@NadineJ: I agree with you whole heartedly about humans' capacity to adapt. Surburban and city dwellers should be relying a whole lot more on mass transit or their own feet. Bikes are a great option as well. Where I live out in the country, it gets a bit more complicated because nothing is close. But I'm trying to encourage my kids to do more travel without cars--bike riding, long boarding, whatever. In business terms, I think it's less about the technology advancements and really boils down to a cultural/change management challenge, which in the end, is much harder nut to crack.
Tim, obviously public transportation systems or pooled vehicles are more economical in the current situation. I strongly believe that state/federal governments have to focus much on these directions to strengthen the public transportation system. This can reduce the traffic and related environmental issues.
Charles, buying a vehicle is somewhat easy because it's a onetime investment, but now a day's maintenance is a big concern due to the rising fuel cost and related issues. So some measures have to be taken care by the state/federal governments to control the fuel pricing or by automobile industry for a better yield vehicle. I know due to the increasing maintenance cost, some of my friends are keeping there vehicles in garage and depending more on public transpiration systems.
This would be my general way of dealing with high gas prices. There would be less 500 mile trips for vacation by car. Hopefully, if gas prices go up it will be enough of an ROI that train lines will start with increased focus on passenger travel.
Outside of the US, gas prices are already the equivalent of $5, $6, or even $7 a gallon.
If it happens here, we'll adapt, as humans do. In places where gas prices are higher, I've noticed that people live differently. They'll walk 6 blocks to go to lunch. In the US, co-workers will jump in someone's car to go 3 blocks. Trips are planned more economically and cars are a luxury.
Most of those countries are smaller than the US, some even smaller than Califirnia. Because of that, they have a more established public transit system.
Personally, I'd ride my motorcycle or bicycle more often and save the car for trips that require it.
I grew up in Chicago and never owned a car until I moved out of town, when I was in my mid-20s. There was no need; I could take public transportation anywhere I wanted to go. I never had to make a car payment or an insurance payment, pay for parking, or buy gas. I could also read, study, or do homework during my commute. talk on my cell phone without having to worry about getting a ticket, and sleep without having to worry about getting in an accident (although I did have to worry about missing my stop).
The total cost was about $1000 a year in passes, plus occasionally having to stand outside in the snow waiting for the bus. I consider it one of the best deals I've ever had.
Show me a hybrid with that kind of ROI and I'll buy it!
Good thinking, Warren. I would probably ride a bike to local stores and to visit family nearby. We would limit car trips--we share one vehicle--to one or two a week and spend the day buying groceries, running errands, etc. I'd get haircuts at home and we'd start to grow some of our own food. Lots of ways to overcome high gas prices and higher prices overall.
A parallel hybrid is a far better choice. First a metal shaft is a whole lot more efficient at power transfer than generator/charge battery/electric motor. (with the overhead of the batteries being the big hit. Typically you only get 70% of what you put in back out. The electric motors do a lot better, usually >95%.)
But the other problem is system weight. You need a generator that is capable of generating the full power output of the engine, and an electric drive motor that has all the horsepower that you need to accellerate. (bigger than the generator by the batteries peak discharge rate) Both of those mean a lot of weight that you rarely use. Sure you could take the tack that you size engine and generator for average power required, making both smaller, but you still need the big drive motor, and a battery pack capable of pure electric's discharge rates.
A parallel hybrid means a much smaller generator, as it only needs to output the batteries charge rate limit. This will be is a lot lower than the discharge limit. (typically 10% of discharge max if you want them to not catch fire). The drive motor(s) only need to produce power up to the limit of your battery discharge rate, need more power, fire the IC engine, its power just adding.
If you are clever about it, the motor(s) are also the generator. In the case of Honda, they built a motor/generator combo into the flywheel. (single motor system, means they can't move without the engine turning). I have heard it reffered to as an "electric turbo", with the bonus of rapid engine restart to allow for stoplight engine shutdown.
In the case of the Toyota system (The Ford system is basically the same layout), they use two electric motors, connected to the IC engine thru a planetary gear. This allows them to move without the engine turning. They also use the electric motors to synthesize the cars CVT "transmission", there is no conventional gearbox, or the variable pulleys of a normal CVT. The IC engine is connected to the sun gear, one motor/gen drives the planet carrier, and the ring gear has a chain drive to the drive axle, which has the second electric motor directly connected (it is always turning when the car is moving). With the car moving and IC engine off, the electric motor connected to the planet carrier just freewheels. With the IC engine turning, the control system picks a rpm and direction for planet's driving motor to give the desired ratio thru to the ring gear.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.