The Oil Drum | Electric Commercial Vehicles

100 comments on Electric Commercial Vehicles

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Grautr on April 9, 2009 - 11:29am

If the entire commercial transport system was to go electric ( I realize we dont have to go 100% electric but its hypothetical) then what sort of strains would that put on the grid?

Would this mean, for example, a doubling of existing coal and nuclear plants?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

iwylie on April 9, 2009 - 12:35pm

Gautr,

I believe that most North American electricity grids have some spare capacity (about 7TW total in the US) during the day but as much as 30% spare capacity at night. Most battery charging can and should take place during the night when other demands are low. Many power stations are much better suited to continuous (or near continuous) power outputs with long lag times between changes in the load requirements and the ability of the power station to supply it. This is particularly true for Nuclear power plants. The "peaking power plants", which are so popular these days often use natural gas power turbines (e.g. GE) which can adjust their output within minutes instead of hours or days but with high CAPEX expense.

I believe that if you take the current 7TW output of the US grid, multiply by 30% that you more than provide enough power for a 100% conversion of the car (and truck) fleet to electric IF the charging is down at off-peak times (the majority). The problem is not the availability of electricity. It is the availability of capital (and energy) to build all of the cars and trucks to replace the existing infrastructure. Do a calculation of how much money and energy it would to replace the entire car fleet and you will see that it is a huge investment. Even with a 100% replacement of the existing car fleet at their normal end-of-life point and it takes a huge commitment and about 17 years to convert the fleet. That is a long time when Peak Oil is probably already upon us. Changing behaviors and attitudes is even tougher. We have a tough time ahead. I hope that most of your readers have a good back-yard garden planned for this summer!

Ian

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Neil1947 on April 9, 2009 - 4:34pm

By my calculations that's 0.7TW surplus to peak capacity(700GW), but not all of that is really available at off-peak times, 440GW is from natural gas, that is kept mainly for peak demand, and 70GW is hydro. If they were used as well in off=peak periods would not have enough NG or water. Until wind power becomes a larger part of energy, only coal could expand to supply off=peak( about 90GW surplus); that's still a lot of vehicles(90Million) that could be charged.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Grautr on April 10, 2009 - 5:33am

I read an artical recently about an electric battery that charges almost instantaneously. This was proposed as a big leap for the production of electric vehicles but if spare capacity is greater during the night then should the slow charging batteries stay?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Neil1947 on April 10, 2009 - 6:14am

Off-peak rates are lower than peak rates, most people don't drive around at night, but do in the day, so night charging makes sense, but if you are on a long trip it would be nice to be able to re-charge every hour or so, while having a coffee or burger. One to 2 minutes is fast enough, but 15 mins would be OK for a trip if your range was 2-3 hours driving.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Paleocon on April 10, 2009 - 8:36am

I think for long-distance travel battery size should be calibrated to match bladder size. :)

For a family truckster vacation, 15min downtime every 2-3 hours would be fine. I can't imagine having to stop every hour for that long though. For a frequent business traveler, a stop every 4 hours is probably the minimum. I know on a "good" trip I make one stop for gas and food on a 9.5 hour drive, quite routinely.

This isn't to say that memes can't change, but for easy step-in the new solution shouldn't be too painful. Better rail would probably be a better long-term solution -- until then, I think I'd rather rent a gas vehicle and pay the price for longer trips, and leave the EV at home.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

dwcal on April 9, 2009 - 1:33pm

Electric trucks and buses aren't suited to long haul routes. Do you mean electrified rail for long haul and electric trucks for local deliveries?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

AlanfromBigEasy on April 9, 2009 - 6:47pm

Inter-city freight, taken entirely by electric rail (about 4x to 5x as efficient as electric trucks, not counting battery weight on trucks), would take less than 3% of current US electricity.

Alan

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Engineer-Poet on April 9, 2009 - 11:42pm

Some years ago, I calculated that a total replacement of petroleum transport fuel would require a 40% increase in US electric generation at worst. Given that the typical efficiency of light-duty vehicles is considerably less than 20% and electrification of freight via railroads and e.g. Bladerunner trucks would have substantial cuts in energy demand, we might be talking 30% or even less.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.