[Swappable cars]

[JCoyote]

Automated car washes were not essential, and would be used infrequently. You always had the option to simply not bother waiting in line for it if there was any wait.

Missing the point. They were large, expensive, robotic machines that somehow became ubiquitous in only a few years at the majority of service stations in the country. A similar infrastructure just happened, without any sort of mandates or subsidies. The fact that they were non-essential and spread like wildfire does more to prove the potential for an essential system than disprove it. If finding a swap station was the same difficulty as finding an automated car wash, you would hear very few complaints about availability.

But most importantly--just one isolated automated car wash was a useful thing.

They weren't isolated. In 1980 they were hard to find, by 1990 every other corner had one.

To do what you were proposing would severely compromise the range and efficiency of the car. Batteries flat enough to slide underneath a car would require significant compromises for the reasons I stated.

The Better Place designs are very close to what I described. The palate jack description was not intended as the precise tool used, and it didn't necessarily exclude having the car up off the ground a bit. A roll up area and a palate-jack type tool are all that would be required to pull one of those batteries by hand. IF you doubt you could move that weight on something like a palate jack you've probably never used one. I was demonstrating that providing even rudimentary battery swap service without a robot was possible for smaller stations. And it would be even with what was shown if proper clamping was there. I did NOT mean someone changing their battery if they were stuck on the side of the road, I meant if convenient full charges were not available people will push their charge... and when situations like weather changes rapidly that margin they are pushing against changes too. I have seen the temperature both drop and rise 40 degrees in 40 minutes where I live. I've gone to work on a clear warm day and dug my car out of a foot of snow to get home... was pretty hard on my fuel supply doing all the rolling to get out so I fueled up on the way. Some people wouldn't sit around and charge an hour they'd risk it instead.

The entire spare cars already exist. There are millions of cars that already exist. We don't need to be throwing them away overnight.

But we DO need to abandon their fuel supply ASAP because there are more efficient uses for petroleum.

We can phase out usage.

The only way to phase out usage of anything is to provide a fully featured alternative ASAP. Otherwise the process tends to halt. And so far it is a process that is barely above stagnation.

By making this service easy and reasonable, people can start using electrics as primary vehicles right away--not after waiting for some massive infrastructure. Gasoline cars would still exist, but they would account for a lower number of miles driven.

Nothing prevents the adoption of an electric car now and simply renting occasionally while hoping to get a change station in town. Soon.

You are proposing a set of half-measures that will leave using a new technology a hassle, and a general rule when a new technology is a hassle, IT IS NOT ADOPTED. Abandoning the development of infrastructure that allows the same flexibility of current gasoline vehicles in an electric is suicide for the broad adoption of electric vehicles. In many areas it will leave them in a niche market. Like mine. If the development of the infrastructure is delayed until whenever, it usually ends up delayed perpetually.

This is not like hydrogen. Adjustments for new battery technologies in systems like this will be easy, it can literally be a electronics cartridge plugged into a current charger to allow it to understand and properly charge new battery chemistries. The handling past the battery factories is dry flatbed storage and transport... ultimately battery swap stations are a replacement for gasoline, and can mean comparable or even reduced infrastructure than is currently supported when all the fluid handling and periodically replaced underground tanks are included. The handling of an occasional leaking battery is nothing compared to ground seepage from all the gas stations out there right now.

And at the end of the day, we can burn any fuel we want, because we don't burn it in the car.

[HenrikOlsen]

Except there are already millions of swappable cars out there already, and the infrastructure already exists. There's an entire car rental industry which already exists.

And none of those millions of cars are relevant as they aren't electric. They could just as well be non-existing.

You're somehow trying to argue that renting a single car for the whole trip and refilling it as needed is the same as swapping cars every 50 miles, after which each is unavailable for use for several hours as the battery is charged, which is what swappable cars mean in this context.

One 1000 mile round trip in swappable cars requires 20 cars that are all going to be out of use for several hours before they're recharged. Now including the hassle of moving your baggage to the new car each time and remembering everything each time.

[NEOWatcher]

You seem to think that swapping cars is a distinct idea from on demand short term car rental, but it actually isn't. I explicitly give the example of on demand short term car rental as an implementation of swapping cars instead of swapping batteries.
I give the example of renting from other individual car owners as another way to implement swapping cars.

Ah; that explains our disconnect. I tied that discussion in with the entire idea. Like I said before, I think being run as a rental agency can be done.
I still think it would be a bit more hassle for the individual, and not much difference with the rental agency. (see below). I see both ideas being beneficial, but for the electric car owner, I think there would be a bigger market for the battery swap instead of leaving the car at home and renting one for longer trips.


So; let me recap all my thoughts and trade-offs on this instead of this point to point bantering that I think is clouding the big picture of what I consider to be important.

Personal car lending:
Good:
- Urban areas where people don't normally do a lot of driving as a car sharing type of arrangement.
Not Good:
- Longer trips outside of the car's range without time for recharge.
- In a swap arrangement, the return trip will introduce problems.
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Legal issues, scheduling and possible logistics problems.

Gas rental:
Good:
- for anyone with an electric car on a long trip to avoid the hassles of...
- - Stopping often.
- - Finding a swap location and possibly needing to go off route to find one.
- - Time to swap (whatever hassles there are with property, or the business recording the swap)
Bad:
- Fossil fuels.
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Trade-offs between different types of cost. Electricity + swapping vs Gas and one time business contact.

Electric rental:
Good:
- Eliminate Fossil fuels.
Bad:
- Stopping often with time to swap. Some people won't mind this. Personally, I like to try to get at least 3 or 4 hours in at a time (My last trip was 700 miles with a total of a half hour for stops)
- Finding a swap location and possibly needing to go off route to find one.
- Cleaning and servicing the vehicle between users. (Same as gas rentals, but would be a lot more often)
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Currently, rental places are generally near airports and major commercial areas. This would need to expand.

Battery Swap:
Good:
- Useful for any type of electric driving. Most notably, those that are driving just beyond a car's range (no need to hassle with rentals for short trips)
Bad:
- Finding a swap location and possibly needing to go off route to find one until it is adopted (gas had the same problem).
- May limit the number of designs that allow for this.
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Needs to be accepted and developed nationwide just like having rental agencies in strategic locations.

From what I can tell, it think the last one is where we have the biggest disagreement. Why do I consider battery swap only a consideration rather than a bad point?
What I was picturing is a lot less complicated than the Drive-Switch-Go because you don't have to move the batteries around.
Basically, instead of a large facility with deep bays and fancy robots, it would just be a series of specialized parking spots.
Each spot has the mechanics to lift/drop one battery and slide over enough to lift/drop the other. The entire system can be just a raised platform enough to hold the lift and allow for ground clearance. The drawback is that you would need enough bays to allow for a bay being down while the replaced battery recharges. But; that would be a trade-off with the investment of a larger system.

(and I know it was discussed after your comment, but my two cents...)

This means the batteries must be large and flat to fit underneath the car, and that they must be supported from above essentially outside the structural body of the car. There are a lot of design compromises here.

Yes; there are design compromises, but take a look at how the Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Volt hold thier battery packs. It seems to me that designs such as those would be a simple conversion to a drop out design. The Leaf is already large and flat and at the bottom of the car. The Volt is in the central "tunnel".

[djellison]

Gas rental:
....
Bad:
- Fossil fuels.

....
Electric rental:
Good:
- Eliminate Fossil fuels.

You know where most of the electricity in the USA comes from, right? About 3/4s of it comes from burning fossil fuels.

One questions about battery swopping ideas. Let's assume this is something done at a gas station.
What about the power requirements.....how many cars fill up in a gas-station per day in cars that can do 250+ between fill ups? I see at least two or three cars in a gas station every time I'm in one around here. I'm there for 5 minutes say, that's 42 fill ups per hour, of a 250 miles range at (for me) 70mph+.

Let's be kind to the cutting edge of electric cars like the Tesla and assume it, also, can do 250 miles. (it can't at 70mph).

That facility has to now charge 42 battery packs per hour. Even with the 'high power connector (70A/220V)' it takes 3.5 hours to charge one. Thus you would have to have 150 packs on charge at any one time to keep up with the typical demand. (yes, I know, there are fewer people filling up at night and more people filling up at rush-hour when you can't even get to a pump - this is about averages) 150 Packs on charge, 70 Amps at 220 volts, is 2.3 megawatts of power required to keep up. Again - talking rough averages here - ball park estimates.

2.3 Megawatts. There's more than 100,000 gas stations in the USA.

Two problems thus arrise. Firstly - generating that much power. Secondly - the infrastructure to deliver it. These are serious, non trivial problems that need to be resolved if the idea of swop-out battery packs are to gain any traction at all.

It's also why I still think that the fuel cell car has far FAR more chance of gaining serious traction, because it works just like a car of today....and so does its infrastructure. The only challenge there is where you make the hydrogen and where you get the power to do it.

[IsaacKuo]

Missing the point. They were large, expensive, robotic machines that somehow became ubiquitous in only a few years at the majority of service stations in the country. A similar infrastructure just happened, without any sort of mandates or subsidies. The fact that they were non-essential and spread like wildfire does more to prove the potential for an essential system than disprove it. If finding a swap station was the same difficulty as finding an automated car wash, you would hear very few complaints about availability.

No, quite the opposite. Because they were not essential, there was no chicken-and-egg problem. The customers didn't have to wait for the car washers before they bought their cars, and so the gas station owners didn't have to wait for a nationwide infrastructure before making a profit.

The Better Place designs are very close to what I described. The palate jack description was not intended as the precise tool used, and it didn't necessarily exclude having the car up off the ground a bit. A roll up area and a palate-jack type tool are all that would be required to pull one of those batteries by hand. IF you doubt you could move that weight on something like a palate jack you've probably never used one. I was demonstrating that providing even rudimentary battery swap service without a robot was possible for smaller stations.

I don't see this possibility as relevant in practice. Automated car wash machines exist in many gas stations because they make a profit. In contrast, gas stations don't offer human car wash services despite the fact that it's entirely possible and requires practically no infrastructure investment. The bottom line is that the labor costs are too high to make it profitable for gas station owners. The robot wins the financial argument despite the higher initial costs.

You're describing a battery swap service with a roll up area and a heavy tool, which obviously involves greater infrastructure investment than human car wash services. And it requires somewhat skilled labor. I would think that the robot would close the financial argument every time.

Now, the financial argument is radically different if it could be self service. But I think that by the time you design the operations to be safe and secure, you end up with a system that might as well be the robot.

I did NOT mean someone changing their battery if they were stuck on the side of the road, I meant if convenient full charges were not available people will push their charge... [...] Some people wouldn't sit around and charge an hour they'd risk it instead.

Ah, I see. Sorry for misunderstanding.

I guess I just see both swapping cars and swapping batteries as able to solve this issue. You would be less likely to try and push the limits if you had a cheap and convenient alternative. This could be short term on demand car rental, or it could be a battery swap (assuming there is a dense enough infrastructure of battery swap stations in place).

But we DO need to abandon their fuel supply ASAP because there are more efficient uses for petroleum.

I disagree. Petroleum is well matched to transportation use. Other uses tend to have more efficient alternatives, which is why they use those alternatives (like natural gas or coal).

And I don't see ASAP electric conversion as such a good environmental win since ASAP conversion would require massively ramping up dirty coal plant production. I prefer a more gradual transition, so it can take place concurrently with a gradual transition to greener electrical power technologies.

In contrast, ramping up biodiesel could offer direct environmental benefits. (And this would actually free up more petroleum for cars, rather than increase pressure to reduce gasoline car use ASAP.)

The only way to phase out usage of anything is to provide a fully featured alternative ASAP. Otherwise the process tends to halt. And so far it is a process that is barely above stagnation.

I disagree. The transition to hybrids is already taking place. I see the popularization of plugin hybrids as almost an inevitability within the next decade. But even plugin hybrids would involve a terrible strain to the grid if we try to force the transition too quickly.

The key which has been holding back plugin hybrids and electrics has been the cost and performance limitations of the batteries. It took a couple unrelated consumer products--the laptop and the cell phone--to ramp up the R&D cycle to produce the needed battery technology improvements. As I see it, we're already over the hump. We now have a positive feedback loop where marginal investment in improved battery technology pays off almost immediately in marginal profits from mass market consumer product demand.

Nothing prevents the adoption of an electric car now and simply renting occasionally while hoping to get a change station in town. Soon.

Car rental is currently a hassle. I'm suggesting an improvement on it which would make it easier, more convenient, and cheaper.

You are proposing a set of half-measures that will leave using a new technology a hassle, and a general rule when a new technology is a hassle, IT IS NOT ADOPTED. Abandoning the development of infrastructure that allows the same flexibility of current gasoline vehicles in an electric is suicide for the broad adoption of electric vehicles. In many areas it will leave them in a niche market. Like mine. If the development of the infrastructure is delayed until whenever, it usually ends up delayed perpetually.

The reality is that plugin hybrids and electrics are being adopted. I see the current and near term adoption rates as acceptable, and I actually don't want to see a sudden transition ASAP.

Obviously, you disagree and feel we should make a full transition ASAP.

And at the end of the day, we can burn any fuel we want, because we don't burn it in the car.

In the short term, that fuel will be coal. Are you happy with that idea? I'm not. But I see plugin hybrids and electrics as something good in the long run. We won't be getting the bulk of our electricity from coal forever, and the combination of large numbers of plugins/electrics with smart grid technology can help spur renewable energy. In particular, large numbers of plugins/electrics connected to a smart grid can act as load leveling electricity storage. This can make solar and wind more practical.

So, even if a plugin or electric is something of a wash right now, each one is a small step toward a more promising future.

[NEOWatcher]

You know where most of the electricity in the USA comes from, right? About 3/4s of it comes from burning fossil fuels.

Yep; but we also need to consider the future. As we phase in electric cars and such we phase out fossil sources for electrical generation. I think we will see the market determine how fast this transition takes place.

One questions about battery swopping ideas. Let's assume this is something done at a gas station.
What about the power requirements.....how many cars fill up in a gas-station per day in cars that can do 250+ between fill ups? I see at least two or three cars in a gas station every time I'm in one around here. I'm there for 5 minutes say, that's 42 fill ups per hour, of a 250 miles range at (for me) 70mph+.

It's not a matter of how far they can go on a fill up. It's a matter of how far they can go in a day. I just wonder how many of those fillups are people who don't need more than 50 to 100 miles in one day.
We may have similar issues with charging stations and power requirements.
But; I share your concern. In my situation, anything under 50 to 100 miles per day would be a big hassle on seldom(but often enough to be concerned) occasions. I normally do between 20 and 30 miles a day, but there are at least once or twice a week I go more than 70.
I'm just thinking of options for those that don't have that kind of situation.
Right now; I am a fan of chargable hybrids (like the Volt), but they are just too expensive at this time.

Eventually; we will find a more convenient, easily replenishable, or bigger capacity alternative. (yes; fuel cells among them)

[JCoyote]

You would likely see a net reduction in demand at swap stations in contrast with traditional service stations simply because of the less expensive option of plugging in when you get home. Swap stations would center around freeways (at least initially) as they are a boost to longer distance travel, and most people who do significant driving distances spend some of it on freeways.

[djellison]

Yep; but we also need to consider the future. As we phase in electric cars and such we phase out fossil sources for electrical generation. I think we will see the market determine how fast this transition takes place.

Right now though, it's going backwards. An ever increasing %'ge of our electricity comes from burning things.

You would likely see a net reduction in demand at swap stations in contrast with traditional service stations simply because of the less expensive option of plugging in when you get home. Swap stations would center around freeways (at least initially) as they are a boost to longer distance travel, and most people who do significant driving distances spend some of it on freeways.

BUT - that total electricity demand will still exist. I centralized it at the 'gas' station to make the maths easier. People are still going to need that much energy, total, regardless where they get it. If everyone was charging their car at night, the grid would melt down. Indeed, it doesn't matter where they get that electricity - home, swop out batterie s- the requirement would still be there and neither the grid nor the generation are equipped to handle it. Rolling browouts would be regular day to day events, especially somewhere like SoCal.

[IsaacKuo]

So; let me recap all my thoughts and trade-offs
[...]
Personal car lending:
Good:
- Urban areas where people don't normally do a lot of driving as a car sharing type of arrangement.
Not Good:
- Longer trips outside of the car's range without time for recharge.
- In a swap arrangement, the return trip will introduce problems.
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Legal issues, scheduling and possible logistics problems.

Gas rental:
Good:
- for anyone with an electric car on a long trip to avoid the hassles of...
- - Stopping often.
- - Finding a swap location and possibly needing to go off route to find one.
- - Time to swap (whatever hassles there are with property, or the business recording the swap)
Bad:
- Fossil fuels.
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Trade-offs between different types of cost. Electricity + swapping vs Gas and one time business contact.

Electric rental:
Good:
- Eliminate Fossil fuels.
Bad:
- Stopping often with time to swap. Some people won't mind this. Personally, I like to try to get at least 3 or 4 hours in at a time (My last trip was 700 miles with a total of a half hour for stops)
- Finding a swap location and possibly needing to go off route to find one.
- Cleaning and servicing the vehicle between users. (Same as gas rentals, but would be a lot more often)
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Currently, rental places are generally near airports and major commercial areas. This would need to expand.

Yes, I basically agree with most of the above. I share djellison's concerns about fossil fuel use in the short term--but I agree that it can help lead to elimination of fossil fuels in the long term.

Battery Swap:
Good:
- Useful for any type of electric driving. Most notably, those that are driving just beyond a car's range (no need to hassle with rentals for short trips)
Bad:
- Finding a swap location and possibly needing to go off route to find one until it is adopted (gas had the same problem).
- May limit the number of designs that allow for this.
Ambivalence or other things to consider:
- Needs to be accepted and developed nationwide just like having rental agencies in strategic locations.

I essentially agree with the above, but I'll note one other important alternative--the plugin hybrid. I see plugin hybrids as the ideal near term solution to the problem of driving just beyond a battery's range.

From what I can tell, it think the last one is where we have the biggest disagreement. Why do I consider battery swap only a consideration rather than a bad point?
What I was picturing is a lot less complicated than the Drive-Switch-Go because you don't have to move the batteries around.
Basically, instead of a large facility with deep bays and fancy robots, it would just be a series of specialized parking spots.
Each spot has the mechanics to lift/drop one battery and slide over enough to lift/drop the other. The entire system can be just a raised platform enough to hold the lift and allow for ground clearance. The drawback is that you would need enough bays to allow for a bay being down while the replaced battery recharges. But; that would be a trade-off with the investment of a larger system.

If I understand your proposed battery swap bay properly, each bay would only be able to service one vehicle every few hours (depending on the charge time). I find it hard to imagine that this will be competitive with the Drive-Switch-Go system.

That said, my feeling is that there may be something similar which will solve the problems. Or maybe some solution which isn't similar but gets the desired results. Something that's self-service and mechanically simple. Something that doesn't involve raised platforms and maybe even avoids vertical motion.

Yes; there are design compromises, but take a look at how the Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Volt hold thier battery packs. It seems to me that designs such as those would be a simple conversion to a drop out design. The Leaf is already large and flat and at the bottom of the car. The Volt is in the central "tunnel".

The Volt's T shaped battery pack is high up within the cabin, and doesn't seem to lend itself to such a conversion. Too much structural compromise. But it doesn't need quick battery swaps--it has a gasoline engine for extended range.

The Nissan Leaf looks suitable. It looks like the battery mounting is already underneath the main structure. But I can't help but wonder if a slightly different design could be used to allow sideways battery replacement.

In the Nissan Leaf, the batteries seem to be situated entirely ahead of the rear tires. Rather than fit them into an upside-down well, they could be designed to slide in sideways into box tubes. Box tubes sandwiched between two structural floors would be sturdy and lightweight.

A robotic station could replace all of the cells at once using a hydraulic ram. Self service and even road service might be practical by replacing one cell at a time. The cells might not even be full width--each tube might house a number of cells. Either way, you replace cells by pushing new cells into the tube. This forces the spent cells out the other side.

[NEOWatcher]

I essentially agree with the above, but I'll note one other important alternative--the plugin hybrid. I see plugin hybrids as the ideal near term solution to the problem of driving just beyond a battery's range.

Yes; just as I had mentioned in my last post, along with flexible fuels, alternative power storage etc.

I would thank that right now (but maybe not in the future) would be a plug in hybrid with an engine that can run on a wide variety of fuels (isn't diesel a lot more flexible in that sense?)

If I understand your proposed battery swap bay properly, each bay would only be able to service one vehicle every few hours (depending on the charge time). I find it hard to imagine that this will be competitive with the Drive-Switch-Go system.

Yes, it is just a cheaper alternative idea, maybe for low volume stations. Maybe a sliding rack with more than 2 battery slots?
Just brainstorming here as an alternative. I just don't think it's going to be a high demand situation as other alternative drive systems come on board.
And; if you compare it to vehicle swap, it has the same issue because that swappable car would be out of service too.

Right now though, it's going backwards. An ever increasing %'ge of our electricity comes from burning things.
BUT - that total electricity demand will still exist. I centralized it at the 'gas' station to make the maths easier. People are still going to need that much energy, total, regardless where they get it. If everyone was charging their car at night, the grid would melt down. Indeed, it doesn't matter where they get that electricity - home, swop out batterie s- the requirement would still be there and neither the grid nor the generation are equipped to handle it. Rolling browouts would be regular day to day events, especially somewhere like SoCal.

Yep; the two situations go hand in hand. Our electricity demand is going up regardless of electric cars or not, and we are already seeing the problems. Unfortunately; to accomodate the increase, burning things is the fastest way to get on line (at least there are a large variety of burnable things with minimal conversion and distribution than there are with motor fuels).

There is no doubt that something needs to be done with the grid and the technologies feeding it. If we are doing it, let's do it with the ability for future demands that include things like electric cars.

[Gillianren]

Which takes less storage space, a rack of batteries or a rack of cars? Especially if you need to accommodate big car/small car/smoking/nonsmoking/kids/no kids. And take the time to clean every car, because you'd better believe that would be legally mandated pretty fast. If it isn't already. So that's probably a bigger investment in labour than just "some guy to switch the batteries."

[IsaacKuo]

Which takes less storage space, a rack of batteries or a rack of cars? Especially if you need to accommodate big car/small car/smoking/nonsmoking/kids/no kids. And take the time to clean every car, because you'd better believe that would be legally mandated pretty fast. If it isn't already. So that's probably a bigger investment in labour than just "some guy to switch the batteries."

There's no legal mandate to clean taxis, trains, or jetliners after every use.

Storage space may or may not be an issue. There already exists storage space suitable for current levels of demand for car rental services. Ramping up storage space could be as simple as clearing out fields--they don't even need to be paved or covered.

Also, I'm advocating gradual transitions rather than rapid transitions, so the increased service demand might be handled just fine without resorting to crude unpaved fields.

[NEOWatcher]

There's no legal mandate to clean taxis, trains, or jetliners after every use.

Mostly, no. New York taxis do: There's a $50 fine for unclean cabs.
They keep themselves policed pretty well and do work on anything that needs attention. So; I can believe this would happen with the swappable cars, but Gillian's point about needing someone to clean the cars still applies whether mandated or not.

ETA:
Another thing to point out. Taxis, trains, planes, buses and Rental cars are all inspected to some degree between uses.

[NEOWatcher]

There already exists storage space suitable for current levels of demand for car rental services. Ramping up storage space could be as simple as clearing out fields--they don't even need to be paved or covered.

But would need to be equipped with charging stations if you want a good throughput of inventory.

[Gillianren]

There's no legal mandate to clean taxis, trains, or jetliners after every use.

I can assure you that trains and jetliners get cleaned between uses. Taxis probably get cleaned on a regular basis. But that doesn't matter; look at the rules for rental cars, since that's the parallel you're drawing most of the time. No, they may not get sterilized, but they get cleaned. And since people eat in their cars, that's definitely a good thing. Spillage is a constant problem, especially if there are little kids involved.

Storage space may or may not be an issue. There already exists storage space suitable for current levels of demand for car rental services. Ramping up storage space could be as simple as clearing out fields--they don't even need to be paved or covered.

Great! What's the average price of real estate in Los Angeles? Or Manhattan? After all, if your idea is going to work, someone is going to have to start seriously buying a lot more cars, because the current number of rental cars is nowhere near large enough for your idea to work. We're not even talking doubling or tripling. We're probably talking a thousandfold. And people are going to have to find somewhere to put those millions of extra cars. So you also have to figure things like depreciation from cars' being in an uncovered field with no protection from the elements--and how would you charge them in that vacant lot?

Also, I'm advocating gradual transitions rather than rapid transitions, so the increased service demand might be handled just fine without resorting to crude unpaved fields.

The thing is, the idea you're proposing only works on a small scale, because the more you scale it up, the more problems become inherent.

[djellison]

There's no legal mandate to clean taxis, trains, or jetliners after every use.

I would certainly complain if I boarded a plane, train or taxi and found it to be dirty.

You would complain if there was a sticky coke spill on the parking brake, empty food wrappers in the spare seat and the door pockets were full of empty drink cans in the grand car-swop plan.

And, fwiw - I don't believe such a plan could ever work. Most people treat their cars like an extra room of the house. I certainly do. Sure - I'll rent a car when I've flown somewhere...but day to day, I want my car, full of my things, in my way. I want my 72hr emergency pack, my road maps, flashlight, LA National Forest pass, spare sunglasses, and the water, winch, first aid kit and other stuff I take when going on adventures etc etc. I want my iPod cable, the phone mount just where I like it, and my seat in place I like with the fan vents pointing just the right way, and the screen wash full of the wash I like. And I'm sure as heck not moving that stuff grom vehicle to vehicle as a solution to the unacceptably poor range of current battery powered electric cars.

Frankly - I don't even think I'd like battery swapping. Who knows what the state of the replacement is, is it as new and shiny as then one I had last time. Is it 100% as good as a 'new' one, or is it 75% as good. I can look after a battery if it's 'mine'. If it's one I'm just borrowing, who knows how much abuse it's had.

I think you highly underestimate the very personal nature of car ownership.

The current solution to those who wish to put less CO2 in the air per mile, is small diesel cars. I do not understand how or why car firms can get away with citing 30mpg as a great 'feature' of a car in the USA, whilst double that is available on conventionally fueled vehicles already. Even a 44mpg Prius is shamed by the 71mpg of the http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...sel-quick-spin VW Polo diesel. Hell - the Golf and Passat turbo-diesels get 50-60 mpg. I am utterly convinced that they are better solutions, environmentally, to personal mobility than battery electric cars right now. They are a compromise too far, and the battery tech is very nasty, environmentally.

Swapping cars, or just batteries, is an environmental no-no imho. You would need 'more' of each than is strictly necessary, as you need to have a stockpile at any location. Thus, you're building more cars (massive environmental impact) or more battery packs (even larger environmental impact)

Until we have personal mobility solved in a way that is at least as good as the current traditional car in terms of affordability, range, practicality and so on, it simply will not take on mass appeal.

For a bit of context and grounding to the entire issue, to understand just how far away from mass acceptability something like the Leaf is, to see just how little America cares.....consider this. For every Leaf sold in the US in 2010, Toyota sold about 10 Prii, and Ford sold 30 F150 pickup trucks.

[Van Rijn]

The current solution to those who wish to put less CO2 in the air per mile, is small diesel cars. I do not understand how or why car firms can get away with citing 30mpg as a great 'feature' of a car in the USA, whilst double that is available on conventionally fueled vehicles already. Even a 44mpg Prius is shamed by the 71mpg of the http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...sel-quick-spin VW Polo diesel. Hell - the Golf and Passat turbo-diesels get 50-60 mpg.

Diesel has a higher energy content, so it automatically has an advantage over gasoline. There aren't many auto diesels being sold in the U.S. these days because the specifics of the air pollution laws makes it difficult (California based standards especially). Also, I don't know how the safety standards compare, but I do know that there were lighter '80s U.S. cars that got good milage but couldn't be sold new today because they wouldn't meet current safety standards. So I'd be suspicious of any comparison of vehicles designed for different regulations.

Until we have personal mobility solved in a way that is at least as good as the current traditional car in terms of affordability, range, practicality and so on, it simply will not take on mass appeal.

I agree. Personally, I'd consider a plug-in hybrid, but not a pure electric. But with their added cost and complexity, their own resource issues (lithium production, for instance) it isn't clear they will ever have a real advantage over conventional vehicles.

[LotusExcelle]

Can I offer an opinion about batteries in general? Worst possible solution period. Hydrogen is - absolutely - the only possible solution to oil that does *not* require a complete rewrite of driving habits and social driving structure.

[djellison]

+1 Mr Lotus. +1 indeed.

[IsaacKuo]

People, the issue of cleaning is not magically different for car rental and car ownership. Do you clean your car after every use? No, but you do clean it if necessary. The same thing for a rented car. The amount of cleaning required, and the amount of labor involved, is fundamentally similar.

Do you personally turn into a disgusting slob when you are in someone else's car, or a taxi, or a rented car? I'll bet not. It's the same with other people.

Can I offer an opinion about batteries in general? Worst possible solution period. Hydrogen is - absolutely - the only possible solution to oil that does *not* require a complete rewrite of driving habits and social driving structure.

No, it's certainly not the only possible solution which matches those parameters. Biofuels are another possibility, and many of them can even use existing vehicles and existing infrastructure. Depending on the exact biofuel technology, it could be grown in currently unproductive areas, like deserts or deep oceans.

There are also other synthetic energy carriers, such as methanol or aluminum.

Also, short range energy storage is a possible solution which matches your parameters, if combined with rapid and/or wireless power transfer. Electric vehicles wouldn't need long range batteries if roads are integrated with induction loops.

Even compressed air might be viable since they could be cheap and very rapidly refilled. Robotic refills could take place in seconds while stopped at an intersection, or by briefly driving alongside a refilling truck. The refilling truck needs to periodically stop to refill, but it allows highway drivers to drive long distances without stopping. (If no refilling truck is available, there's still the fallback option of sidetracking to the offramps to refill while stopped at the intersection.)

In short, there are many possible solutions.

[Gillianren]

People, the issue of cleaning is not magically different for car rental and car ownership. Do you clean your car after every use? No, but you do clean it if necessary. The same thing for a rented car. The amount of cleaning required, and the amount of labor involved, is fundamentally similar.

Not really. I know what mess I've made in my own car. I don't know what mess someone else has made in a rental car. Therefore, I expect a certain amount of cleaning just as a courtesy between uses. What's more, accidents happen even if you aren't a slob, and there has to be someone available to take care of that problem. Anything shared requires more cleaning, because different people are, if nothing else, exposed to different bacteria. What if the person who used that headrest before you had lice? You don't know that; you can't know that.

Here's another thought no one has mentioned. I was helping a friend start the process of shopping for her expected child the other day, and we were discussing car seats. She isn't going to get one of the ones you take out and carry around, because a high percentage of car seats aren't properly installed. She plans to get it inspected, make sure it's in correctly, and leave it there. And in our jurisdiction, children are legally required to be in some form of booster seat until they are eight or four foot nine, whichever comes first. By requiring people to swap cars if their battery runs out, you require them to move the child seat. This means that many more opportunities for an incorrectly installed car seat.

[Van Rijn]

Can I offer an opinion about batteries in general? Worst possible solution period. Hydrogen is - absolutely - the only possible solution to oil that does *not* require a complete rewrite of driving habits and social driving structure.

I liked the hydrogen economy idea at one time, but that has pretty serious problems too (among other things, hydrogen is a low density fuel and likes to leak). A sort of follow-on idea is the methanol economy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol_economy

and it turns out it isn't that much harder to make methanol than hydrogen. For that matter, if you have methanol you can make gasoline. My own hunch is that there will need to be some major technology change before we get away from conventional IC engines and more or less conventional liquid fuels. For air travel, bulky and hard to handle fuel is an even bigger issue. I doubt that's going to change any time soon.

Frankly, what I'd like to see is more emphasis on developing efficient, flexible, and low cost energy storage for the electrical grid. In that case, bulk isn't as big an issue. It's going to be important if (for instance) ground based PV solar is to get beyond supplying a small percentage of the electrical load. Save the fossil fuel for the cars, and revamp electrical production first.

[Strange]

Can I offer an opinion about batteries in general? Worst possible solution period. Hydrogen is - absolutely - the only possible solution to oil that does *not* require a complete rewrite of driving habits and social driving structure.

Hydrogen has all sorts of delivery and storage problems. It might be better to directly synthesize hydrocarbons: http://www.wired.com/science/discove...ws/2008/01/S2P

[NEOWatcher]

People, the issue of cleaning is not magically different for car rental and car ownership. Do you clean your car after every use? No, but you do clean it if necessary. The same thing for a rented car. The amount of cleaning required, and the amount of labor involved, is fundamentally similar.

Consider the following...
A normal car rental is usually several days between occupants. So; the cleaning is only done days apart.
In the swappable car scenerio, it will be down to hours. So; you've considerably increased the number of cleanings.

Some cleaning takes similar times no matter how dirty it is. How much longer does it take to vacuum an interior with little dirt or one with lots of crumbs? Not much. Same with washing a window. What about the inspection?

Frankly - I don't even think I'd like battery swapping. Who knows what the state of the replacement is, is it as new and shiny as then one I had last time. Is it 100% as good as a 'new' one, or is it 75% as good. I can look after a battery if it's 'mine'. If it's one I'm just borrowing, who knows how much abuse it's had.

Things would have to be very well regulated.

Right now, we have inspections in place to make sure that the amount of gas we buy is properly metered by the pumps. Plus; we have the advantage of an internal gauge. So; we know what we are paying for.

The same would have to be true of charging stations. But; I get leery of measuring battery charge.
As an example, My laptop battery got over 5 hours when it was new. When it was starting to go, I showed a full charge on the battery, and the measurement went from 100% down to about 85% in the normal time. Then suddenly it showed 14% and died within 15 seconds.
Things like that make me leery of measuring a battery charge and making sure I got the power I paid for.

In a battery swap scenario, the only way I would trust the swap is if the car had an un-tamperable meter to measure the flow from the battery during use that can show how much power you got from the battery. If you couple this with a regulation that the swap station is responsible for any tow due to insufficient charge based on that meter, then you can probably be assured they will make sure that the batteries are good.

There aren't many auto diesels being sold in the U.S. these days because the specifics of the air pollution laws makes it difficult (California based standards especially).

One thing that I've always wondered about is how these standards are set.
Everything that I have seen measures output by PPM or some similar meausurement based on the percentage of the exhaust. So; a much greener car can end up putting more pollutants in the air according to that.
For example: a 40mpg car outputs 0.75ppm of X. Now; the 80mpg diesel version puts out 1.25ppm. Which one is cleaner? By law, it would be the one that puts out more pollutants.

[hypergreatthing]

How about:
installing the infrastructure for induction recharging on the roads themselves.
On major highways they could install superconducting powerlines underground along side of the highway (completely different project, but it would be to improve power distribution). They could piggy back an inductive charging lane off the powerline. Maybe just have a "slow lane" for inductive high speed charging. The battery technology could change and improve while the charging system could stay the same, just use of the power would change. They could tie the charging straight to a bank account/credit card like they do for tolls/etc. Sure the charging lanes would stretch for miles but it would be a convenience because you wouldn't need to stop, just every X number of miles (as technology gets better, so would the need to recharge on these lanes) get into the charging lane and allow it to refuel while moving..

For inner city/suburbs, just having induction recharging parking spots would be good enough. Not everyone has to have them, but they could be placed in parking lots in malls, stores, at work, etc. All they're doing is making the power distribution more convenient and widened. There's already inner cities which are experimenting with power cables in parking spots for electric cars, this would just be an easier extension. Then of course in your own driveway the same thing, except hooked up to your home (this is already done for electric vehicles).

This sort of eliminates the need for standardized batteries, and the need to swap out batteries like it was a fuel (like diesel or gasoline). Of course the infrastructure would be a huge initial cost, but it would come at a huge convenience (unlimited range on electric vehicles basically) because of no need to stop and refuel.

[IsaacKuo]

Not really. I know what mess I've made in my own car. I don't know what mess someone else has made in a rental car. Therefore, I expect a certain amount of cleaning just as a courtesy between uses.

Well, if this is a common enough sentiment then I suppose you people can pay a premium for the service.

How much of a premium would you pay on a taxi ride for cleaning before your use? One dollar per trip? Ten dollars per trip?

How much of a premium would you pay on a subway ticket for cleaning before your use? One dollar per ticket? Ten dollars per ticket?

Personally, I expect that the majority of users would rather save some money rather than pay a permium for cleaning before each use.

Here's another thought no one has mentioned. I was helping a friend start the process of shopping for her expected child the other day, and we were discussing car seats. She isn't going to get one of the ones you take out and carry around, because a high percentage of car seats aren't properly installed. She plans to get it inspected, make sure it's in correctly, and leave it there. And in our jurisdiction, children are legally required to be in some form of booster seat until they are eight or four foot nine, whichever comes first. By requiring people to swap cars if their battery runs out, you require them to move the child seat. This means that many more opportunities for an incorrectly installed car seat.

If she doesn't want a quick swap car seat, and she wants her car seat to be permanently installed, then she still has the option of using a plugin hybrid or a traditional car. I would expect a high percentage of people with young kids to prefer plugin hybrids or traditional cars over full electrics. They are not nor should they be forced to switch.

Anyway, I see that you brought up an issue of scalability.

I see on demand short term car rental as a better match for the required scalability. I'm taking into consideration the fact that battery technology is improving and will continue to improve.

With a battery swap infrastructure, the scaling is wrong. You need a massive investment in battery swap stations at first, because batteries have short range. But as batteries improve, range increases and demand for battery swaps fall. The vast majority of those stations go out of business.

With a car rental infrastructure, the scaling is right. You don't need a massive initial investment because the infrastructure already exists. Since the transition is gradual, demand ramps up gradually. Electrics can be phased into car rental inventories incrementally, as part of the natural turnover of older cars wearing out. Increasing adoption is counterbalanced by improving battery technology, so the required car rental inventories don't balloon away.

Ultimately, battery technology will top out, but this could easily be at a point where battery range is sufficient for the vast majority of cities. At this point, a battery swap infrastructure would be a desolate wasteland. But car rental would still enjoy a certain level of demand from non-owners and owners of single person commuting vehicles (who occasionally need vehicles with higher passenger capacities).

[IsaacKuo]

How about:
installing the infrastructure for induction recharging on the roads themselves.

It's a nice idea which suffers from challenges with recharge times and the inefficiency of induction at a distance.

But...capacitors are able to recharge extremely quickly. They have little capacity, but a car could include both a capacitor and a battery. The capacitor could be rapidly recharged in brief bursts, and then it slowly recharges the battery.

The charging regions of the road would periodically have pairs of slightly raised metal charging bumps along the centerline. These are similar in shape to raised pavement markers, but they're along the centerline of a lane rather than the edges.

The car lowers two spring loaded contact plates, which briefly engage the charging bumps as the car passes over. One contact plate is in the front; the other contact plate is in the rear. During this brief contact, the car's capacitor is charged up. This provides enough energy to make it to the next charging pair as well as to pump some juice into the battery.

By default, the positive charging bump is not connected to the power supply capacitor for safety reasons. Wireless RFID on the underside of the car could be used to coordinate closing the connection only when a (paying) car is overhead.

This system might minimize the investment required for setting up charging roads. The installation only uses periodically spaced charging bumps rather than continuous rails or large numbers of induction loops.

Obviously, the same contact plates could be used for charging while parked or stopped at an intersection. This could use a more efficient charging mode directly connected to the battery.

[NEOWatcher]

How much of a premium would you pay on a taxi ride for cleaning before your use? One dollar per trip? Ten dollars per trip?

Irrelevant... a taxi is attended. Someone knows how dirty or clean the cab is getting.

How much of a premium would you pay on a subway ticket for cleaning before your use? One dollar per ticket? Ten dollars per ticket?

Irrelevant... I'm not hiring a subway car for my personal use. It is a public service and has certain expectations as a public service. Besides, they are cleaned between uses.

Personally, I expect that the majority of users would rather save some money rather than pay a permium for cleaning before each use.

I can agree with that, but there is a minimum amount of liability that they need to consider.

With a battery swap infrastructure, the scaling is wrong. You need a massive investment in battery swap stations at first, because batteries have short range. But as batteries improve, range increases and demand for battery swaps fall. The vast majority of those stations go out of business.

Same holds true with swappable cars. As they are able to go farther, the demand for swap stations decreases.

With a car rental infrastructure, the scaling is right. You don't need a massive initial investment because the infrastructure already exists.

I've said it before. As with other electric car options, the infrastructure does not exist. It is currently central to transportation hubs.

[Gillianren]

Well, if this is a common enough sentiment then I suppose you people can pay a premium for the service.

How much of a premium would you pay on a taxi ride for cleaning before your use? One dollar per trip? Ten dollars per trip?

How much of a premium would you pay on a subway ticket for cleaning before your use? One dollar per ticket? Ten dollars per ticket?

Personally, I expect that the majority of users would rather save some money rather than pay a permium for cleaning before each use.

Stick to your initial comparison, please. Rental cars get cleaned between usage. All of them. It's just considered a courtesy. After all, assuming the battery even gets a hundred miles before dying, how many average-length subway rides does that equal? And I can see the building where they clean our local buses from the street as I run certain errands, in fact, because they clean the buses on a regular basis. Probably less than every hundred miles, in fact.

If she doesn't want a quick swap car seat, and she wants her car seat to be permanently installed, then she still has the option of using a plugin hybrid or a traditional car. I would expect a high percentage of people with young kids to prefer plugin hybrids or traditional cars over full electrics. They are not nor should they be forced to switch.

Based on your "they can opt out" solutions, I see practically everyone's preferring plug-in hybrids or traditional cars. People who have any special needs whatsoever. ("Quick swap car seats" aren't as safe, so of course she doesn't prefer them.) A lot more people have those than you seem to realize, which is why battery swaps are more universal. Yes, it requires that there be a certain standardization in batteries which I don't think is going to happen any time soon, but it does have the distinct advantage of allowing for different circumstances.

Anyway, I see that you brought up an issue of scalability.

Several posts ago, yes.

I see on demand short term car rental as a better match for the required scalability. I'm taking into consideration the fact that battery technology is improving and will continue to improve.

How much land does a rental car lot currently take up? How will this change with trader cars?

With a battery swap infrastructure, the scaling is wrong. You need a massive investment in battery swap stations at first, because batteries have short range. But as batteries improve, range increases and demand for battery swaps fall. The vast majority of those stations go out of business.

But they have the advantage of being able to go into places which already exist and not take up that much extra space in them. How many service stations are there within a one-mile radius of where you live? Or, heck, how many gas stations? Cars are getting better and better gas mileage than they did in the old days, and those don't seem to be going out of business.

With a car rental infrastructure, the scaling is right. You don't need a massive initial investment because the infrastructure already exists. Since the transition is gradual, demand ramps up gradually. Electrics can be phased into car rental inventories incrementally, as part of the natural turnover of older cars wearing out. Increasing adoption is counterbalanced by improving battery technology, so the required car rental inventories don't balloon away.

But the scaling up is phenomenally impractical. You didn't answer my question about real estate prices, for example. What will the initial outlay be for a single car-trading location versus a battery-trading location?

Ultimately, battery technology will top out, but this could easily be at a point where battery range is sufficient for the vast majority of cities. At this point, a battery swap infrastructure would be a desolate wasteland. But car rental would still enjoy a certain level of demand from non-owners and owners of single person commuting vehicles (who occasionally need vehicles with higher passenger capacities).

I do see car-renting as being a limited solution--for people who seldom go anywhere and only need a car every once in a while. People with no kids or special needs. For the general community, it's loaded with issues you're deliberately failing to consider.

[IsaacKuo]

Stick to your initial comparison, please. Rental cars get cleaned between usage.

I see we're just going in circles. You refuse to consider any possibility other than requiring cleaning between every use, despite real world examples where that is not the case.

How much land does a rental car lot currently take up? How will this change with trader cars?

On demand short term car rental does not inherently require more parking space.

The overall number of miles driven per person in society remains roughly the same. Because a single car could be used by multiple users in a day, these cars may end up driving around a somewhat higher percentage of the time, and parked a somewhat lower percentage of the time. So, overall, parking space requirements would be somewhat reduced.

However, I see on demand short term car rental as a potential enabler for commuters to use single passenger commuting cars. This could lead to a requirement for more spare cars--larger cars which would see a demand spike on the weekends.

What percentage of commuters will require these extra rental cars on a weekend? It's unclear. I could see it going either way, as to whether more parking spaces are required or less parking spaces are required.

Still, the distribution of these parking spaces can be optimized for costs. Since the weekend demand spike is predictable, the extra rental cars could be parked in cheaper outlying areas during the week.

But they have the advantage of being able to go into places which already exist and not take up that much extra space in them. How many service stations are there within a one-mile radius of where you live?

Service stations are still needed for car repairs, and you do not want to be paying service station prices or suffering service station waits for battery swaps!

Or, heck, how many gas stations? Cars are getting better and better gas mileage than they did in the old days, and those don't seem to be going out of business.

Umm...the big oil companies are making higher profits than ever. That should tell you that they aren't hurting.

Why not? It's because gas prices have risen so much. Gas mileage has not really improved much, and gas prices are expected to continue to rise. The big oil companies aren't sweating.

With battery swap services, demand will plummet as battery capacity becomes sufficient for the great majority of trips. Others in this thread envision commuters using them several times per day. That means a battery swap for almost 100% of trips. But what happens when battery capacity improves to eliminate commuting swaps? Since these are long commutes to begin with, battery swap demand could plummet from 100% of trips down to 2% of trips. How many of these stations will survive a 50-fold reduction in demand?

But the scaling up is phenomenally impractical. You didn't answer my question about real estate prices, for example. What will the initial outlay be for a single car-trading location versus a battery-trading location?

A car swap location could be anywhere there are parking spots. The parking lot doesn't even need to be owned by a car rental company. A parking lot owner could have arrangements with several car rental companies. Some parking lots might try to be monopolistic, but they would tend to get squeezed out in favor of cheaper lots where competition drives down the prices.

Plausibly, the car rental companies would also have their own parking lots for periodic car maintenance and other various reasons. But these could be located on less expensive land outside of cities.

In any case, parking lot owners always have their regular business of directly selling parking spots to individual customers. They can flexibly reserve some spots for traditional customers while letting car rental companies use other spots (on a first come first serve basis).

A battery swap location is a special purpose facility with robotic hardware, maybe underground.

I do see car-renting as being a limited solution--for people who seldom go anywhere and only need a car every once in a while. People with no kids or special needs. For the general community, it's loaded with issues you're deliberately failing to consider.

People with electric commuting cars could ge to and from work every day. As long as the range of the battery is good enough for most purposes, it's a good solution--but only if there's a convenient option for those cases where they want or need to go farther.

I see on demand short term car rental as a perfectly viable solution for that.