[Swappable cars]

[boppa]

Or they could just rent it for the trip and let the rental company owner deal with those issues.

Bingo, we have a winner
I don't know if it's just an Oz thing, but almost everyone here has a towbar fitted as a matter of course (many new cars are sold with them prefitted from the dealer) so to me it seems quite a normal thing

The idea I was originally thinking of was you could buy your own (incorporated into a caravan or box trailer- most ozzies already have a box trailer and/or caravan and/or boat trailer (I got both a caravan and a boat trailer myself) so they aren't intimidated by the idea of towing like some people apparently are here)
But actually the idea of the rental one is even more sensible, why pay for it to sit around most of the time
(some people might buy their own anyway- so either option would be easily doable for a member of the general public)

I cant see the issues with wiring and such, the trailer itself is simply a usual trailer re lighting etc so the usual trailer plug for that, and the genpack itself really only needs to be told to start and stop (and that could be done by a single light gauge wire monitoring the `ign' circuit of the car (so to speak) and controls itself from there- all it then needs is the charging cable (240vac15A as is common here for heavy duty household chargers would seem the most acceptable- at least here as thats our household voltage and gives you 3600W continuously available for charging the batteries- that could be decided upon at a later date tho, a lower voltage/ higher current option might become an industry standard (72v seems to be the voltage of choice for most traction motors) or even a 3 phase 50a 415v system (the oz standard one would give around 20kw and many people are already familiar here with the industry stand plugs used in them and they are waterproof ip67 rated to boot

To me it simply seems the best system in both financial and usability term given current tech, it would allow the widespread introduction of electric cars for general usage, without the current restrictions of range and or requiring multiple cars or hiring/swapping idea (s a person who has had a lot of experience with hire cars, I can tell you that I would consider the `swapcar' option the least attractive (both for the expense and the fact that as a smoker, I would find the idea of inflicting my habit on the later occupants of the car unacceptable)- in fact I have often bought a `clunker' just for a couple of weeks usage, rather than hire one

[noncryptic]

There will likely be some market early on for battery swapping, but it could become redundant with improvements in stationary and then dynamic charging solutions.

Would that development not make car swapping redundant as well?

As far as "swappable cars" are concerned the ultimate metaphor for that is a personal "elevator", wherein you push a button, a pod is pulled from a pool, you plug in your coordinates (after swiping your credit card), then enter a maglev rail system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTran

I think such a system does not necessarily imply swapping of cars or 'personal elevators'.
Also i don't think that most roads will be fitted with such a rail system any time soon. It's possible in principal, but not likely to be a practical solution.

Either way, automated battery swapping technology exists and is being implemented. I think car swapping won't quickly become more popular than car pooling.
Having lots of rechargeable batteries connected to the electric grid also is an advantage as we become more reliant on intermittend energy sources such as solar-electric.

[NEOWatcher]

...and they do present a real danger on the road - especially for parking etc etc.

I would be curious to know any statistics with that because I don't have a clue as to how much more of a danger it is. I really don't see a lot of issues with trailers on the road, but that's just perception.
Parking etc etc is not that big of a deal.
In most places with parking, it's more of an inconvenience than anything else because you just need to find two open spaces back to back which means parking a little further away. During the trip, this is not an issue because you are generally travelling through non-urban areas with open lots. At your destination, it might be a problem though. If it were a rental, then that could be solved by dropping it off when you get there.

There is an integrated solution SCREAMING out here. Fuel cells.

I still favor that one too.

I cant see the issues with wiring and such...

I can't see an issue with control and transfer, but I can see a problem with the connection design.
I have seen (and experienced) plenty of pigtail failures from abrasion and other stresses. With the 12v, that's not that big of a deal because it just means a frayed wire, lost connection and possible blown fuse.
Although with 240v, I'm not sure a failure would be so benign. It would need some really good design for reliability (probably making the connection locations standard to shorten the pigtail). And it would really need a good response trigger to shut down immediately.

To me it simply seems the best system in both financial and usability term given current tech...

I wouldn't go out on a limb and say "best". Maybe not even "good" because there are obviously problems to overcome. But I would say "feasible" pending any solutions to the problems.

[boppa]

I would be curious to know any statistics with that because I don't have a clue as to how much more of a danger it is. I really don't see a lot of issues with trailers on the road, but that's just perception.
Parking etc etc is not that big of a deal.
In most places with parking, it's more of an inconvenience than anything else because you just need to find two open spaces back to back which means parking a little further away. During the trip, this is not an issue because you are generally travelling through non-urban areas with open lots. At your destination, it might be a problem though. If it were a rental, then that could be solved by dropping it off when you get there.


I still favor that one too.


I can't see an issue with control and transfer, but I can see a problem with the connection design.
I have seen (and experienced) plenty of pigtail failures from abrasion and other stresses. With the 12v, that's not that big of a deal because it just means a frayed wire, lost connection and possible blown fuse.
Although with 240v, I'm not sure a failure would be so benign. It would need some really good design for reliability (probably making the connection locations standard to shorten the pigtail). And it would really need a good response trigger to shut down immediately.


I wouldn't go out on a limb and say "best". Maybe not even "good" because there are obviously problems to overcome. But I would say "feasible" pending any solutions to the problems.

Parking is IMHO not that much of an issue, as you have to remember that the trailer could be disconnected and left parked, you still have your fully charged batteries to give you your normal range anyway without it- its use is for the long haul trips using the genpacks engine to best advantage

The connection is simple engineering (and as an electrical fitter its not even that much of an issue anyway, existing suitable connectors are already available, simply not in widespread public use). The high voltage cutout again is already in widespread use in Oz, in fact one is now compulsory in all new and rental properties to prevent electrical accidents (earth leakage breakers with a less than 5ms cutoff time)

The higher voltages are actually better as for a given wattage, the lower the current is, making the wires thinner and more flexible anyway- one reason that I would prompt for a mains voltage system (that plus the widespread availability of existing parts), one reason that a 72v traction system voltage is less preferable is that the wires have to be much thicker hence less flexible as the would have to carry just over 3 times as much current for the same power for a 240v system, and 5 times for a 415v system

another advantage is the engine used could be run at its optimum rpms, minimising fuel usage and letting control circuits regulate the charging system (again in widespread use in diesel electric locos on a much larger scale already)

The main reason I see this as a way of getting around the limitations of existing storage capacity of electric cars, thus promoting a wider and faster way of reducing emissions from transportation, using already available and proven technology. Electric cars could already be feasible for most peoples urban travel requirements, and this could be a way to make their usage even more attractive as it eliminates most peoples last objection- its basically a hybrid for long distances for the limited times that most people would require it, and electric for the rest of the time without the weight penalties of having to drag the motor along all the time when its not needed

Certainly there would be issues in implementation, but I don't consider them to be that major or expensive in comparison to other ideas already suggested such as induction charging built into the road surface or revamping rail/car shuttles etc- it simply means that a suitable type of interconnection point has to be made an industry standard for the charging port- it doesn't even limit the operating voltages of the car itself as it would be using an AC supply, hence can be transformed up or down to suit the battery operating voltage chosen by the cars manufacturer for the internal supply system

[HenrikOlsen]

If we're looking at direct current system I'd expect 360 volt to be much more likely than 72 volt, it's one of the industry standards with a wide range of off-the-shelf components ready for heavy-duty use.

[djellison]

Guys - why are you taking a Volt, ripping out the IC engine and putting it on a trailer? I don't get it. You don't want to have to go and lease a trailer every time your journey is more than the miserable range of electric vehicles.

[NEOWatcher]

Guys - why are you taking a Volt, ripping out the IC engine and putting it on a trailer? I don't get it. You don't want to have to go and lease a trailer every time your journey is more than the miserable range of electric vehicles.

One word: Weight.

I agree, that the trailer would be a hassle. But; in the current environment when every ounce is scrutinized by the manufacturers in the name of efficiency, it is a factor (and an annoying one as well).

[rant]
Its a factor that stuck me with a car that has no spare tire all for the sake of saving 26 pounds to inch up the numbers for a "base-equipped" model and almost no availability for the model with that as an option.
Now; I can't even find a way to add it after-market unless I go with a full wheel that doesn't fit in the well for the spare (which is currently an air pump compartment) since the tire is only a factory only option.[/rant]
Oh; and did I mention that my car is virtually a non-electric Volt, and the Volt doesn't have a spare for the same reason?

Just to drive in in the point of weight...From a Volt brochure:

Hear this. The available Bos e® Energy Efficient Series sp eaker syst em is 30% smaller, 40% lighter and uses 50% less energy than comparable Bose systems.

If the weight of the speakers are a selling point, then you know they are trying to squeeze as much out of that turnip as possible.

[Ara Pacis]

Parking is IMHO not that much of an issue, as you have to remember that the trailer could be disconnected and left parked, you still have your fully charged batteries to give you your normal range anyway without it- its use is for the long haul trips using the genpacks engine to best advantage

The connection is simple engineering (and as an electrical fitter its not even that much of an issue anyway, existing suitable connectors are already available, simply not in widespread public use). The high voltage cutout again is already in widespread use in Oz, in fact one is now compulsory in all new and rental properties to prevent electrical accidents (earth leakage breakers with a less than 5ms cutoff time)

The higher voltages are actually better as for a given wattage, the lower the current is, making the wires thinner and more flexible anyway- one reason that I would prompt for a mains voltage system (that plus the widespread availability of existing parts), one reason that a 72v traction system voltage is less preferable is that the wires have to be much thicker hence less flexible as the would have to carry just over 3 times as much current for the same power for a 240v system, and 5 times for a 415v system

another advantage is the engine used could be run at its optimum rpms, minimising fuel usage and letting control circuits regulate the charging system (again in widespread use in diesel electric locos on a much larger scale already)

The main reason I see this as a way of getting around the limitations of existing storage capacity of electric cars, thus promoting a wider and faster way of reducing emissions from transportation, using already available and proven technology. Electric cars could already be feasible for most peoples urban travel requirements, and this could be a way to make their usage even more attractive as it eliminates most peoples last objection- its basically a hybrid for long distances for the limited times that most people would require it, and electric for the rest of the time without the weight penalties of having to drag the motor along all the time when its not needed

Certainly there would be issues in implementation, but I don't consider them to be that major or expensive in comparison to other ideas already suggested such as induction charging built into the road surface or revamping rail/car shuttles etc- it simply means that a suitable type of interconnection point has to be made an industry standard for the charging port- it doesn't even limit the operating voltages of the car itself as it would be using an AC supply, hence can be transformed up or down to suit the battery operating voltage chosen by the cars manufacturer for the internal supply system

Would you actually even need a trailer? How large and massy would the engine and fuel tank need to be to provide the electricity? I see a lot of cars mounting un-wheeled extensions to their hitch, such as bike racks and flat-bed cargo racks. Could it go on a roof rack?

The concept of adding a gen sounds doable. People could use it at a campsite if they're not doing rugged outdoor camping. They could even use it at home as a backup system in case of power failure. And what sort of engine would it be, diesel or gas piston, or perhaps turbine?

[NEOWatcher]

Would you actually even need a trailer? How large and massy would the engine and fuel tank need to be to provide the electricity? I see a lot of cars mounting un-wheeled extensions to their hitch, such as bike racks and flat-bed cargo racks. Could it go on a roof rack?

Pretty big. Even accounting for efficiencies gained in a constant velocity setup, it's still got to be a big enough engine to provide enough instantaneous amount of electricity.
The volt has the same engine as my non-hybrid/non electric, and you still need to add the alternator and fuel tank. And, of course the EPA is going to have something to say about how much emission control equipment has to be added. It's not your average campsite generator.

[Gillianren]

I don't think I have a tow bar. I don't think most of my friends do. And I can think of a lot of places where I go on a regular basis where I couldn't park if I had a trailer. Also a lot of places where I would go on vacation.

[Ara Pacis]

Pretty big. Even accounting for efficiencies gained in a constant velocity setup, it's still got to be a big enough engine to provide enough instantaneous amount of electricity.

The volt has the same engine as my non-hybrid/non electric, and you still need to add the alternator and fuel tank.

Ballpark it. Usage patterns may dictate differences. It may not need to provide complete motive capacity. For example, many people have to stop for food and lavatory, and that is a good time for the generator to catch up a bit. If they also hook it up to a charging station then they could have extra charging during that stop.

And, of course the EPA is going to have something to say about how much emission control equipment has to be added. It's not your average campsite generator.

Or would they? If it's only used occasionally for long distance travel, then the totality of the emissions of that system compared to the current installed system of polluting car engines, may allow them to be a bit more lax. The question is how many cars will need/use an add-on genny? City-dwellers may be the target. Country-dwellers may be better off using a hybrid from the get-go. Many might do better renting a hybrid instead of using an add-on. Everyone might do better to use trains if and when passenger rail is available again.

[Ara Pacis]

I don't think I have a tow bar. I don't think most of my friends do.

They're usually aftermarket accessories.

And I can think of a lot of places where I go on a regular basis where I couldn't park if I had a trailer. Also a lot of places where I would go on vacation.

Then don't get one.

[Gillianren]

They're usually aftermarket accessories.

Apparently not in Australia.

Then don't get one.

I'm just saying--I don't think anything requiring a trailer is terrible feasible as an overall solution--or even just as a "going on vacation" solution. I'm not confident enough in my driving abilities, and certainly not my parking abilities, to be interested in it. Given my opinion of the average driver, I do not see it ending well.

[NEOWatcher]

They're usually aftermarket accessories.

Apparently not in Australia.

It could be a dealer option there for many of those kinds of vehicles where you don't even see that it isn't a factory option.
If it's common enough there to have one, then that's probably a selling point for the dealer.

[djellison]

One word: Weight.

And you can save the weight you spend on a small engine because you can carry a smaller battery.

The battery in a Tesla is 450kg.

The battery in a Volt is 181kg

Even putting in the 100-150kg mass of a small engine, and 30kg for a full tank of gas - the two power sources for a Chevy volt are still lighter than the one power source of the Tesla.

The one word everyone keeps missing is CONVENIENCE.

If someone has to hook up, bolt on, attach, plug in etc a device just for long journeys - they're not gonna buy it. Period.

The car of tomorrow has to be..

As fast as
Have the same or better range as
Cost the same or less than
Be the same or easier to maintain than
Be as quick to 'recharge' as

The car of today.

If it fails in any of those...it WILL.NOT.SUCCEED.

Having to bolt something on just to go further kind of breaks all of those rules.

Case in point...May 2012 sales ( from http://www.hybridcars.com/news/may-2...ard-46746.html )

Volt - 1,680
Leaf - 510

And for comparison..

Diesel Jetta - 4,644
Prius 13,053

And lest we forget just how much of a damn the average motorist cares about any of this... ( http://www.thecarconnection.com/news...lling-vehicles )

Ford F Series - 54,836
Chevy Silverado - 34,555 units.


Just a little perspective here.

[Extravoice]

Convenience is important.
As a single data point, I'm going on vacation this summer, an will be renting a vehicle that gets worse mileage than my car.

The vehicle has to carry six people around for a week, plus two ten hour drives to/from the destination. The additional space for people and cargo, plus the knowledge that I can simply get a replacement if something breaks is worth the added fuel cost and hassle of renting the vehicle. If I owned an electric vehicle, I'd probably do the same thing, rather than rent a power trailer.

Of course vacation is a once-a-year type of thing. However, I frequently drive 70 miles (round trip) to my parents' house, and probably would choose a hybrid car over the electric/trailer solution, even if it got better mileage for shorter trips.


BTW: Some neighborhoods disallow parking of trailers, so add that to the list of negatives.

[Ara Pacis]

Convenience is important.

Convenience depends on many factors including money, time, knowledge curve, desire, and perhaps most importantly, need. Someone who's hauling 4x8 sheet rock, heavy loads, or towing large trailers is probably going to choose a quarter-ton pickup truck over a Prius if limited to one vehicle. Of course, someone doing that much work with a vehicle may wear it out faster and sell it used and get a new one, thereby increasing sales numbers. Of course, some people do have more money than sense, so it's not just the Mike Holmes of the world who drive pick ups.

A haul-along genny might only be useful for city cars and city cars are marketed to city folk.

As a single data point, I'm going on vacation this summer, an will be renting a vehicle that gets worse mileage than my car.

The vehicle has to carry six people around for a week, plus two ten hour drives to/from the destination. The additional space for people and cargo, plus the knowledge that I can simply get a replacement if something breaks is worth the added fuel cost and hassle of renting the vehicle. If I owned an electric vehicle, I'd probably do the same thing, rather than rent a power trailer.

Of course vacation is a once-a-year type of thing. However, I frequently drive 70 miles (round trip) to my parents' house, and probably would choose a hybrid car over the electric/trailer solution, even if it got better mileage for shorter trips.

Right tool for the job. I do lots of things, so I got an MPV with good fuel economy that can haul 4 peeps around the continent and still carry appliances. There may be hybrid SUVs that would suit your trip.

[NEOWatcher]

And you can save the weight you spend on a small engine because you can carry a smaller battery.

The battery in a Tesla is 450kg.

The battery in a Volt is 181kg

But that is not what I am getting at. From that point of view, you are absolutely correct, battery weight helps offset the engine weight.
I was referring to what is now a plug in hybrid that has a large enough range for day to day driving an eliminating the weight of the engine for most usage.

The one word everyone keeps missing is CONVENIENCE.

Nope, I don't see that. Although I think everyone is looking at different conveniences and weighing them differently.

If someone has to hook up, bolt on, attach, plug in etc a device just for long journeys - they're not gonna buy it. Period. <and the next few lines>

I would generally agree unless there is a big change in peoples perception on what a personal vehicle is.

And lest we forget just how much of a damn the average motorist cares about any of this...
Ford F Series - 54,836
Chevy Silverado - 34,555 units.
Just a little perspective here.

I can see what you are getting at, but I think for trucks, the numbers are skewed. Although a lot of people do buy trucks only because they are <grunt voice> trucks </grun voice>, the numbers are skewed by businesses and individual contractors that require trucks, and tend to get replaced more often.
Also, with that link, there are plenty of midsized and compact cars in the same general range as the Silverado. Since there are not a lot of pickup truck options, the purchase numbers for pickups are not spread over a whole lot of vehicles.
Since I don't have numbers to form an opinion, I'm not denying your comment. Just pointing out that the comparison should be between class of vehicle instead of model. (ie. Pickups vs SUVs vs compact SUV's, vs full-size vs mid-size vs compact, etc)

[djellison]

I would generally agree unless there is a big change in peoples perception on what a personal vehicle is.

It is naive in the extreme to think that people will be prepared to take a step backwards in personal mobility.

They will not.

People will no more mass-adopt a car with a 50 mile range any more than they'll buy their next Smartphone without 3G and a camera.

And no - the comparison shouldn't be between class of vehicle. It should be within a class of vehicle. i.e. When looking at small cars, how many pick a 100% Electric. How many pic a Hybrid. How many stick with conventional IC. Right now - Leaf is dwarfed by conventional IC in its class. Volt and Prius are dwarfed by conventional IC in their class. And larger vehicles? They've not even bothered. The technology just can not do the job.

The automotive and energy industries can, and must, do better.

[NEOWatcher]

Just so everyone knows my stance.

In the short term, I place my near term preferences for convenience vs "green" in the following order.
Plug-in hybrid - fuel cell.
Plug-in hybrid - conventional or deisel. (Volt)
Plain hybrid (probably can do fuel cell here too.)
It then goes on to speculation about infrastructure and stuff like battery swaps and stuff like that and the list gets kind of muddled.

That does not include my own feelings about cost or payback. If it did, I wouldn't have bought a conventional compact.

Now pure plug ins and other wacky ideas (like the trailer) are more for people in situations that fit thier lifestyle, or for things like a second or third vehicle, and where wacky just enters the picture as options for those. In other words, they would remain a somewhat niche vehicle.

[NEOWatcher]

It is naive in the extreme to think that people will be prepared to take a step backwards in personal mobility.

Did I indicate that it has a chance of happening? I just mentioned a condition. Whether that condition is met is another story.

[HenrikOlsen]

It is naive in the extreme to think that people will be prepared to take a step backwards in personal mobility.

They will not.

It will happen whether people are prepared for it or not.
Not thinking that it will is just as naive.

[Ara Pacis]

It will happen whether people are prepared for it or not.
Not thinking that it will is just as naive.

Right. Oil Shocks shouldn't shock anyone these days.

Now pure plug ins and other wacky ideas (like the trailer) are more for people in situations that fit thier lifestyle, or for things like a second or third vehicle, and where wacky just enters the picture as options for those. In other words, they would remain a somewhat niche vehicle.

Perhaps it sounds wacky now, but times change. At some point the price of oil and its refined byproducts will increase, which isn't to bad as long as income keeps pace, but demand is increasing and eventually there may not be enough to go around. Splurging on gas guzzlers as a selfish lifestyle choice may work for a few. Downsizing to "niche vehicles" will be an option for some. Abandonment of personal vehicles altogether and trying to make do with mass-transit or bicycles may work for others. But that's assuming personal transit-miles stay the same. Some people may just keep their old car and not drive it as much. The Niche-iness of those limited-but-augmentable vehicles depends on the price point of those and other vehicles. Many people will do it if it makes economic sense.

One thing we could do is create ultra-light vehicles that go farther on a battery charge and give them special lanes and ramps to drive on so avoid collisions with heavier vehicles.

[djellison]

One thing we could do is create ultra-light vehicles that go farther on a battery charge and give them special lanes and ramps to drive on so avoid collisions with heavier vehicles.

You can't be serious?

Moreover - it's the aerodynamic drag that causes the loss in efficiency of electric cars at high speed - not the mass.

[Extravoice]

One thing we could do is create ultra-light vehicles that go farther on a battery charge and give them special lanes and ramps to drive on so avoid collisions with heavier vehicles.

Just let them use the carpool lanes...they're empty.

[djellison]

Just let them use the carpool lanes...they're empty.

Clearly you've never been to LA. Pool lanes are regularly at near-congestion or a congested state during rush hour.

That is a situation that's about to be made even worse as the pool lanes are also to be opened up to anyway prepared to pay to use them as an express lane.

[Van Rijn]

It will happen whether people are prepared for it or not.
Not thinking that it will is just as naive.

But when will it happen?

Unconventional oil production is really jumping. If you're thinking about short term oil shocks, that certainly could happen. If you're thinking about much higher sustained oil prices over the next decade, probably not going to happen.

[djellison]

A move away from IC doesn't mean we all have to drive poor range, expensive electric cars.

That oil will run out is obvious. We know that. It also doesn't mean the end of personal transport and of cars that work similar to or better than those of today.

We can (have) and must do better than pour efforts like the Leaf etc.

The Honda Clarity is out there, proving it, right now.

[Van Rijn]

A move away from IC doesn't mean we all have to drive poor range, expensive electric cars.

That oil will run out is obvious.

Obvious that it will run out eventually, but if you're hoping it will run out soon, that's very unlikely. It seems to me a lot of people are hoping oil will get a lot more expensive soon and stay that way, since it would help to force change, but I wouldn't plan on it. A better near-term argument would be environmental, and that's probably best served by more efficient conventional vehicles for now.

The Honda Clarity is out there, proving it, right now.

How so? What are the fuel cell prices now? Here's the most recent thing I could find on their production costs:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=a693eL42oJHo

``Honda designed an attractive product, but we're talking about a vehicle priced like a Bentley,'' said K.G. Duleep, managing director of Arlington, Virginia-based Energy & Environmental Analysis Inc. ``The economics of fuel cells are way out of line. Batteries look like a better option because costs should come down more quickly.''

Honda engineers estimated three years ago that its previous fuel-cell cars cost more than $1 million to build. Duleep, who completed a fuel-cell vehicle study this year for the U.S. Department of Energy, believes Honda has cut its production costs to between $120,000 and $140,000 per vehicle.

And then you need to fuel it with hydrogen. For that to be an alternative to fossil fuels, it will need to be produced as an alternative.

[Van Rijn]

Here's an interesting article on fuel cell technology:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/...uel-cell-cars/

It gets into the fuel cell costs, and a big problem is catalyst costs, finding ways to use less platinum-group metals (or use other catalyst) in a durable (that's one of the other big issues) mass produced fuel cell system. They're hoping to meet DOE goals by 2017.

(eta: that's DOE goals for catalyst performance.)