<A Nice Counterexample The Oil Drum Weekend Open Thread...>

69 comments on Urban Survival: The GOM Situation

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

step back on October 2, 2005 - 8:14pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
There is no need for recharging only overnight if we use swappable battery packs. You pull into an "energy" station and they swap out the depleted battery pack while swapping in a newly charged pack. The whole operation should take less than 3 minutes.

The internet could be used to broadcast to everyone in real time, when and how much recharge load the grid can handle. Electricity prices vary based on this info.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Engineer-Poet on October 2, 2005 - 11:29pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Swappable battery packs mean not just a radical redesign of vehicles, but an infrastructure investment on the order of hydrogen-fuel stations.  This isn't going to happen fast enough to help, if it happens at all.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on October 3, 2005 - 6:46am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Swappable fuel-cells or other such energy-storage modules is going to have to happen with hydrogen anyway. No one is going to be pumping liquified hydrogen through a hose and nozzle. Imagine the cryogenic burn you get if you spill some on your hand. Ouch.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Magnus Redin on October 3, 2005 - 7:58am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Why use hydrogen as fuel with a completely new infrastructure when it easily can be uses in the current refineries to upgrade crude and thus distribute the energy content within the current infrastructure?

I guess that the best hydrogen distribution method when oil get realy expensive is as synthetic methane. And then you reuse the natural gas infrastructure for distribution.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Engineer-Poet on October 3, 2005 - 10:31am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
The problems with synthetic methane are two:  efficiency of use and the carbon.  Methane is no easier to use efficiently than gasoline (compared to e.g. zinc, which is usable at about 62% efficiency in Zn-air fuel cells) and you've got to obtain the carbon somewhere.  Fossil carbon will eventually run short, and renewable carbon isn't available from conventional sources isn't available in the quantities required.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Anonymoose on October 3, 2005 - 11:03am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
If battery manufacturers formed a consortium to define an ISO standardized form factor and operating specs for these swappable batteries then auto makers could make receptacles built in for them. Existing autos could have the receptacles retrofitted into the trunk. The receptacles would probably have to be tailored to each vehicles power requirements and would convert (if neccessary) the battery output into whatever format the car needs. New cars of course could be made to run directly off the batteries. As far as infrastructure goes, you only need as many gas-station-battery-swap-booths as required for the number of swappable-battery-cars in the area.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on October 3, 2005 - 12:54pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I was thinking more in terms of a swappable battery pack that is part of a GM-like, modular under-carriage structure. You want the batteries to be low-hanging so as to keep the center of gravity close to the ground. This reduces chance of roll over.

You would drive into an open-trench service station similar to those fast lube job shops. They swap the battery from underneath without having to jack the car up. Maybe they can lube your hybrid car's gas engine at the same time if the car has a fossil fuel burning, booster engine.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
mw on October 3, 2005 - 1:05pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Why all the talk about batteries, fuel, etc... and no talk about human powered vehicles?

That's the biggest bang for your buck of all... there must be, all over North America, a huge - massive - number of people that could trade some, or all, of their fossile-fueled transportation for human powered transport.

Too little mind-effort is spent on high tech solutions. Three wheeled bikes with comfy seats, high tech generators (for lights) and cargo carrying capability (on board or via trailers) could easily be mass produced at much lower cost... and given away... and would be far more effective in reducing overall fossil fuel energy use than any other initiative I can think of, other than a mass die off thanks to some new flu virus.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
mw on October 3, 2005 - 1:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I sure wish I used the preview feature more. I meant of course "too little effort is spent on LOW TECH solutions"...
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Anonymoose on October 3, 2005 - 4:43pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
While i really like the idea of people powered transport, i can only see it being viable for short range, or flat land trips, in weather that is warm enough.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.

69 comments on Urban Survival: The GOM Situation

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version