2008 Blog Archive

   

About EVFinder   EVents Calendar    FAQ    EV Selector   Links    The EV Finder Archive Site Map

Past Blogs

Sunday April 5, 2008 - No-Plug Boycott

Sunday March 30, 2008 - ZEV Mandate the results are in

Sunday March 23, 2008 - New York 2008

Sunday March 16, 2008 - Sustainable Development

Sunday March 9, 2008 - Geneva 2008

Sunday March 2, 2008 - Mangling the Mandate

Sunday February 24, 2008 - Death and Taxes

Sunday February 17, 2008 - A Vision of the Future

Sunday February 10.2008 - Internal Combustion

Sunday February 3, 2008 - The Berkley Climate Action Plan

Sunday January 27. 2008 - Smart Arrives

Sunday January 20, 2008 - Trouble at Tesla

Sunday January 13, 2007 - Hydrogen Highway hits Speed Bump

Sunday January 6, 2008 - Solar Grand Plan

View 2007 blogs

Sunday April 5, 2008 - No-Plug Boycott - It's been a while now since Dontcrush.com organized the protests that saved the Ford Ranger and Th!nk City cars from the crusher but failed in the attempt to save the EV1.  Well, some people are now beginning to say that a boycott would be more effective than protests outside dealer lots.

 

Boycotts have been most effective in the recent past.  Lets consider the Civil Rights movement.  While millions of people marching in Washington to listen to the stirring speeches of Dr. Martin Luther King highlighted the need for reform, in the end it was people of color boycotting businesses that pushed things over the edge and led to a more just environment for everyone.

 

In South Africa, it was the total boycott by the rest of the world that finally led to the overthrow of Apartheid.  In the end the isolation from the world economy was what brought majority rule to the southern tip of Africa.

 

So, if we want to see cars that plug in the idea is that we let the major automobile manufacturers know that the next car we buy is going to have a plug or we will stick with what we have.  

 

This is not going to be easy, especially for those that like to change their cars every two or three years, but in the long run the large automobile manufacturers are going to produce the type of car that people buy.  If nobody is buying large SUVs then they will stop producing them.

 

So what's the problem?

 

Well, the large manufacturers have to jump through legal hoops to get a car on the road.  They have to meet DOT requirements including  extensive crash testing.  They have to meet CARB and EPA emissions requirements, and they have to produce a car that is going to be reliable and that requires testing testing testing.  It also needs to be affordable and that means working with the supply chain to develop and produce a whole set of parts and on top of that you have to try and predict the volume of sales you are going to experience.  So it takes a long time to get a new car on the road, typically five years.  Now, if nobody buys one of your cars for five years until you can produce one with a plug then you are going to be out of business.

 

Unless a car manufacturer already has a plug-in vehicle in the works it is unlikely that they will be able to produce one in the near term.  The good news is that we already know that Ford, Toyota and GM are working on plug-in hybrids while Subaru, Nissan and Chrysler all have battery electric vehicles in some stage of development from concept car to fleet testing.  Ford has plug-in versions of the Escape hybrid in testing with Southern California and I have actually seen one on the roads here in LA.  Toyota have a couple of plug-in hybrid Prius being tested at UC Irvine and UC Berkley, while GM has been working hard on the Volt and really look like they intend to sell it, although given GM's track record I will believe it when I see them in dealerships for sale not lease only.

 

In the interim there are a number of options that can be used to keep the mileage down on the old gas hog.  Neighborhood electric vehicles are available from a number of manufacturers, including Chrysler with the GEM, and these can be used for short errands and commutes of 10 miles or less on surface streets.  There are also a few small independent companies that are trying to get into manufacturing, and companies like EVT and Vectrix offer reliable two wheel electric transportation. 

 

I certainly think that if enough people go to their dealers and ask them for a car that plugs in and when they say they don't have one then respond that you will wait to buy a car until they have a plug-in then that is going to influence the vehicle manufacturers decisions.  I don't know if Plug-in America will champion a boycott of none plug-in transportation but I do know that some senior executives at Plug-in America are looking closely at this issue.  If Plug-in America doesn't do it then someone will; and soon.

 

I think that it is more important that we follow through and, assuming that the plug-in vehicle is affordable, we actually go out and buy one when it becomes available.  I for one an expecting my next car purchase to be a plug-in hybrid and I know I can continue to drive my Prius until one becomes available.  The automobile manufacturers have a habit of making it difficult to buy plug-in vehicles then claiming their is no demand.  That's difficult to do if the cars are flying off the lot as fast as they arrive like the Prius did in 2004 where inventory times at dealers were counted in hours rather than days or weeks.

Sunday March 30, 2008 - ZEV Mandate the results are in - Last Thursday the California Air Resource Board (CARB) met to review the California Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Mandate and the published staff report appeared to show that the mandate would be totally gutted.  Well, the results are in and, while things could be better, they are not as bad as they were in the staff proposal.

 

The day started with public testimony, first from the automobile manufacturers and then from the general public.  Unlike the last CARB review where then chairman Alan Lloyd gave the automobile manufacturers as much time as they wanted then cut the public testimony and even stopped some members of the public having their say, Mary Nichols gave each person three minutes to present their views so everyone who wanted got their turn,

 

The Board were not overly impressed with Staff recommendations feeling that they had cut the program too deeply.  The result was better than expected but not as good as those in the BEV community would have liked. 

 

Staff had proposed that the number of true ZEVs that must be produced in the 2012-2014 time period would be 2500 vehicles.  The Board increased this number to 7500 vehicles; not as good as the original 25,000 vehicles but better than the staff recommendations.  

 

Now, CARB has this really complicated set of credits that were intended to jump start the ZEV mandate by giving more points to vehicles placed in service early and since the number of credits that each manufacturer has accumulated has always been kept secret the impact of past credits on the numbers above is impossible for the layman to gauge.  One of the staff recommendations that the Board accepted was that the number of credits banked by the OEMs will be made public record by 2010 which will then let us figure out just how many vehicles have been placed in service and how many credits the Automobile Manufactures have banked.

 

They also introduced a new classification of vehicle, the long range Fuel Cell Vehicle (FCV) which is defined as a fuel cell vehicle that has a range of over 300 miles on a tank of hydrogen.

 

The CARB summary lists the following number of vehicles that would need to be produced by the large volume manufactures.   The minimum number of vehicle then can get away with is 5357 long range FCVs.  If they want to fulfill their requirement with regular fuel cell vehicles then they will need to place 7500 vehicles in service, and if they want to fulfill their obligation using BEVs then they would need to place 12,500 vehicles in service.  It should be noted that we are talking freeway capable electric vehicles here not NEVs or City EVs.  

 

These numbers can, of course, be offset by accumulated credits so the actual number of vehicles placed into service is unknown but will certainly be less than the numbers quoted above.  It should also be noted that these numbers are spread over the five large volume manufacturers, Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan and Toyota.  A large manufacture is one that sells more than 60,000 vehicles per year in California. 

 

There are several manufactures poised to move from medium to large volume over the next few years and the Board once again rejected the staff proposal to give them twelve years to transition, leaving the transition period at its current six years before they have to meet the ZEV requirements.

 

The new requirement also requires the large volume manufacturers to produce 58,000 plug-in hybrids in the 2012-2014 time period.  Since at least three of the manufacturers, GM, Ford and Toyota all have plug-in hybrid projects in the works, this will spur them toward getting these cars on the road.  

 

Finally the Board directed Staff to totally overhaul the ZEV program for 2015 and beyond.

 

Overall I think that these revisions still put too much emphasis on fuel cell vehicles and not enough on battery electric vehicles but the results are certainly much better than the staff recommendations.  Unfortunately we won't know just how this will translate to actual vehicles in the hands of consumers but I think it is enough to keep vehicle manufactures programs active.

 

The biggest losers here may be the small start-up companies like Phoenix Motor Cars, Commuter Cars, ZAP and Tesla.  With the prospect of both BEVs and plug-in hybrids being sold by the big OEMs it becomes much less likely that people will be willing to spend lots of money on a BEV from a small company.  Tesla of course stands the best chance here since their roadster is very different from anything that the big five are likely to produce.

 

Phoenix must be very disappointed with the outcome of this meeting.  Their business plan called for selling credits to the big five to keep the cost of their SUT down to affordable levels.  Since the OEMs probably won't need to buy a lot of credits for a while this may mean that Phoenix may need to re-price their vehicles upwards.  I could also see them as being a target for one of the big companies like Ford or Chrysler who could get a pretty decent BEV for much less than the cost to develop one and get it to market.

Sunday March 23, 2008 - New York 2008 - The New York Auto Show is in full swing and once again we are seeing the automakers trying to project a greener image.  

 

For starters GM's Vice Chairman of Global Product Development, Bob Lutz, was there showing pictures of the first Continental Lithium Ion Battery pack featuring A123 technology that will be tested in the Chevy Volt.  The pictures showed a metal case in still in the crate with no indication of the internals of the battery pack.

 

Mr. Lutz also announced that GM would be launching 16 hybrids over the next four years and this will include some with their two mode hybrid system.  He also hinted that there would be a lot more flex fuel cars coming from GM.  He is quoted as saying that GM intended to be the "world wide fuel solutions leader and undisputed environmental and technological leader in the industry."

 

Mitsubishi were also showing their i-MiEV electric car.  This car has a 330 volt lithium battery pack driving a 47KW permanent magnet motor giving a top speed governed to 80mph and a range of about 80 miles.  Unlike the Chevy Volt show car, which only has a golf cart motor and can barely move, Mitsubishi had a car on hand to allow journalists to take a test drive.  The car is currently undergoing fleet tests in Japan and should go on sale to the public there in 2009.  Mitsubishi used the New York Auto show to announce that it would also be doing fleet tests with select US power companies starting in the fall of this year.  No companies were mentioned by name but Southern California Edison is strongly tipped to be among those getting cars.

 

Subaru was also showing its R1e electric car at the show.  The R1e is powered by a lithium battery pack that is supposed to have a 10 year 100,000 mile life and can be recharged to 80% of capacity in about 15 minutes using a special charger or fully charged in 8 hours from a standard 110V receptacle.  The car, which has a top speed of 65 mph and a range of about 50 miles, has been tested in Japan for the last two years.  Subaru announced a formal partnership with the New York Power Authority to test the R1e in the USA. 

 

Nissan also had an EV concept at the New York Auto Show, the Denki Cube Concept, an electric version of Nissan Cube micro-car currently being sold in Japan.  Apparently Denki is the Japanese word for electricity.  The Denki Cube is, as its name implies, a boxy looking car that is very similar in appearance to the Scion Xb.  The car is powered by a lithium battery pack.  Nissan have been using lithium packs since the late 1990s when they leased a small number of Nissan Altras and Nissan Hyperminis in California.  There was no indication of any plans to put the Denki Cube into production although Nissan has said that they see the future in battery powered EVs.

 

The New York Auto Show was also the venue used to formally announce the X-Prize $10 million competition to the public.  Progressive Insurance was also announced as the X-Prize sponsor.  $7.5 million will go to the first company to produce a vehicle that can achieve a fuel economy rating equivalent to 100mph.  Now, several people have built cars that can do this but the kicker here is that the car also has to carry four people, do a top speed of 100mph and have a range of 200 miles on a tank of gas.  There is also a secondary prize of $2.5 million to the first company to build a car that will seat at least two people, have a top speed of 80 mph, have a range of at least 100 miles before refueling, and get the equivalent of 100 mpg.  The kicker here is that the car must also pass federal safety requirements and must sell at least 10,000 vehicles.

 

To date there has been approximately 18 entries into the competition including electric car companies Commutacars and Aptera.  It will be interesting to see who finally comes up with a winning entry.

 

2008 is rapidly shaping up to be the year of the EV.  While many companies are talking about 2010 as the year that they will launch their electric vehicles it is this year that the vehicles are starting to come to light.  I expect to see more announcements from the big auto companies as they realize that they can't deliver on fuel cell vehicles in a timely manner and finally get the notion that battery electric vehicles are the wave of the future.  Look for announcements on plug-in hybrids at the LA and Detroit auto shows.

Sunday March 16, 2008 - Sustainable Development - Over the last couple of weeks I have been spending some time down in south Orange County and I have seen the kind of development that is built around the use of an automobile.  This kind of development is a big reason that America is addicted to oil.

 

The area of Aliso Viejo, close by the 73 toll road, has lots of development going on.  The development is the old fashioned sort of development where one vast tract is being developed into housing, another has office buildings springing up like weeds, and a third area is a mini-mall grown to gigantic proportions.  Vast amounts of acreage is dedicated to parking lots and the whole thing is fed by miles of wide multi-carriage surface streets that cars zip along at 45-50 mph.

 

Now, that might sound pretty good, and it does mean that people can live, work, and shop all within the area, but the big problem is that the different zones aren't close enough together to make it possible to walk anywhere.  If you want to go to the store then you have to get into the car, want to go to work and again you need to get into your car.  Since the different areas are only a few miles apart, the car is constantly being run at low temperature which is when the internal combustion engine is just at its most polluting.  Of course electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles are perfect for this type of driving, but not driving at all would be even better.

 

If they want to take their kids to school then you have to drive.  If they opt to carpool with the other moms then they need a bigger vehicle which in South Orange County means a full sized SUV.  Imagine how much better it would be to walk the kids to school instead of Chauffeuring  them to school in a barely warmed up 14mpg SUV.  The exercise would do everyone a world of good.

 

Even a trip to the bank requires that you get in your car and drive a few miles.  Banks are few and far between in that area but accommodations are being made.  I found a Wells Fargo bank branch located in a Vons grocery story and my carpool partner Jerry found he could make a deposit at an ATM inside a Burger King without incurring ATM fees.

 

I did observe one piece of development that was trying to address this.  There is a row of town houses that is being built in a complex that is walking distance from the office complex, the public library, and a smaller shopping complex that hosts a grocery store.  This row of town houses is being built as a mixed use building.  The ground floor level is set up to be shops while the upper two levels is living space.  The idea is that people can run a business from the ground floor while living above the shop.

 

The only issue I had with this is that the ground floor business areas where too small for any serious business.  Half the space appears to be taken up by garage leaving only a small space for business.  Once again accommodating the automobile is getting in the way.  Three of the shops appear to be taken by hairdressers.  The problem here is that they each only has room for one chair.  Still, the idea of mixed use development is beginning to spread.

 

For those that have to work further away there is no real public transportation system that is close enough to work well so everyone must get into their cars and drive.  The main access into the area is via the 73 toll road which means an extra eight dollars a day.  Toll roads of course are just another form of disguised taxation since the money to build the roads is provided by a private party then paid back by the people who drive the road instead of the money coming from a bond issue then being paid back from the tax that people pay on their cars.

 

The ideal situation is that people live in a community where everything they need is close by.  Where people can live, work and play within their community.  It has to be understood that not everyone will be able to work close to home so the community will have to be near to public transport, preferably an electrified rail system.  The other alternative is for people to be able to telecommute.  I work with people who live in places like Phoenix and Oklahoma City who are just as able to complete their work as they would be if they went into the office every day.  I understand that telecommuting isn't always possible but companies need to start making it happen instead of blocking it at every turn.

 

Before the dawn of the automobile age most people never traveled more than thirty miles from their place of birth.  I'm not saying that we should go back to that but going back to a state where everything you need is close at hand and you only have to travel when you want to not because you have to. 

 

I have to admit that I have one of the longest commutes of anyone that works for my company and only mitigate that by carpooling and the occasional telecommute.  The company I work for openly discourages telecommuting and that is something that I have to work on.  I live in an area where I can walk to the local grocery store, drug store, library and several excellent restaurants.  It would be nice if I could leave my car at home most of the time like I did when I lived in London. 

Sunday March 9, 2008 - Geneva 2008 - The Geneva Auto Show just got into high gear and we have seen a host of encouraging announcements that show the auto industry is moving in a more sustainable direction.

 

The biggest announcement of the week came from electric car maker Th!nk Nordic.  They announced that they are going to begin delivery of the Th!nk City to customers in Norway starting this spring.  They also showed a concept car called the Th!nk Ox.  This car is basically a five passenger crossover but styled to be very aerodynamic.

 

The car will come with a 60KW electric motor and a choice of NiNaCl or Li batteries.  With a top speed of 130 km/hr and a target range of 200 Km this is just the kind of car that people have been looking for.  It appears that Th!nk intends to produce this car.

 

Other good news for Th!nk is that GE have invested four million dollars in the company.  It is good to see that a company with deep pockets like GE is getting behind this tiny electric car manufacturer.  GE also announced that it is going to invest twenty million dollars in lithium battery maker A123 who will be supplying one of the battery pack options being offered by Th!nk.

 

The biggest bombshell that came out of the Geneva Auto show wasn't one of the cars however but statements made by both GM and Toyota about fuel cell vehicles.

 

First it was GM vice president of product development Bob Lutz who said "recent advances in lithium batteries indicate that future electric cars might be able to travel 300 miles on a charge".  He went on to say, "If we get lithium-ion to 300 miles, then you need to ask yourself, Why do you need fuel cells?". He also stated that fuel cells are still too expensive, saying "We are nowhere near where we need to be on the costs curve".

 

Somewhat less of a bombshell but significant never-the-less was Toyota President Katsuaki Watanabe who noted, not for the first time, that the high cost of fuel cells and lack of infrastructure was a barrier to sales of fuel cell vehicles to the public.  He stated "it will be difficult to see the spread of fuel cells in 10 years time".

 

Hybrids, on the other hand, were on display in abundance.  Volkswagen for example showed their concept Golf TDI hybrid, which features a 27 hp electric motor and a 1.2 liter 3 cylinder common rail turbo-diesel, giving fuel consumption of 69mpg.  VW say this car is almost production ready.  

 

Another diesel hybrid on display was the Mercedes BlueTEC Hybrid from Daimler.  This SUV has lithium ion batteries and a 224hp 2.2 liter blue tech diesel engine which Daimler claim has the lowest CO2 emissions of any SUV on the planet.  There was no indication if Daimler planned to produce this car.

 

Saab took the concept one step further with its 9X BioHybrid concept car.  The BioHybrid, which looks like yet another crossover SUV, is powered by a 1.4 liter flex fuel engine coupled with GM's next generation hybrid drive based on lithium batteries to give an overall fuel economy of 48mpg when using gasoline and a little less when running on E85.  GM did not have plans to produce this vehicle but said that they plan to sell 100,000 hybrids per year when the second generation hybrid power train come on line.

 

Fisker has its plug-in hybrid on display in Geneva.  The Fisker concept sports car has a large battery pack, big enough to let the car run 50 miles electric only before needing a recharge.  Once the batteries are depleted an ICE comes on to provide the electricity needed for an additional 450 miles of range.  "We are getting up to 100 orders each week" a company spokes person told the Associated Press.  The car will cost around $80,000 and will go into production in late 2009.

 

Toyota, which doesn't have diesel technology to rival the European manufacturers is planning to expand sales of its hybrid vehicles in Europe.  They plan to have 18 different hybrid models available by the end of 2009.

 

It looks like we are reaching a tipping point for electric vehicles.  Car companies are now starting to look at hydrogen as a long term issue and see plug-in hybrids and pure electric vehicles as the way forward in the near term.  Still, it is companies like Fisker and Th!nk that are actually out there moving towards production.  It's time for the big boys to step up to the plate and get vehicles with significant electric range and recharge capability into the hands of the public.

Sunday March 2, 2008 - Mangling the Mandate - The California Air Resource Board (CARB) is due to meet on March 27 to consider the ZEV mandate.  The Staff report has just been released for public consideration and it is clear that CARB want to further Mangle this legislation.

 

The ZEV mandate was first adopted in 1990 after GM showed the Impact at the LA Auto Show and stated it's intention to manufacture this car.  Since then CARB has been steadily watering down the Mandate, modifying it in 1996, 1998, 2001 and 2003.  Each time the number of ZEVs that the large automobile manufacturers must produce has been reduced.

 

The latest Staff report is no exception.  Under these revisions the number of ZEVs that must be placed in service in California is exactly 0.  The traveling provision that was introduced in 2003 has been extended to cover not only fuel cell vehicles but also battery electric vehicles.  

 

The manufacturers do still need to put some ZEVs on the road, just not in California.  The cars can be placed in service in any of the 10 other states that now follow California's emission laws and still count towards the California total.  The total has, in fact, become a total for all states that follow the California rules.

 

In reality most of the ZEV vehicles will be placed on the roads in California and New York state and it is the smaller states like New Mexico that are not going to see any ZEVs on the road for a long time.

 

The CARB staff proposal has also reduced the number of vehicles that are to be delivered in the 2009-2011 model year period from 25,000 down to 2,500.  This clearly shows how the automobile manufacturers hoodwinked CARB when CARB did the 2003 modifications.  These manufacturers did a good job of persuading CARB that they could begin commercialization of fuel cell vehicles by 2008 when groups like Plug-in America were telling them it wasn't possible.  It turns out that Plug-in America was correct.  I will further predict that the 25,000 fuel cell vehicles that CARB is expecting to be produced in the 2012-2014 model year period won't be built either.

 

Then again, CARB isn't expecting the manufacturers to actually build that many vehicles.  On page 29 of the report is table 4.4 which sets out a scenario where the large manufacturers use their banked credits.  In this scenario they would, as a group, only need to produce 250 fuel cell vehicle with a 200 mile range and 10 minute fill times, and 200 fuel cell vehicle with a range less than 200 miles to full the 2009-2001 requirement.  In years 2012-2014 they would need to build just 2,500 of the 200 mile range Fuel cells, 3125 fuel cells with less than 200 mile range,  4,167 Freeway capable EVs, and about 11,250 City EVs.

 

The big question here is where did the six biggest automobile manufacturers get their banked credits.  There hasn't been a single EV sold by one of these manufacturers since very early in 2003 and they have only put a handful of fuel cell cars on the road since then, including only 3 that are in the hands of individuals rather than fleets.  One good recommendation of the staff report is the provision to make information on the ZEV credits available to the general public. 

 

Another good provision is the merging of the two tracks that were introduced in the 2003 modification back into a single track.  The Automobile manufacturers would not have to select to take the fuel cell route or the battery electric route, they can now meet their obligations with a mixture of battery electric and fuel cell vehicles.  This makes a lot more sense than having manufacturers elect one route or the other and gives them much more flexibility to exploit evolving technologies.

 

Another provision is the increase in credits that are awarded to NEVs.  NEVs, although ZEV, can only be used to offset AT-PZEV requirements.  That means that they are treated like a Prius of Honda Civic Hybrid rather than a true ZEV.  Many of the battery electric vehicle advocates pushed of this in 2003 since they want to see freeway capable EVs on the roads.  However, a ZEV is a ZEV and if you can offset miles driven, especially for very short trips where and ICE is at its most polluting, then the air quality issues are being addressed.  

 

There were also a couple of interesting factoids buried in the report.  It appears that sales of NEVs in California is falling.  I am not sure if this is a comparison using 2001 and 2002 as a yardstick where Chrysler and Ford, and to a lesser extend GM, dumped large numbers on NEVs onto the market in California at prices that were little more than cost.  I have heard that NEV sales are going down in general but this appears to be part of the general economic downturn rather than people moving away from NEVs.  The second factoid concerned the Type VI ZEV which is basically a fuel cell vehicle with a range of greater than 200 miles and fast refill capability.  The manufacturers are going to 10,000 psi tanks and it appears that the current fueling stations are not able to fill these in under 10 minutes so the cars don't qualify as type VI ZEVs even though they have a range of over 200 miles.

 

 In the end, CARB are still trying to push fuel cells and appears to be doing its best to ignore the strides that have been made in battery technology over the last few years.  We now have the ability to make and sell a decent ZEV at an affordable price.  Perhaps we can't build one that will go 80mph on the freeway for 200 miles with a battery pack that will last for 20 years or 150,000 miles, but we can build a car that will function quite adequately and cost effectively as a second or third car for the family.

 

If CARB want to really promote ZEVs then let the 25,000 vehicle requirement stand.  Allow the manufacturers to fill this limit with fuel cell vehicles, freeway capable EVs, city EVs, NEVs, or credits bought from smaller manufacturers including makers of battery electric three wheelers like ZAP, Twike and Aptera.

 

Comments on the Staff report can be made here and I urge anyone that lives in one of the states that supports the California rules to let CARB know that they need to stop weakening the mamdate.  States that have adopted the ZEV mandate are 

Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

 

The six large volume manufacturers effected by the mandate are Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Nissan, and Toyota.  Large volume manufacturers are defined as those that sell more than 60,000 cars per year in California.

Sunday February 24, 2008 - Death and Taxes - In a letter to Jean-Baptiste Leroy written Nov 13, 1789, Benjamin Franklin said, "In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes."

 

Benjamin Franklin, while being the best known, wasn't the first to express this sentiment.   That honor goes to Daniel Defoe who, in The Political History of the devil written in 1726 wrote "Things more certain as death and taxes, can be more firmly believed."

 

This week the husband of a friend passed away and it's time to get my tax information ready for my accountant so death and taxes are firmly on my mind.

 

Nobody likes paying taxes.  I look on them as a necessary evil.

 

The basic purpose of taxes is a way to fund government. In reality, taxes are used for many other purposes, to build and maintain infrastructure, to educate our children, to fight wars, to take care of those unable to care for themselves, and to promote changes in behavior.

 

It is the last item that has a large impact on alternative fuel vehicles. 

 

Taxes have often been used as a carrot and stick.  For example high taxes on gas in Europe have lead to people driving smaller, more fuel efficient cars while in the US, low gas taxes and subsidies to oil companies (from taxes) have kept gas prices low and vehicles large.

 

I have said over and over on these blogs that we need to have a huge push to move the world towards a more sustainable future.  That means cutting subsidies to oil and gas companies and move that money toward solar, wind, wave an geothermal energy generation; toward better more usable public transportation; and towards zero emission vehicles.

 

That brings us back to 'death'; thousands of people die each year as a result of health problems brought on by vehicle and other emissions.  This should not be acceptable in a modern society.  We, at the very beginning of the twenty-first century, need to solve this problem for future generations so our great grandchildren, as they move into the twenty-second century, will live in a world with clean air to breath and a sustainable lifestyle to preserve the world for future generations.

 

If that happens then I will consider my taxes as money well spent.  

Sunday February 17, 2008 - A Vision of the Future - I have been reading a lot of different things about the past, present and future of personal transport over the last few months so I thought it would be fun to speculate a little on a possible future weekend trip.

 

It's Friday afternoon and time for me to finish work.  The company I work for is based in Aliso Viejo about sixty miles south of LA in Northern Orange County.  The drive home might seem daunting but not for me; I shut down the computer and walk over to the living room where my wife is watching a sitcom on the large screen TV.  Telecommuting is much easier than having to slog through all that traffic every day.

 

This weekend in Presidents day weekend and we are going to take a trip to Las Vegas.  We already have a room booked for two nights at the Flamingo and just need to get there.  When the next advert comes on I grab the remote keyboard and log on to the Amtrak  web site.  I find that there is a train leaving for Las Vegas at 10am tomorrow and I book two seats. 

 

On Saturday morning we get up and have a leisurely breakfast then flip on the TV and go to the LA MTA web site to pull up the Red Line information.  I see that there is a train that will get me to Union Station in plenty of time to make my connection.

 

Picking up our luggage Aggie and I head down to the garage and get into our Smart.  The Smart, which was provided as part of our rideshare membership, is an excellent car for getting around town.  The Zebra batteries give the car a range of 70 miles and a top speed of 60mph which is perfect for a city car.

 

It's a short hop to the transfer station at Wilshire and La Cienega where I pull the Smart into the large underground parking lot and navigate over to the car share area and plug in to one of the charging towers powered from a large solar array up on the roof of the transfer station.

 

When we get down onto the platform the display tells us that the east bound red line train will be arriving in two minutes.  When the train arrives it isn't too crowded so we get some seats for the twenty minute trip into Union Station.

 

Union Station is bustling with people getting out of town for the long weekend.  Aggie and I go to the ticket machine, I swipe my smart card, and the machine delivers two boarding passes for the 10am train.  Next we have to pass through security.  Since we are registered travelers this isn't too much of a problem.  We go to the registered travel lane, swipe our smart cards then look into an eyepiece to get a retina scan.  Once the computer has identified us the barrier opens and we are through onto the platform.

 

The indicator shows that the train will be arriving in five minutes so we find a seat until the train pulls into the platform and disgorges a horde of travelers coming to see the sites of LA.  We already have our seat reservations so it is just a matter of finding the correct car and getting to our seats.

 

At 10am sharp the train doors slide shut automatically and it begins to accelerate out of the station.  At about 30mph we feel the maglev lift off the track and we are pushed back into our seats as the train quickly gets up to over 100 mph.  Los Angeles begins to recede into the distance as the train gets up to its top speed of a little over 300 mph.

 

The first stop on the trip is at Ontario Airport.  We start to slowing down as we come into the Ontario area and as we approach the airport we see the large storage tanks of bio-fuel that has now replaced most oil based aviation fuels.  The train accelerates out of the station once more and we move on to a stop in Victorville and Barstow.  As we leave Barstow we pass by the large new solar generating station that has been built there.  This power station uses a liquid salt process to produce electricity twenty-four hours a day.  We will pass several of these as we cross the Mohave desert.

 

The train makes another stop in Baker then starts the long run from baker to Prim on the Nevada side of the California-Nevada border.  Finally the train speeds its way into the rail station in down town Las Vegas.  It only took us a little over two and a half hours to travel from our home to Las Vegas which is much better than the usual five hour drive.

 

They have only just started building the subway in Las Vegas so we opt to use a car.  There is a rideshare pick-up point at the station so I go over there and swipe my card at the kiosk.  There computer screen at the kiosk shows me a list of available cars there but they don't have a Smart so in the end  I opt for a Miles NEV.  The Miles NEV is a nice four seat fully enclosed car with a top speed of 35mph and its lead acid batteries give it a range of around 30 miles.  It is quite adequate for getting us to our hotel.  

 

Las Vegas blvd. is busy as it always is but traffic still moves along at a steady 35mph and the Miles easily keeps up in the dash between traffic lights.  We pull into the Flamingo self parking and go up to the 3rd floor where there is a bunch of charging stations for electric cars at the rideshare lot.  We plug in the car and I swipe my smart card again.  The card is automatically charged for the twenty minutes and twelve miles I had driven the car.

 

During our stay in Las Vegas we travel around using the monorail that runs the length of the strip, or occasionally use the trams that run between casinos, like the one that runs from Bellagio to the Monte Carlo. 

 

On Monday we take in an early lunch at the Flamingo Buffet  before picking up another car at the rideshare stand in the Flamingo.  This time, since the Miles is no longer available, we select a ZAP Xebra to get us back to the station.  We catch the 2pm Maglev, getting us back home a little before 5.  

 

I log on to check on my emails and find that the couch we are having re-upholstered is ready.  I give a quick call to our nephew who says he can help us with the couch if we can get it home before 7pm.  The Smart isn't going to carry a couch.  I log on to the rideshare service and see that the lot at the Beverly Connection has a Dymac Truck available.  I reserve the truck then drive on down to pick it up. 

 

Arriving at the Beverly Connection I find the Dymac Truck and swipe my smart card to unlock it.  I take the truck down to Western and the upholstery company employees load the the couch up for me.  I give Reuben a call and he says he will meet me at the apartment in 20 minutes.  By the time I get home the truck state of charge is getting quite low but Reuben is already there so we lug the couch up to my place.  There is still enough charge on the truck to get it back to the Beverly Connection again but as I turn into the parking lot the low battery light starts to flicker.  I pull it into a free space, place it on charge, then swipe my smart car one last time and get charged for use of the truck.

 

The above may seem like it is fanciful but just about all the elements that I listed here, with the exception of bio fuels for airplanes, are already available.  Everything here from maglev trains to solar power stations that use hot salt to store heat so they can continue producing electricity after sunset, to rideshare systems that can use smart cards to control reservations and billing, are all here now.  Even the cars I listed are available now.  It's just a matter of building out all the infrastructure and you can have a world that needs a tiny fraction of the oil that is currently consumed to run our transportation systems.  

 

There are even a couple of states that have updated their low speed vehicle laws to allow them to travel 35mph not 25mph.  These laws aren't in place yet for California or Nevada but there is already an active movement here in California to get the laws changed and once California updates their laws other states will follow.

 

We know that oil will one day be in short supply.  We need to move towards the sort of future I have described otherwise we will be caught with our shorts down once again.

Sunday February 10.2008 - Internal Combustion - This week I just finished reading Internal Combustion by Edwin Black.  This is a fascinating book, based on thousands of hours of research by Mr. Black and his team, about how the Internal combustion engine became the method of choice to power our personal transportation.

 

The book begins with a very good overview of the early development of the horseless carriage.  It covers the rise of steam and the railroads, early developments in electric batteries and electric vehicles, and the growth of internal combustion powered vehicles.

 

The book goes on to discus the various ways that energy sources have been manipulated to keep costs up and the population dependent.  It starts with a history of how those in power have controlled sources of energy.  Things like the royal wood monopolies in England to the rise of the Hostmen of Newcastle, a cartel that controlled Coal throughout most of Europe.

 

There is a very good chapter on how bad pollution from horses really was.  By 1900 there were more than twenty one million horses working in the US.   The book tells us that "Each horse dropped between 15 and 35lbs of manure daily" which must have left the cities smelling pretty bad.

 

The book goes on to talk about fraud and stock manipulation that occurred with early battery manufacturers.  The book then focuses on Albert Pope who founded the Columbia Manufacturing Company and built the company up to where it had a virtual monopoly of bicycle manufacturing.  Eventually Columbia would begin manufacturing electric vehicles.

 

The next phase that Mr. Black documents was the rise of the Seldon patent.  George Baldwin Seldon was a patent attorney  who began by submitting a near worthless patent for an internal combustion engine vehicle.  It took sixteen years for Seldon to get his patent approved and over that time he carefully incorporated the developments of other inventors into his patent.  

 

In 1899 Pope bought the Seldon patent and began taking legal action to ensure that the growing number of car manufacturers paid license fees to build internal combustion engine cars.  Mr Black's contention is that the profits from royalties from the Seldon patent were much better than the profits from making electric cars so Pope actually stopped electric car production and, to further profits, actually bought out some other electric vehicle companies, such as Riker, and shut them down too.  Henry Ford fought against the patent and eventually got it overturned but by then the damage had been done and internal combustion had become the power train of choice.

 

The book also focuses on the plans put together by Henry Ford and Thomas Edison to build an electric car.  They made big announcements and even turned out a couple of prototype cars.  The plan was to make an affordable electric car, just as Ford had done with his Model T.  The project came to an end when Edison's laboratory in Orange, NJ was  burned to the ground in 1914.  The book implies that the fire occurred under suspicious circumstances but presents no evidence other than the fact that the fire spread through supposedly fireproof buildings.

 

The book goes on to document the conspiracy by GM, Firestone, Mack Truck, Phillips Petroleum, and Standard Oil of California to buy up electric trolley lines, shut them down, and convert them to bus service.  Mr. Black suggests that GM's intent was to eventually shut down public transportation totally so that people would be forced to rely on their automobile.  In the end, GM was found not guilty of "Conspiracy to secure control of transit systems" but guilty of "Conspiracy to monopolize the transit business for their own oil, tires, and busses."  The book does a fine job of documenting many of the street car lines that were shut down but for some reason skips over the best known of these, the Los Angeles system.

 

Mr. Black goes on to call for a Manhattan style project to move the US away from fossil fuels towards sustainable energy.  Then he blows it.  After telling us about how wonderful electric transportation and electric vehicles were, he buys into the hydrogen hype.  Instead of calling for electrification of railways and expansion of electric based mass transit with electric vehicles as the way to get around cities, he calls for a drive to move us towards hydrogen. 

 

If the ending of the book is disappointing for electric vehicle fans it does present an excellent overview of the rise of the internal combustion engine and how greed got us into the mess we are currently in with the environment and our dependence on foreign oil.  This book is well worth reading.

Sunday February 3, 2008 - The Berkley Climate Action Plan - Lots of people talk about climate change and the impact that it will have on peoples lives but the people of Berkley decided it was time to do something about it.  In November 2006 the citizens of Berkley passed ballot measure G by a staggering 81% of the vote.

 

Measure G set a goal of reducing the cities overall Green House Gas (GHG) emissions 80% by the year 2050.  The measure went on to task the city to develop an action plan, to be adopted by the city council in 2007, which sets a goal for GHG reductions in ten years and a plan to reach the 80% goal by 2050.

 

The city has missed its deadline but a draft report recently came out for public comment which sets a goal of reducing GHG emissions by 33% from 2000 levels and maps out a strategy to accomplish this.  It also recommends additional revisions to take into account new technologies that will eventually allow the city to reach the 80% reduction target by 2050.

 

The plan calls for the following

 

 

The plan appears to be well thought out and has specific methods for moving the city towards each of these goals.  For example the city is providing curbside recycling bins and requiring recycling at all public events to help reduce the amount of waste sent to land fills.

 

They are also recommending that new buildings and those that are being remodeled will have to go through an energy review and be built to reduce energy consumption.  The idea is to have green building methods become "Business as Usual".

 

The report starts out with a GHG inventory that shows that 26% of the cities GHG emissions comes from residential dwellings, 27% comes form commercial enterprises, and 47% comes from transportation.  It is this last category, transportation, and their plans to cut emissions in this sector, that I want to focus on.

 

One interesting piece of information was the statistics on where GHG emissions originate.  1Kw of electricity generation produces 0.5 lbs of CO2, 1 therm of natural gas consumed produces 12 lbs of CO2, and 1 gallon of gasoline produces 20 lbs of CO2.  These numbers are based on the specific mix of electricity generation from PG&E so your numbers will vary.  Based on these numbers, a Prius, which gets about 48 mpg would produce about .42 lbs of CO2 per mile while the typical electric vehicle, which gets around 3 miles per KWhr would produce approximately .17 lbs of CO2 per mile.

 

The plan is heavily weighted towards getting people out of their cars and onto public transportation, walking, or bicycling each day.  If we are really going to address global warming by reducing our carbon footprint, this is something that we will all need to do. 

 

Berkley, which is on the extensive Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system, already has pretty good public transport options, the best in the State of California.  Part of their plan calls for new residential buildings to be erected along existing public transportation corridors.  The idea is that if you live just a few blocks from the nearest BART station for example, then you can walk to the station and take public transport where if you live three miles from the nearest subway station you are more likely to hop into your car and drive to work.  They are also looking at bringing in businesses, like a menswear store, that will allow residents to shop locally rather than driving out to the Mall.

 

They are also plan to provide safe bike storage areas so that people who do live further from public transport can bike into the local subway station.  The idea is that they are more likely to use their bike if they can be sure that the bike isn't going to be stolen while they are at work of shopping.

 

One additional proposal was the introduction of Rapid Transit buses on a dedicated bus lane.  RTD busses have proved very popular here in Los Angeles but they act rather like subways in that they have limited stops.  In some cases this means that people must travel much further to the bus stop than they would for regular bus service which discourages older people who are less able to make the trek.  Yesterday I rode on one of the new Los Angeles Articulated busses on the 704 line from Santa Monica to Beverly Hills.  The ride was really bumpy and the buss rattled like it was going to fall apart; all in all not a pleasant experience.  If they introduce RTD they need to make sure that the busses are safe, quiet and pleasant to ride on.  I think that electric busses using overhead wires would be ideal for this type of application.

 

There are a couple of ideas in here that seem exceptional.  The first is to implement real time signage that will tell you what time to expect the next bus.  If you have ever sat at a bus stop waiting for a bus, with no idea when it will arrive because in congested cities bus schedules quickly become meaningless, then you could very quickly appreciate a sign that tells you that you have to wait 5 minutes for the next 704 bus.  The other idea is to implement regional bus passes.  This is a bus pass that can be used across all the various transport agencies.  In the case of Berkley this might include BART, AC Transit, and the local Municipal lines in the area.  This could be done pretty easily using smart card technology, allocating the cost of the pass to the various entities based on which transit systems the rider actually used.

 

The plan also calls for an increase is car sharing programs.  Again, the idea is to have residents rely on public transit for most of their needs but be able to use the car share system on the occasions when they need a car.  One thing I didn't see in the proposal was the concept of station cars.  It seems to me that if you are going to have people make much more use of public transit, a station car program, using cars like the Miles ZX40s NEV, would greatly increase the distance people would be willing to travel to the local subway station.

 

Another part of the proposal is to increase fees at parking meters and expand meters to areas where parking is currently free.  This will dissuade people from taking cars into the city but it also appears to me that is will encourage people to drive out to the Mall instead of shopping locally.  

 

They also mentioned public charging infrastructure. Currently the city has one public charging station at the Central Garage.  This station contains one Small Paddle inductive charge suitable for charging the RAV4 EV and the Chevy S10E, and one AVCON suitable for charging the Ford Ranger EV and a few conversions.  There is no 110V charger at this site that would be useful for charging NEVs, Electric Scooters, Plug in Hybrids, ZAP Xebras, or most conversions, even though these probably make up the bulk of electric vehicles in Berkley.  I also hear that this site is commonly ICED making it very unreliable.  If the city is going to provide charging infrastructure it needs to provide usable infrastructure and needs to put out legislation with teeth to make sure that the chargers are available and working when an EV driver needs them.

 

There are also chargers at the Ashby Bart station but they have been out of service for months, and the one at UC Berkley also gets regularly ICED but this location also needs a permit so it is unavailable to the general public.  I recently came across a RAV4 EV driver who had to visit Berkley but couldn't be sure that there was charging so had to drive his ICE as he couldn't rely on getting a charge in Berkley while he was at his meeting.

 

The City of Berkley has also moved their fleet from regular Diesel to B20.  This has already reduced their carbon footprint but the report calls for moving all the city's diesel vehicles over to B100.  The plan also calls for making bio-diesel more available in the city.  The plan didn't seem to mention Ethanol at all, which indicates that the city understands that given the current state of Ethanol production they can't achieve a 33% reduction of GHG emissions by 2020 by a switch to E85.

 

Overall, the Berkley plan is very good and it is hoped that other cities see what Berkley is doing and begin to adopt similar measures.  I think this is a case of Berkley leading by example and while their solutions may not fit every city, it is a good start on getting GHG emissions under control.

Sunday January 27. 2008 - Smart Arrives - On Friday evening I was walking down Beverly Blvd passed Mercedes Benz of Beverly Hills and sitting at the Curb were two Smarts.  They were part of the new Smart Center at the dealership.  The Smart has finally arrived in the US.

 

The new Smart for two is a tiny two seat car that has been selling in Europe for many years.  The original car was a design collaboration between Daimler and Swiss watch manufacturer Swatch.  Daimler Chrysler had talked about bringing the Smart over to the US at least three times but each time they would reverse their decision before they really spent any money preparing the car or the distribution channel.

 

The 2008 was different though, it was designed from the get-go to comply with US crash safety standards.  The result is the smallest car that can legally run on the US freeways.  The redesign produced a slightly larger vehicle, 7.7 inches longer than the older model but still shorter than a Mini Cooper by 3 feet.  Daimler have still managed to retain the distinctive looks that have made the Smart so popular.

 

Gone too is the old turbo charged power plant which was replaced by a 1 liter 3 cylinder engine built by Mitsubishi that is capable of delivering around 70hp.  The old 6 speed transmission was also replaced with a 5 speed automated manual transmission, one that shifts itself.  The car delivers an EPA estimated mileage of 34mpg in the city and 40mpg on the highway.  For comparison, the Mini gets 26mph in the city and 34mpg on the highway with automatic transmission.   While gas mileage isn't stellar, only the Toyota Prius and the Honda Civic hybrid does better when you look at the new 2008 EPA mileage estimates, which are done to produce more realistic values than the old EPA procedure.

 

For several months now Daimler have had their reservation system open, and $99 would reserve you a Smart which sells for as little as $12,000 for the base model.  They claim to have taken over 30,000 orders, which exceeds the current annual production of the Smart factory in France.  I am not sure if the 30,000 number is correct but Mercedes Benz of Beverly Hills had taken 22 orders prior to starting their Smart Center.

 

The Smart offers a nice option for commuting into the city where parking space is at a premium.  It can be parked in a space about half the size of a compact car and can even be parked with the rear wheels to the curb and still fit in a standard parking space.  This isn't always a good idea though since many cities have ordinances which require the wheels to be parallel to the pavement. 

 

There is always someone who suffers though and in this case it is the ZAP dealers that still have Americanized ZAP Smarts on their lot.  These cars, that used to sell for over $26,000 dollars are now going to be very hard to move.  Still, people may be willing to pay the premium to get the original Smart.

 

The Smart Fortwo has always been popular with EV converters.  Its small size, light weight, and low cost make it ideal for conversion to an electric city car, and make and excellent Station car.  Several EV converters, including AVT in the UK, have had Smart as an option.  The problem in the US has always been that the Smart wasn't legal here so getting models has been difficult and fitting them out so they can pass US crash worthiness standards is expensive.  Now that there is a street legal version on the roads it won't be long before we see a Smart EV on the roads.  Who knows, Daimler might decide to bring their own Smart EV over to this side of the Atlantic.  

Sunday January 20, 2008 - Trouble at Tesla - I have been picking up a lot of buzz over the internet that would seem to indicate that all isn't well with Tesla.

 

It appears that there is currently a bloodbath going on in San Jose where Martin Eberhard hasn't been the only one to whom they have said farewell.  It seems that Tesla is laying off, or firing lots of employees and one or two people have speculated that this is an indication that Tesla may be setting up to shut down operations. 

 

I think this may be more of a case that the new management is cleaning house and bringing in their own people.  This isn't totally unprecedented but the way Tesla is going about it in a very ham fisted way, if a blog since taken down from the internet at Tesla's bidding is to be believed.

 

What is most disturbing in the blog is that Tesla appears to have eliminated their entire Human Resources department.  This would make it very difficult to recruit new people to replace the ones being terminated.  I took a quick look at their web site and they do have a list of 43 job openings which does seem to support my contention that this is a sweep for the new management to get rid of the old guard.

 

They also appear to have eliminated some key individuals such as their VP of manufacturing, the lead engineer on Tesla's motor team, and the VP of Whitestar.  In all they seem to have eliminated about 26 people which, given the size of Tesla Motors, must have turned their San Jose facility into a ghost town.  All the jobs that they have eliminated appear in their Job openings page.

 

It should be noted however that Tesla always planned on having the Roadster built by Lotus in the UK so the staff cuts may not impact production.  What appears to be at issue is the ruthless way that Tesla did the cuts.

 

Still, in a blog from December 27, 2007 the new President and CEO Ze'ev Drori states "Our goal is to start full production of Tesla Roadsters in spring 2008".  He also updated the situation with the transmission.  Tesla will be shipping the car with a temporary transmission which should provide the reliability needed for a production car.  This transmission won't allow full performance though with 0-60 times of around 5.7 seconds instead of the promised 4.0 seconds.  They will continue to develop the transmission until they have one that can deliver the 4.0 second 0-60 while being robust enough to meet reliability expectations.  When the new transmission is ready and tested it will be fitted into the early cars at no cost to the owner.

 

Mr. Drori also addressed the range issue.  The original EPA range test was done on an incorrectly calibrated system which gave a wrong range value.  The test has been re-done and the EPA range set at 221 miles.  In testing Tesla have reported ranges as good as 267 miles in slow city driving and as low as 167 miles when being driven hard on the highway.  I think that the range is going to meet owner's expectations.

 

Interestingly, Chairman of the Board Elon Musk wrote "Prior to beginning series production, our intent is to build production cars in limited quantity throughout the first half of 2008. This will allow us to exercise our manufacturing, supply chain and customer service capabilities before we enter full production. My car, production VIN 1, is already off the production line in the UK and final preparations are being made for importation." in his blog dated December 21, 2007.  It seems that some of the original signature 100 customers may start receiving cars early in 2008.

 

A quick review of the Tesla home page also revealed that they are now accepting reservations for their 2009 production cars.

 

Those who have followed evfinder.com will know that I have never been a big fan of Tesla ever since they totally ignored me when setting up their launch party while inviting other less well known EV advocates.  The current blood bath at Tesla only strengths my dislike of this company.  They appear to be delivering a fine product and have approached the design and manufacturing work in a very well thought out and effective way.  It will be good to see a freeway capable EV on US roads.  There is, however, a human side to business and ruthless treatment of your staff doesn't cut it in my book.  With such staff firings going on, moral must be very low at Tesla, and I wonder how long it will be before they are hit with lawsuits for improper termination.  

Sunday January 13, 2007 - Hydrogen Highway hits Speed Bump - When the California Air Resource Board killed the ZEV Mandate they replaced it with a grand plan to move to a hydrogen economy.  A key part of the plan was to build a "hydrogen highway" but that part of the plan is hitting significant speed bumps.

 

Over the last few months three of the state's existing hydrogen fueling stations have closed their doors and three others have been DOA.  This shows the chicken and egg nature of the hydrogen economy; you can't run fueling stations without customers to sell to and you can't get customers without places to refuel.

 

The State's plan was to create a network of 100 hydrogen fueling stations by running the length of the state by 2010.  This would allow fuel cell vehicle owners to drive wherever they wanted in California with just a little planning.  Back in late 2002, when I was a member of the Committee developing the Environmental Sustainability section of the future plan for the City of Beverly Hills, I met with one of then Governor Gray Davis's advisors.  He was totally convinced that Daimler Chrysler would have an affordable fuel cell car in the showrooms by 2005 so the hydrogen highway made a lot of sense.

 

The Automobile companies must of done a really good job of selling the fuel cell vehicle because, though many of us were very skeptical that the companies could have a car on general sale before 2020, a majority of the states lawmakers bought into fuel cells.  Having been sold on the fuel cell hype, it is understandable that CARB backed off the ZEV mandate although most of the board's members should have known better.

 

The State had pushed money into developing the hydrogen highway and it had been built up to around 25 fueling stations.  It has been hard for these fueling stations to remain viable however since there is only about 130 hydrogen fueled vehicles in California and some of these are the BMW Series 7 cars that use liquid hydrogen and can't use the gaseous hydrogen fueling stations that make up the hydrogen highway.

 

More of a concern than the current station closures are the three stations that never got off the ground.  State grants in the order of $1.1M to $1.5M were awarded to Cal State LA, San Diego Unified School District, and PG&E to open new hydrogen fueling stations.  None of these grants have been taken and the three fueling stations are DOA.  The LA times Quoted Jennifer Zerwer, spokesperson for PG&E, as saying "We took a look at where the technology was, and hydrogen seemed like a much longer-term solution."

 

It now looks unlikely that California will reach it's goal of 100 hydrogen fueling stations by 2010, even at a time when Honda, GM and Daimler are planning to roll out a limited number of fuel cell vehicles for testing by select members of the general public.  These companies are now targeting select areas that are adjacent to existing fueling stations.

 

Meanwhile, Governor Schwarzenegger just introduced a new budget for the cash strapped state which included $6M for the hydrogen highway at a time when the he is proposing that they close a number of state parks to save money.  It's time that the state comes to the realization that the hydrogen economy is a lot further off than they expected.  The $6M could be much better spend on electric vehicle infrastructure to encourage the new range of electric vehicles, many being built in California, that will be appearing on the roads during 2008.

Sunday January 6, 2008 - Solar Grand Plan - This week Bill Mason from the RAV4 EV group passed along an article entitled "A Solar Grand Plan" by Ken Zweibel, James Mason, and Vasilis Fthenakis  from Scientific American. In this article the authors lay out a master plan for providing 69% of US electricity from Solar by 2050.

 

The plan requires that the 30,000 square miles of desert in the South West be covered with solar panels.  While this space does sound vast, the authors suggest that when you take into account the land required for mining operations the amount of land is not more than would be needed for conventional coal fired plants.

 

The plan would produce something like 3,000 gigawatts (GW) of electricity but to achieve that the authors postulate that the efficiency of solar panels would need to be raised from about 10% we see with the latest technologies to about 14% and be installed at a cost of less than $1.20 per Kilowatt.  Since efficiencies of 16.5% have already been produced in laboratories this shouldn't be beyond our capabilities.

 

Solar energy is only available during the day when the sun shines but electrical energy is required twenty-four hours a day.  The authors suggest two ways of storing excess power for use at night.  The first method is to use compressed air.  Excess energy would be used to pump air into underground caverns during the day.  These underground caverns would be constructed where the geology of the region was favorable not necessarily in the South West.  At night this compressed air, along with a small amount of natural gas,  would be used to drive turbines to generate electricity.  The second method would be to use concentrator power plants that store heat using molten salt.  There is already a power plant like this in use in Spain but that only has 6 hours of storage before the salt solidifies, the plan calls for 16 hours of storage.

 

Energy would be distributed over a new DC backbone and converted to AC close to the areas where the power is consumed.  It was my understanding that Westinghouse's system of AC power generation won out over Edison's system because it was much easier to transmit AC power because of the difficulty of stepping up DC to very large voltages.  However, According to studies done at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory there is a lot less energy loss using High Voltage Direct Current.  This requires the construction of a whole new HVDC grid to accommodate this.

 

To make this project work the government would need to provide around $420 billion in subsidies in the early stages until the system got off the ground.  A large portion of this would be to build the HVDC backbone with the rest going to making the solar energy affordable in the early years.  To pay for this the authors recommend implementing a carbon tax, something that has been proposed as a way to curb greenhouse gas emissions.  One interesting item is the projection that the move to solar energy would create three million new jobs here in the USA.  

 

By 2050 they propose that 43,000 square miles of the South West USA would be taken up with solar power generation giving enough energy to power not only our homes and businesses but also 344 million plug-in hybrid cars and trucks.

 

The proposal appears to be quite well thought out and should be workable.  My only quibble with this paper is my usual one, it attempts a one size fits all solution.  They do talk about small quantities of wind, geothermal and bio-mass generation filling out the power generation model and they do project about 10% of power generation as being done locally using rooftop arrays.  They skate over the approximately 80 GW of large hydroelectric generation that we currently have in the USA.  They also don't consider new forms of power generation such as wave and tidal energy which could play a significant role in future power generation.  Tidal energy is particularly attractive since it is very predictable and can be harvested with little impact to the environment.  

 

There basic assumption also concentrates power generation in the south west while there are plenty of locations in the south east that are just a good for solar power generation.  All over the country we have large shopping centers with acres of parking lots where cars sit in the sunshine and bake until the driver gets in and cranks up the AC.  There is significant power generation capacity in covering these parking lots with solar panels so cars sit in the shade while the shopping center is powered by clean solar electricity.  I also see solar charging stations where electric vehicles can park and charge on clean solar energy while the driver shops, has a meal, or takes in a movie.

 

It appears that we are facing a triple whammy, global warming, oil shortages and dependence on foreign oil.  This proposal is one of the best that I have seen so far when it comes to dealing with these three problems.  It is in the best interest of the USA to move ahead with a program such as this.