of fabrication wherein uncured, ‘raw’ battery films produced in the previous step, having a
cell thickness< 1 millimeter, are successively joined together, a few layers at a time, in laminar
sandwiches for additive voltages and cured into strong and rigid conformal net shapes.

A process employing negative mold vacuum-bagging vacuum forming techniques and airbags, wherein a collapsible, ultrasonic transducer array is inside the airbag for ultrasonically assisted chemical/mechanical joining.
An electrochemical-mechanical-ultrasonically assisted, vacuum forming method for curing the battery layers to rigid and strong, conformal net shapes wherein the outer skin of the airbag, as well as the inside surface of the negative mold, having a conducting surface, are electrically charged. A process wherein the electrical charge serves to activate and cure the polyphthalocyanine based adhesives. A process wherein the battery is given first charge. A process wherein the electrical charge serves to initiate moderate cross-linking and polymerization of the UHMWPE, converting its gel form to a semi-rigid and stiff mechanical form, while not interfering with its electrolytic abilities.
An ultrasonically-assisted process wherein the ultrasonic array emits ultrasonic waves from the center of the negative mold outward, in a repeating pattern, to ensure no air bubbles are trapped between layers. A process wherein the ultrasonic waves enhance the physical and chemical joining of the layers.
A hook-and-loop type joining process, wherein the natural ‘fuzziness’ of carbon fiber and Kevlar® fibers assist the chemical joining of polyphthalocyanine adhesive by ensuring the interlayer mechanical shear strength integrity of multiply-stacked battery cell layers.
A method for ‘finishing’ a serially stacked battery.
wherein a software-driven, intelligent battery charge and discharge current controller is integrated into the surface of the battery.
A method of finishing the battery wherein exposed edges are hermetically sealed with hydrophobic, uv-resistant polymer or joined edge-to-edge in hydrophobic polymer.
A method of finishing the battery wherein battery to electric-bus connections are established. A method of connection wherein a copper bus-header is joined to the surfaces of the battery to conduct and direct in-plane battery charge to the positive and negative terminals of an electrical delivery bus.
A method for preparing hard-mount points for physical connection of motors, pumps, generators, and other ‘hard’ devices needing physical support. A method of making planned (prior to step 2) or unplanned ‘cut-outs’ and hermetically sealing their edges. A method for connecting ‘hard’ devices using UHMWPE bushings or long-life synthetic rubber grommets through said cutouts.
A method for coating both interior and exterior surfaces in uv-resistant polymer or colored paints.

A process of battery charging and conditioning wherein battery life and safety are maximized.
A software-based method wherein no single battery module, except a designated ‘fail-first’ module in a multi-module array, such as in a car body having more than one sub-assembly, shall never be fully discharged nor fully charged—preserving its life. A software based method wherein planned eventual failure is employed: one battery module, having been selected by computer as the weakest battery, is cycled more intensively and to a greater charge/discharge margin, such that its lifetime will terminate first, preventing the owner from having to replace more than one module at once at great expense. A method for ranking battery modules based on replacement cost and replacement difficulty, such that the fail-first module is never the most expensive/difficult to replace module but rather one of the cheaper/easier to replace modules. A method for notifying owner of the need to replace designated ‘fail-first’ module prior to actual failure, giving predicted date and time of end-of-life. A method wherein ‘fail-first’ battery is replaced before actual failure so that that module may be reused in a less demanding application (i.e. electric utility load leveling) to reduce the needs for waste processing or recycling. A method for designating the weakest battery in the array as the ‘fail-first’ battery after replacement. A software-based method which monitors and controls all aspects of the charge/discharge profile for maximizing lifetimes. A software-based user interface which determines user preferences: commute range, weekend use, price of local utility electricity, price of fuel for onboard generator—in order to determine optimal and most cost-effective charging of battery arrays.

It may be instructive to describe the proposed battery chemistry (which can be easily modified or improved under further development.) In attached figure 2, layer A. serves to join one layer to the next adhesively, while conducting electrons for serial voltage stacking. Layer B is carbon anode (graphite fabric sheet) surface processed on the side facing the electrolyte, such that the natural ‘fuzz’ is converted to carbon nano-rods, serving to aid in electron transport, extending battery life. Graphite cloth’s natural ‘fuzz’ on the other side (facing layer A) serves to aid in hook-and-loop assisted fastening, improving resistance to mechanical shear stresses. Layer C is an Ultra High Molecular Weight Poly Ethylene(UHMWPE) film in ‘gel’ form (no cross-linking and chemically a gel state.) Once cured, it will provide rigidity and lateral and longitudinal strength, as well as electrolytic functionality. Layer C is a spray deposited cathode sol-gel solution of CoO2 and MnO2 on the UHMWPE gel electrolyte, preventing flaking or cracking by integrating the cathode into rigid electrolyte. Layer E is a polyphthalocyanine/polyaramid (like Kevlar®) graft copolymer fabric which conducts electricity and provides good adhesion surface of high surface roughness to next laminate layer. Because carbon and aramid fabrics are both naturally quite ‘fuzzy’, wherein the fuzz is on the order of tens to hundreds of microns in length, these two surfaces add hook-and-loop mechanical shear stress and strain resistance to the interlayer adhesive of layer A.

A pictorial cartoon type description of the roll forming process to make raw battery material is shown in figure 3. It follows existing roll-forming processes, excepting its unique application of ultrasonically assisted physio-chemical joining. The resultant product of this stage of manufacture is a sonico-physically bonded battery cell which will charge to 3.9 volts later. Being less than 1 mm thick and having an electrolyte in gel form, it is still ‘drapable’ in fabrication industry terms. That is, it can conform to a mold shape without kinking or breaking.

Sold as bulk sheets or rolls, the Lithium-ion cells can then be shipped (sealed) to a final stage manufacturer to make net conformal shapes of any mobile product: cell phones, laptop computers, electric vehicle body, unmanned aerial vehicle, model airplanes, RC cars, wearable vest panels in bullet-resistant soldier’s jackets, etcetera.

At this stage of production, the battery cells will be unpacked, cut to correct shape/size and draped one atop the other (serially) a few layers at once into a negative mold using air bag and vacuum bag forming technology. The cell will be pressed by positive airbag pressure on the inside of the mold, and held to the mold with negative pressure by vacuum bagging. In this way, the cell will be under lateral and longitudinal tension in both x and y directions (pre-stressing the net shape for greater stiffness.)

A potential voltage or a gamma ray source will initiate moderate cross-linking polymerization of the UHMWPE electrolyte layer, but not enough to interfere with its electrolytic abilities. The applied voltage will serve to active the adhesive properties of polyphthalocyanine or other electrically activated and conducting resins which are commercially available now.

In this way more layers will be added sequentially until a final desired battery voltage capacity or thickness has been reached. A sonic transducer array inside the airbag aids in sonico-physio-chemical bonding.

Finally, as in the electric car example before, the net shapes of the body-in-white, doors, hoods, trunks, seats can be joined to an common electric distribution bus by copper or silver thin films (covered in separate patent.) Bus connects may be integrated into the surfaces of each battery in a multi-module array during the shaping/curing phase.

In addition, it may be possible to integrate the new flexible polymer photovoltaic solar cells now commercially available into the top surface of any device which may get significant sunlight to aid in trickle charging the battery.

Benefits unique to the design:
Extreme puncture resistance. UHMWPE and aramid layers both are currently marketed as ‘bullet proof’ jacket materials. Bullet or projectile resistant (degree depends on total thickness.)
Puncture fault tolerance, providing limp-home capability.
‘Fail-first’ concept and software-driven battery charge/conditioning minimizes catastrophic whole-system failure and minimizes cost by maximizing replacement interval. ‘Fail-first’ can isolate shorting, damaged, or punctured cells.
Software-driven charging algorithms maximize overall battery lifetime, reducing replacement cost and interval. Software-driven algorithms can be adaptive—they can change charging currents and priorities based on readings of battery assemblies, especially in the case of puncture or damage.
UHMWPE electrolyte prevents thermal runaway.
Exceptionally strong, light.
Replaces existing structural and battery mass, making its effective energy/power density many-fold more than that of any existing battery technology—recall that implementation of SEB design can reduce total vehicle weight by ~45% over best competing technology.
SEB design replaces more weight than it adds.


POSSIBLE APPLICATIONS (Optional)




Electric and hybrid electric vehicles, including military transport. Laptop computers, portable electronic devices: pda’s, Blackberry’s… Military light portable power (bullet resistant.) Military bullet-resistant wearable, powered vests or vest panels. Military unmanned aerial vehicles. Remote-controlled airplane and remote-control hobbyists. Any application where portability and weight/mass are dominating factors.

PRIOR ART (Optional)

UHMWPE-based gel polymer electrolyte developed by DOE funded CRADA at Amtek International of Lebanon, Oregon. PAN cloth treatment to yield graphite cloth anode developed at Sandia. Portions of web-press joining of lithium-ion polymer battery cells (not ultrasound) developed at PNNL. Entek International ©, parent company of Amtek (research division) has extensive experience in UHMWPE electrolyte and solution-sprayed cathode material—may be a good partner?

PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION (Optional)

Tackles the weight conundrum at its root and solves it, yielding entry into the virtuous circle. Does not suffer the need for heavy protective exterior packaging. UHMWPE electrolyte ensures thermal overload protection, melting at about 300 oC, it prevents fire or explosion. Battery charger/conditioner method designates a ‘fail-first’ module, keeping replacement costs minimal and at intervals, rather than having to replace all at once.

STATUS OF THE INVENTION (Optional)


ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS (Optional)


Hand-drawings (not shown here.)

VEGASTDI said:

So high density housing and condos in the city are the only way people should live???

Click to expand...

No, we should be able to chose the way we live, but pay the full and true costs of those lifestyles as to not burden those who have chosen more sustainable paths. There are huge costs to living in big cities that are paid for by the commons, which should also be reconsidered.

VEGASTDI said:

... I know you said it was a generalization..........again, I've never complained.

Click to expand...

Not saying you did.

VEGASTDI said:

... I can't re-locate every time the job makes me change locations.

Click to expand...

I understand, it`s that way for most people. Those, however, that have chosen a lifestyle which keeps work and everything needed close to home should not have to help fund the lifestyle of those who continue to believe in the never ending, all consuming, drive-thru sloburbian landscape.

VEGASTDI said:

... By not agreeing with Mr. Begly about EV's working for "only 90% of the people" seems to have gotten me into hot water with some of the liberal views here..............I should have known better.

Click to expand...

I think Begly has his head in the clouds. No way 90%. Whatever it is, it`s only getting worse as we go down this path of growth. Even if it was 10%, that`s such a huge market, and a big chunk out of our dependence! Electric vehicles should and will be a part of our transportation system because it makes sense in so many situations.... and our options are few.
The vehicle made to order here would be a diesel/hybrid plug-in. Charge the batteries on home or regionally based renewables and/or off peak grid. Drive until the batts get low then go the rest of the way on locally grown/produced biofuels. This is a senario that is quite possible and would transition with the least disruption. It still would be difficult, especially in the present social/political climate. But nothing looks more promising IMHO.
Those who chose live/work lifestyles that can be sustained within their own means, or as close as they can to it, should not be burdened by those who chose to act like there is no tomorrow, or no past.

RC said:

No, we should be able to chose the way we live, but pay the full and true costs of those lifestyles as to not burden those who have chosen more sustainable paths. There are huge costs to living in big cities that are paid for by the commons, which should also be reconsidered.

Not saying you did.

I understand, it`s that way for most people. Those, however, that have chosen a lifestyle which keeps work and everything needed close to home should not have to help fund the lifestyle of those who continue to believe in the never ending, all consuming, drive-thru sloburbian landscape.

I think Begly has his head in the clouds. No way 90%. Whatever it is, it`s only getting worse as we go down this path of growth. Even if it was 10%, that`s such a huge market, and a big chunk out of our dependence! Electric vehicles should and will be a part of our transportation system because it makes sense in so many situations.... and our options are few.
The vehicle made to order here would be a diesel/hybrid plug-in. Charge the batteries on home or regionally based renewables and/or off peak grid. Drive until the batts get low then go the rest of the way on locally grown/produced biofuels. This is a senario that is quite possible and would transition with the least disruption. It still would be difficult, especially in the present social/political climate. But nothing looks more promising IMHO.
Those who chose live/work lifestyles that can be sustained within their own means, or as close as they can to it, should not be burdened by those who chose to act like there is no tomorrow, or no past.

Click to expand...

I did sign out but I have to come back and thank you for the civil reply.


We obviously will never agree on the city mouse/country mouse scenarios but I see and respect the other views.

I've also come to the realization that with TDI ownership, I'm in a different political/eco/social thinking world than I'm accustomed to.

The bottom line, for me at least, concerning this thread was that I strongly dispute the government and oil company coverups that are being blamed for the demise of a product that just wasn't ready for mainstream......YET!!

Your take on a suitable car makes perfect sense........also agree that EV's and any alternative fuel will be a significant factor in the future.


Looking forward to picking up my M/B 300 and running it on WVO....may be for different reasons than some of the folks here.........but in the end it should accomplish a common goal; less dependence on crude.


Regards.

VEGASTDI said:

I've also come to the realization that with TDI ownership, I'm in a different political/eco/social thinking world than I'm accustomed to.

Your take on a suitable car makes perfect sense........also agree that EV's and any alternative fuel will be a significant factor in the future.

Looking forward to picking up my M/B 300 and running it on WVO....may be for different reasons than some of the folks here.........but in the end it should accomplish a common goal; less dependence on crude.

Click to expand...

I know you weren't talking to me, but you also deserve lots of credit for being open minded enough to consider and explore evidence that challenges your world view, even if it may be uncomfortable to do so.

I think you'll discover that TDI'ers of all ends of the political spectrum are a bit more independent minded (and reflective?) that the average bear. We have to be, or we would have never purchased a diesel vehicle in the first place - after all everyone "knows" they are "slow, dirty and loud." On top of that, TDIcluber's are an even more select subgroup - who else would waste hours upon hours reading and writing posts for an audience we'll almost certainly never meet in person. I mean, hey, we could spend that time drinkin' a bud and watching NASCAR instead...

If you want to drive a WVO car on a 100 mile commute and I want to live in a city close to work, we've both succeeded in reducing our petrochemical footprints. That's fantastic! We've each made individual choices that meet our own personal needs, desires, and circumstances - and we've done it consciously.

Good luck with your MB300 - old school IDI greasers, BD TDI'rs, new urbanists, mass transit aficionados and yes, even those silly hybrid drivers, are all brothers in arms toward a goal of reducing our use of fossil fuels. Whether your motivation is national security or the environment, we're all under one big tent. And the first step to getting people to come into our tent is to convince them there is a problem with the status quo that pretends we can just go on importing huge amounts of energy and filling up our cars business as usual...

Thank you, Doc.