realist2

A123 vs. BYD and Other Irrational Battery Investments

Meanwhile, back in reality, affordable, same price up front but better performing than gassers and cheaper to maintain, high performance, practical EVs keep proving themselves every day:

plugbike.com/2009/10/2.../

A123 Systems Files Price Range Amendment

Off topic, but it's about time mainstream analyst services started to get a clue:

www.reportlinker.com/p...

Postal Service Set to Lead the Way in Deploying Electric Fleet

Weak analysis by the Post Office. There's absolutely no reason for them to ever buy another full gasser on any basis.

"The average LLV is driven about 18 miles a day and roughly 96% of the LLV fleet drives less than 40 miles a day. The vast majority of LLVs are parked at Postal Service facilities from 5 p.m. till 8 a.m.

The proposal evaluated in the Postal Service feasibility study would replace the internal combustion engine and drive train with an electric drive and 20 kWh of lithium-ion batteries of unspecified chemistry."

20 kWh is way overkill, as a 10 kWh NEV (there's no mailboxes or mail delivery on interstates) with 200 V 35 amp or similar typical quick charge plug in at lunch hour for 80% recharge would cover more than 96% of all mail delivery driving needs, and certainly cost less than $40,000 each. I know some of the big machines at many post offices already use 220 V, so this is not exactly rocket science. Li-ion'll (choose your favorite flavor) last more than 5 years, too, if the vehicle has modern BMS, PMS and thoughtful algorithms, just with gradually reduced range before top off, so older ones will be eventually be used on the shortest, slowest routes or simply top off a little more during off peak hours during the day. A little common sense goes a long way. Eventually, 220 V charging stations at major housing development post office boxes, with mail vehicles always getting priority for frequent off peak short time top offs (V2G on peak instead if remaining range/timing justifies), as the carrier fills the boxes, will make everything even easier and full day ranges even longer, if needed.

Since there are no mailboxes or mail delivery on interstates, why don't post offices use inexpensive NEVs with a 20 mile AER, opportunistically recharge during off peak (V2G on peak) during the day, and replace all old gasser LLVs right away and continously? They then have no unhelpful price difference between full gassers and BEVs and can make massive relative ROI with fuel and maintenance savings alone and sell the degraded but still useful for storage power pack at the cost of a new lower price one when time for replacement (10 years), with no need to do much V2G, so maximized power pack life. Of course, since such a BEV (they exist today) is cheaper than the current Post Office gasser LLVs, the Post Office would have lower budgets for cost savings to taxpayers, so we can't have that that happen. right?

Comparing my li-ion BEV (high performance highway capable street legal motorcycle) with my full gasser:

My two vehicles (BEV and gasser) cost exactly the same in up front costs, and I've spent an extra $500 on each vehicle in after market convenience parts to make each more comfortably rideable in the real world.

With my BEV:

Same up front price. No price differential.

I save $1,500 per vehicle year on reduced maintenance costs on just the owner's manual recommeded maintenance. Nothing has broken on either vehicle. That means I could purchase a new power pack every two years just on maintenance savings alone, but expect the power pack to last more than twice that before I want an upgrade and sell the still usable one for energy storage applications.

I have 7 days out of service for the full gasser each year and 0 days out of service for the BEV.

I save $750 per year on reduced fueling cost (my comparison gasser is quite fuel efficient, unlike 10 mpg LLVs).

I expect my power pack to last at least 5 years and have already made arrangements to sell it at a profit (that amount depends on usable capacity at that time) over the original purchase price at that time.

I make less than $5 per year on V2G so far, but I do it infrequently, rather than maximize it (I'm not interested in maximizing my power pack capabilities). However, when I do actual V2G in the real world, I make a 85.7% average transaction ROI from the power provider that I'm feeding (buy from wind, sell though solar).

It looks like I use a different business case than the post office, where I try to maximize power pack life for maximum resale value upon eventual replacement, rather than the Post Office intent to have continuous V2G earnings and minimize power pack life through increased cycles. If the two approaches are roughly equivalent, financially, I should be able to make about a $100 total profit on my power pack, about a 0.60% annual ROI, not great but better than some current so called safe investments, in additon to my return on my high ROI but infrequent V2G .

I am fully aware that my results are unique to me and apply to nothing else, though I am reassured with some of the consistency of my real world results with some of the Post Office assumptions.

Some of Post Office's assumptions appear either restrictively path dependent, pessimistic (unsupported or contradicted by actual history and data) or explicitly designed to minimize the life of the power pack rather than optimize ROI, at least to this real world BEV owner with real world experience. Willful obtuseness or uninformed, restrictive or pessimistic assumptions won't help save the Post Offive or any other fleet user any money, that's for sure, if it prevents them from taking the actions (get inexpensive NEVs with just enough daily range when using off peak during the day top offs to the power pack) that will save it money.

It's both sad and amusing to see institutions and businesses running away from and/or being dragged kicking and screaming to $100 bills being handed to them on silver platters.

Debunking PHEV Mythology

您是否也想要油煎的土豆？

Just helping Mr. Petersen in his future career.

Exciting Times as ATVM Loan and ARRA Battery Grants Announced

Easy chart with some more details:

www.reuters.com/articl...

Energy Storage on the Smart Grid: 99.45% Cheap and 0.55% Cool

Or if you prefer a US product, without the Li:

economictimes.indiatim...

Energy Storage on the Smart Grid: 99.45% Cheap and 0.55% Cool

I'm glad to hear your positive views on domestic natural gas. Are you as positive about domestic propane?

What would Hank Hill trade in his clunker for?

blogs.edmunds.com/gree...

The propane HEV uses lithium, but don't tell anyone.

On Jul 20 03:58 PM John Petersen wrote:

> Dirk, the costs of wind and solar keep falling and those that work
> in the generation field expect further economies, but solar is still
> more expensive than wind. While the feed-in tariffs can be problematic,
> the incorporation of storage into renewable power facilities does
> a lot of good for the fundamental economics. I think the big takeaway
> is that electricity is going to cost more tomorrow than it does today.
> One of the nice things about wind and solar is that once the systems
> are in, they work for a long time with minimal maintenance. So even
> if the economics don't pan out the way the initial investors planned,
> the generating capacity will still be there.
>
> The current religious fervor against carbon in all its forms is,
> in my view, counterproductive. I'm willing to accept the idea that
> coal is unacceptably dirty and that imported oil is too expensive,
> but when it comes to natural gas I'm firmly in the pro-development
> camp. We have lots of it at home and a wonderful national distribution
> system is already in place, so I think we're foolish to let an aversion
> put us in a position where we may have citizens freezing in the dark.
> Mercifully, I'm hearing a lot of pro-nuclear sounds coming from the
> DOE so maybe - just maybe - we'll both live long enough to see nuclear
> technology get back on track.
>
> Supercapacitors and flywheels are not large-scale energy storage
> solutions. They are power oriented frequency demand solutions that
> can only be used to smooth second to second spikes. When you start
> talking about storing energy to run a home, factory or city for hours,
> the grunt work will fall to pumped solutions, thermal solutions and
> batteries.
>
> Storage is an ultra-broad field and the simple fact is that there
> won't be a single dominant technology. It's hard to find suitable
> locations for pumped hydro and CAES, so while they're great their
> future is limited by topography and geology. Above ground CAES is
> great where feasible, but the industry really seems to be heading
> toward a distributed system where generation and storage will be
> located closer to the end user in order to increase security, reliability
> and performance.
>
> When all the shouting and hand-waving is done, the utilities are
> going to take the most cost-effective route to their goals. It's
> the ultimate cheap beats cool application. I really do believe that
> we need every storage technology we can get our hands on. The real
> key is to avoid the irrational beliefs that (1) a single technology
> will dominate or (2) cost per kWh out the factory door is not the
> only metric that matters.
>
> I'll have a follow up article in a day or two that adds some more
> color. Stay tuned.

On Oil's Sesquicentennial, The Dream Becomes a Nightmare

That's a good first step in understanding what's happening. A recent study of interest to insurance companies shows that very effect, with hybrid drivers using some of their fuel savings for more long distance non-commute related trips so that hybrids drivers drive more on average than non-hybrid drivers, with increased efficiency prompting more short term oil use (Jevons was looking at coal and steam engines).

A countervaling force to the Jevons effect in the efficiency gain whihc reults in lower resource use per mile traveled. The net result depends on which of the coutervailing forces dominates. In the case of a large stepwise improvement of efficiency, the efficiency gain dominates the Jevons effect for a net reduction of resource use (note that we still have coal (Jevons study) left on the planet). The addition to parallel hybrids, which use gasoline 100% for every inch moved, of ER-REVs and BEVs which use 100% electric drive (for an at vehicle efficiency leap of more than 60% (around 25% real world for liquid fuel engines to around 90% for electric motors) relative to extra time available for long road trips (who has time enough to increase their recreational driving by 60%?) and the limited AER of ER-EVs and BEVs before somewhat slower recharging or less currently ubiquitous power pack swapping provides some current disincentives for long road trips. We can thus see the efficiency of electric drive will dominate the Jevons effect at the vehicle level as vehicles increasingly have electric drive dominate their propulsion.

Plus, I'm not counting that electric drive can use anything for an energy carrier or for ER on the fly recharging, including propane (lpg), CNG, compressed air, fuel cells, non-food bio-fuels, etc., etc.

The part of the Jevons effect that will hasten declining oil use in vehicles (even if less so, overall, which still has benefits in lower production costs) is that as oil is demanded less, due to increased adoption of electric drive in vehicles, the price of oil goes down, which makes general production cheaper, through cheaper energy input costs, which makes vehicles with electric drive less expensive to produce which hastens their adoption. As the economy recovers, oil prices will stabilize at moderately high levels, but much less of the demand will be coming from personal transportation, that's all. Less pollution, which equal less health care costs which also reduces production costs.

The net result of all of thiswill be higher quality of life, less expensive products, oil companies will survive, though not with obscene profits and consumers get intrinsically high perfromance, luxury vehicles with maximum torque at 0 rpm and any time up to about half the maximum speed, instant, seamlessly smooth acceleration at all times, luxury quiet opartion and well controlled acceleration and braking in poor road conditions, all built in qualities of electric drive. Also, we'll see less military involvement overseas for the US to control low sulfur (transportation) oil resources, with corresponding reductions in costs and lives lost.

ak, all, rip my analysis to shreds.

On Jul 06 10:10 PM galewhitaker wrote:

> It's not a moot point. We have waited too long to convert to alternative
> energy (thanks to the oil companies). Peak oil will insure shortages
> which will cause chaos, war, starvation and death. There are almost
> one billion cars and trucks in the world today. Think what will happen
> to our economy when there is not enough gasoline to keep everyone
> moving. Think hybrids are going to solve the problem? Study Jevon's
> paradox. Jevon's paradox will insure that as cars and trucks get
> more efficient the public will use even more gasoline which will
> cause even more shortages.

Lithium-Ion Batteries for Hybrid Vehicles?

Chancer may wish to may wish to address the following obstacle I have heard about to gasoline use in vehicle engines:

The total world's known resources of oil in the first generation of automobile use was insufficient for wide spread use in making the numerous quantity of gasoline vehicles worldwide today and oil is nonrenewable with overall long term production declining. Most vehicle manufacturers will opt for energy carrier alternatives to gasoline that are cheaper and more plentiful, such as lithium and many, many other battery chemistries under development, biodiesel, non-food crop ethanol, lpg (propane), compressed natural gas, etc. etc. Electric drive is the end game. Deal with it.

Also, supply and demand interact and unlike oil, an energy source, lithium, an energy carrier, is not consumed forever when used. nor turned into unuasable pollution. Think through the interactions to realize that the end result is increased production and lower prices.

On Jul 12 04:39 PM Chancer wrote:

> With all due respect to the author, it is reasonable to consider
> that he may have a vested interest in promoting the use of Bolivia's
> lithium resources. I can imagine Bolivians in and out of govenment
> right now are collecting funds (or fees) from speculators (suckers)
> wanting to be first for Bolivia's new riches: lithium. In La Paz
> in 1980, the DEA head told me that the Bolivian national pastime
> was separating the gringo from his money.
>
> The author may wish to address the following obstacles I have heard
> about) to lithium use in vehicle batteries:
>
> 1- The total world's known resources of lithium are insufficient
> for wide spread use in making the numerous quantitiy of electric/hybrid
> vehicles worldwide. Most vehicle manufacturers will opt for alternatives
> to lithium that are cheaper and more plentiful.

Lithium-Ion Batteries for Hybrid Vehicles?

To be fair, I already do V2G with my electric vehicle during peak times, so my electric vehicle has REDUCED the risk the brownouts relative to the demand on the grid without electric vehicles.

Since I've purchased my highway capable electric motorcycle, my monthly electric usage has gone down, not up, as I now spend more time after work playing with my vehicle than I did at home blasting the air conditioner/heating, using the computer, plasma TV, etc., etc.

Tdot appears deeply uninformed about how plug ins are now playing out in the real world has done a wonderful job spreading FUD, old and misinformation and setting up straw men.

Try the 2007 NRCD/EPRI study that shows that the 2007 grid could handle an instant switch over to more than 75% electric vehicles. There are more recent studies with similar results. Do the basic research, please.


On Jul 12 03:07 PM Tdot wrote:
To be fair, the national grid is already strained to the limit on some days, particularly during summer afternoons and evenings, as home air conditioners are operating at "full blast", beating down the heat from the stove, home theater, computer, etc., never mind the heat from the sun and humidity. Add a few more kW to charge your car, along with thousands of your "neighbors", and an urban region like Detroit or Chicago could really "go brown" fast during a peak. It already happens now - brownouts and rolling blackouts - before plug-in electric cars. It can only get worse after, unless more Gigawatt-class power plants are built and networked-in at the same time.

Lithium-Ion Batteries for Hybrid Vehicles?

Considering all the lithium powered pedal assist bicycles and full electric bicycles, scooters and motorycles in China all over the place, and often the dominant form of non-walking transportation, the MIIT rule is completely meaningless. Perhaps they could get out the labs once in a while and smell reality. The future looks a lot like the recent past because it is the recent past, as news always lags behind reality.

Lithium-Ion Batteries for Hybrid Vehicles?

I use a $10 timer so that mine automatically charges off peak in the middle of the night while I sleep (try that with a gasser). You obviously don't own or use an electric vehiucle.

On Jul 12 12:00 PM Longinvestor wrote:

> Get ready for the 6 p.m. brownout as everybody gets home and plugs
> in their PHEV.

Auto Batteries: Short Term Revenue Growth Favors Lead-Acid by 6 to 1

Just because the LiFePO4 and LiMn2O4 cells in millions of outdoor building and landscape power tools, outdoor R/C vehicles and airplanes have been working so well for years, and now in high performance motocross motorcycles (think Baja 500 conditions), maxi-scooters and more is no reason to think that they won't work as well in slightly larger vehicles with much less stringent conditions (inside a climate controlled and protected (including four wheel suspension) container designed for safety (the vehicle)) and lower performance requirements, as the initial successes of such things as the mini E, the i-miev and the Stella show.

In my very humble opinion, you would promote advanced lead acid, especially for storage, much more credibly if you didn't take bashing the myriad of quickly improving li-ion chemistries, configurations and applications as your main strategy. I happen to think that advanced lead acid sounds great for the applications it excels at, while enjoying my li-ion powered high performance motorcycle every day.

I gotta go beat some Lamborghinis off the line and go do some 30 foot jumps through streams on my old high performance li-ion mn spinel cell powered electric motorcycle now. Later...


On Jun 29 12:37 AM John Petersen wrote:

> NorthernPiker, the bulk of humanity's experience with Li-ion batteries,
> regardless of the cathode type, has been small devices that are principally
> used indoors. The difference between a cellphone or laptop that is
> used in a limited range of conditions and a vehicle that needs to
> work in all conditions is immense. We also have no idea how the batteries
> will stand up to the rigors of the specific application and the vagaries
> of individual driving habits. It will take huge amounts of testing
> to gather enough data to make an informed judgment that will satisfy
> OEM boards and regulatory agencies.
>
> Lead acid batteries have been starting cars under all conditions
> for the last 75 years. The only difference with a micro hybrid is
> that the battery will need to start the engine more frequently. Using
> a more durable second generation product to do the same job the first
> generation product has done for decades is no big deal.
>
> If anyone starts talking about using lead-carbon as a traction battery,
> as opposed to using it as a starter battery, we'll be talking about
> an entirely different kettle of fish and far more extensive testing
> will be necessary.

How Short Term Supply Constraints Will Impact Booming HEV Markets

blogs.edmunds.com/gree...

Li-ion Battery Technologies: Understanding Their Development Path

re: the LBL report and its implication for all forthcoming reports.

Well, here's your problem:

"Goals developed in cooperation with ...a cooperative of major automotive manufactures."

Why would you put a group of folks hugely invested in keeping the status quo in charge of measuring something different that they have no retail experience in?

Wake me when the large existing vehicle manufacturers are part of the solution rather than part of the problem. In the meantime, electric vehicle startups are starting to eat their lunches.

It's interesting that much of the information in a March, 2008 report is already largely obsolete. For example, my lithium based power pack is already beyond 700 cycles with no absolutely loss of real world on the road performance and no noticeable degradation in real world range. Expect that obsolescence be also true of the forthcoming December, 2009 report.

Last, it's telling that my current electric vehicle (motorcycle) uses a well established, robust, non-toxic, safe (relative to laptops) lithium chemistry, which major vehicle makers apparently deemed incapable of meeting goals for electric vehicles, at a total up front retail price less than the similar (but worse performing) gasser vehicle and with lower at vehicle lifetime costs (due to much lower operating and maintenance costs). Does my electric vehicle maker lose out from those lower consumer costs? Not at all, as I can now buy plug and play performance upgrades or my next new vehicle from them that much faster.

The reviews also fail to note that electric drive, regardless of the energy carrier, offers superiority in off the line torque, at speed acceleration response, smooth and seamless accleration and luxury unmuffled quiet operation, all of which command a premium in real world vehicle markets, a premium which can offset up front high energy carrier prices as market penetration improves and production scales up.