Which Way, Battery? (Part 3: Li-Ion, Fe)

The point about hybrids (at least I thought) was to get them off the grid! If you have a fully electric car, the recharge off the power grid simply creates a massive carbon footprint.

The idea behind the hybrid was to get a car that didn't need to be plugged in each night, sucking up powerplant energy.

Either that or run it off of some alternative fuel, like hydrogen that wasn't on the grid.

However, if we can power the grid with wind or solar, the carbon footprint will disappear..correct?

All vehicles on planet Earth are consuming summary energy which is 2-3 times greater than all power stations capable to produce. Plus process of battery recharging so far is soo far from 100% effectiveness. It's much more worse than would be desired. Therefore here's a deadlock for completely electric car. Hybrid does give us a chance. I suspect it's not a panacea though.

Hi vermin - Thanks for your comments:

I think the primary point of hybrids like the Prius was to increase fuel efficiency (and decrease dependence on foreign-sourced gasoline), by increasing MPG to 40+ miles per gallon (the CAFE standards idea). Staying off-grid to accomplish this also made sense for consumer convenience and the grid, but I suspect this was a secondary motivation for Toyota's design team.

Ideally, if you had a fully-electric car, and could charge your car battery overnight from a wind turbine situated near your home, you'd completely sever the gasoline (and foreign-sourced energy) link.

Someone was pitching the "wind turbine in your backyard" idea on my local Albany, NY area radio this week, stating that the Adirondack Mountains (near to my home) provide strong overnight (off-peak for the power grid) winds that could be harvested for this purpose.

- Larry

Plugging in off peak has the advantage of reducing "carbon footprint". The rotating capacity is kept producing rather than just idling and venting steam. For those who have never worked in the power industry, drive past a power station and observe the amount of steam vented at different times of day. Off peak load also reduces the problems associated with leading power factor. Proponents of "non carbon" electricity generation will point out that alternatives are available. Right now micro generation is subsidised, that subsidy isn't necessary if a higher value use is available. This is an early step on a big journey and probably the only way to break the oil stranglehold. Just as laptops have spun off the present technologies the vehicle industry has the potential to spin off stationary battery technology.

Energy security is essential for long term economic recovery, oil is bleeding America and other importers dry.

The decision to stay off the grid was primarily due to an infrastructure problem. Charging stations aren't exactly on every street corner after all, and nobody has come up with a standard charging system yet either (there are several incompatible designs floating about in R&D labs.). It is also much easier to address a point source pollution generator than thousands of mobile sources, and generating electricity from Coal or Natural Gas or nuclear power is far cheaper and more efficient than burning gasoline in an engine to turn a generator.

But Detroit has another problem. There are only a few major suppliers of NiMH and LiIon bateries. Toyota now owns two of them. Two years ago they bought a controlling interest in Panasonic, a month or so ago Panasonic bought out Sanyo. That leaves China as the only other supplier. So one way or another, Toyota will be getting their share of the action.

Hi Rorschach - I understand that it's a U.S. company that has partnered with GM for the Chevy Volt - a company called "A123 Systems" (Wikipedia shows some interesting investors), using technology developed at MIT. My hope is for a diversity (100's of companies?) of U.S. and global companies concurrently developing all possible battery technologies, with the marketplace choosing the winners in the next number of years. We'll see how this plays out - I'm optimistic for now.

.5 million cars built with Li-ion batts. would deplete the worlds known reserves of mineable lithium.......... most of which is found in China.

I'm a tad leery of LiIon batteries for automotive use. Can you imagine what would happen if in a crash the battery was damaged/shorted? The first thing the fire dept will do is spray water on it. Water and Lithium don't get along too well.

Lithium Fire on Pallet about to load onto aircraft

The part about extiguishing it grabbed my attention.

We had an electromechanical voice coil shaker table made by Ling where I used to work. The platen was a magnesium alloy. we had to have special fire extinguishers and fire suppression training before we were allowed to work in the Vibe test lab. every reactive metal (Lithium, Sodium, Magnesium) has it's own special kind of fire extinguisher specific to that metal.

Agreed - this will need to be sorted out, both at the designer's/manufacturer's level and at the emergency responder level. I'm aware the local EMT's in the Albany, NY area are already being trained to respond to Prius-technology (Ni-MH) crashes (where to apply the jaws-of-life, etc.), and so their training will need to be expanded to include other battery technologies that eventually make their way to the highways. Lots of due diligence work up front for the battery designer, but a nice return downstream. A Chinese electric car on Interstate 87 is a new concept for me, but look how well Hyundai did in just a few years. Mr. Buffet may be on to something. - Larry

Electric cars are going to be too expensive. The price of copper keeps climbing. Batteries are expensive, and if one wants to build millions of cars, the price of materials will increase quickly. Producing more materials will be difficult; it may take years just to get the environmental inpact statement approved. Likewise, recycling will be closely regulated by OSHA and EPA.

The solution is good old 19-20th century technology, compressed air for energy storage, a "steam engine" to drive the vehicle. It's ferrous metal technology, with nothing needing to be invented. If you believe those who say compressed air energy transmission is too inefficient, you are ignorant of history. A series of experiments has shown that energy transmission by compressed air is more efficient than using an electric generator and motor, <<if you do it right>>. Look up US Patent No. 5,832,728.

Author's note: Part 4 is now available: click here.