Rode an electric bike today

[Big Dave]

Cruise style unit. Performance seemed similar to a DR650 150km range.

I'll stick some pics on the KR site after the footie.

You guys were right - Mmmmmm instant torrrrqqqquuee. :drool:

[John_H]

Cruise style unit. Performance seemed similar to a DR650 150km range.

I'll stick some pics on the KR site after the footie.

You guys were right - Mmmmmm instant torrrrqqqquuee. :drool:

Presumably no sound?

[98tls]

Cruise style unit. Performance seemed similar to a DR650 150km range.

I'll stick some pics on the KR site after the footie.

You guys were right - Mmmmmm instant torrrrqqqquuee. :drool:

What footie?

[Big Dave]

Remarkable how noisy chains are. :-)

[Big Dave]

Tigers v bulldogs and checking the score on the purple cheats V parra.

[98tls]

Tigers v bulldogs and checking the score on the purple cheats V parra.

Ahhhhhh,cheers.Thought i was missing some Rugby,as you were.

[bogan]

Rode an electric bike today

meh, I rode one yesterday, mine was prolly more exciting too cos it caught fire a little bit! What model did you ride?

[blackdog]

Cruise style unit. Performance seemed similar to a DR650 150km range.

I'll stick some pics on the KR site after the footie.

You guys were right - Mmmmmm instant torrrrqqqquuee. :drool:

proliferation is now inevitable.

give me a 350km range (from a 1hour charge) and litrebike performance i'm at the head of the queue.

and in the not too distant future

edit:- would prefer sprot style unit

[98tls]

proliferation is now inevitable.

give me a 350km range (from a 1hour charge) and litrebike performance i'm at the head of the queue.

and in the not too distant future

Long as the Italians dont get involved,there shite with lecky things.

[blackdog]

Long as the Italians dont get involved,there shite with lecky things.

i'll be happy until microsoft gets involved.

[nudemetalz]

i'll be happy until microsoft gets involved.

Yeah,...the "START" button will be for "turn off"......

[Blinkwing]

And it'll stop working when you're in the middle of turning in a tiny gap on the motorway. No thanks!

[98tls]

And it'll stop working when you're in the middle of turning in a tiny gap on the motorway. No thanks!

Whats this "motorway" thing you speak of?

[Urano]

Long as the Italians dont get involved,there shite with lecky things.

i'm longin to get involved.
i can give you about 1000 km of range with 1 minute of "charge"...
i just need some money to prepare a prototype... not even so much actually: i think i can test the theory with less than 20k €...
interested?

[Milts]

Does anyone know of any manufacturers moving towards hydrogen engines? It seems to me like a lot of electric cars were hopeless because of this no range, long charge issue - but now they're moving towards hydrogen cells, so instead of charging at at socket you fill up at a station, but it still uses an electric motor (and the only byproduct is water).
Cleaner on the environment because there are no acid filled batteries and no need for coal powered electricity, too...

I've heard quite a bit about it in terms of cars, but nothing in terms of bikes - if they move that way I would be keen as if I had the money!
(One thing that would piss me off though is lack of gears... I like shifting for corners/pulling off at the lights!)

[Blinkwing]

Whats this "motorway" thing you speak of?

y'know, when cars actually go fast enough to present a challenge to pass them.

[smoky]

http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2007/05/22/hydrostatic-drive-diesel-motorcycle/
This is an interesting direction for economy, if you start talkin bio-diesel you may even start talking eco-friendly (maybe)

[Big Dave]

http://kiwiridermagazine.blogspot.com/2010/06/greetings-earthling.html

[bogan]

Does anyone know of any manufacturers moving towards hydrogen engines? It seems to me like a lot of electric cars were hopeless because of this no range, long charge issue - but now they're moving towards hydrogen cells, so instead of charging at at socket you fill up at a station, but it still uses an electric motor (and the only byproduct is water).
Cleaner on the environment because there are no acid filled batteries and no need for coal powered electricity, too...

you need heaps of electricity to make the hydrogen in the first place. And storing it is a problem, think a merc or bmw did one with an open tank but storing it at -100deg c or summat, trouble is if you leave it too loong all your hydrogen has evaporated!

[Urano]

Does anyone know of any manufacturers moving towards hydrogen engines?

hydrogen is a dead end.
it has a lot of problems i'll try to explain, please forgive me for language errors and try to keep the sense...

1- first of all there is the transport problem: h2 is gaseous and less dense than air, so in an empty cylinder normally you'd find more air than possible h2. so you can pump it in, and then you'll have huge problems because of problem number 2.
2- h2 is pretty explosive. do you remember hindemburg? that's a boom... putting h2 in pressure in a bottle is a bad, bad idea.... may be there's another way, but here it comes problem 3
3- you can liquify it, in order to put more h2 in the same volume. unfortunately h2 liquifies at very low temperatures, and if you want to use this form you'll have to keep it freezed. always, with the car on or off, under the snow or the sun... pretty complicated...
4- h2 is pretty a bad energy keeper. unless you use it for nuclear reaction (which is not the case and is way over our possibilities, today) with chemical transformations gasoline ha way a better "energy density" than h2. a litre of gasoline or, even worse, diesel, will have about 4 times the energy of h2...
5- h2 is obtainable with low efficiency methods, as elettrolisis, which is possible only if you use a lot of energy to separate the water. where will you take this energy from? nuclear plants? good...

so h2 is a bird mirror, and would not work. bmw understood it, and they were by far the most involved in h2 technology research...

the best solution right now is a high efficiency hybrid, waiting for a new battery generation made from environmentally friendly materials and with higher capacity.

[Big Dave]

Vid on KR site

http://kiwiridermagazine.blogspot.com/2010/06/ed-and-ev-earthling-video.html

[oldrider]

Vid on KR site

http://kiwiridermagazine.blogspot.com/2010/06/ed-and-ev-earthling-video.html

Have seen a few variations and the batteries are certainly improving, just add a hybrid power source to keep the charge up and tackle a bit of distance.......interesting prospects! :ride:

[Pixie]

The Poms are manufacturing an electric bike.
And it's got....wait for it.... SUSPENSION!!!!!!!!
and it doesn't look like some deformed piece of shit from the 1940's

210781

[Pixie]

Have seen a few variations and the batteries are certainly improving, just add a hybrid power source to keep the charge up and tackle a bit of distance.......interesting prospects! :ride:

Meh -batteries.
Ultracaps are coming along nicely

Check out the stats on this:
(except the bit where it says it will be ready by 2008:whistle:)

210784

http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1022392_eestor-founder-dick-weir-confirms-esus-presently-being-built-and-once-delivered-to-zenn-by-the-fourth-quarter/page-2

http://theeestory.com/topics/2529

[Flip]

My vote for the next 50 years is high efficiency diesel motors. The pollution made making the batteries is a killer for them. Hydrogen is just too low in energy storage.

[bogan]

My vote for the next 50 years is high efficiency diesel motors. The pollution made making the batteries is a killer for them. Hydrogen is just too low in energy storage.

and you expect the pollution from making very small high efficiency diesel engines (and running them) to be less?

With electrics its a case of progress is progress, combustion engines have been around for ages and have had bucketloads of research money thrown at them, electrics are still a developing tech, especially the energy storage. Even if (and I don't think this is the case) they are more pollutant now I'd still buy one simply to support the industry that will become a hell of a lot greener in the future.

[R-Soul]

And it'll stop working when you're in the middle of turning in a tiny gap on the motorway. No thanks!

Yeah what is the electric bike motorway equivalent of the 'blue screen of death' exactly...?

[R-Soul]

Does anyone know of any manufacturers moving towards hydrogen engines? It seems to me like a lot of electric cars were hopeless because of this no range, long charge issue - but now they're moving towards hydrogen cells, so instead of charging at at socket you fill up at a station, but it still uses an electric motor (and the only byproduct is water).
Cleaner on the environment because there are no acid filled batteries and no need for coal powered electricity, too...

I've heard quite a bit about it in terms of cars, but nothing in terms of bikes - if they move that way I would be keen as if I had the money!
(One thing that would piss me off though is lack of gears... I like shifting for corners/pulling off at the lights!)


How do you think they separate the hydrogen from the Oxygen in the first place?? With coal fired electricity of course...
But I also think this is the future. No range/recharging probelems. Mind you, they are making HUGE strifdes in battery charging and storage...especially with the use of nanotech.

Hydrogen power is more efficient than petrol, but prolly less efficent than straight electric. Now if you could use solar or wind power to trickle charge a compressor/electrolysis unit to separate the Oxygen from Hydrogen, so that you have new full tank every day when you come home, that would be useful...

[NighthawkNZ]

Japps a developing a magneting motor which is pretty impressive to... it be on youtube some where

[R-Soul]

hydrogen is a dead end.
it has a lot of problems i'll try to explain, please forgive me for language errors and try to keep the sense...

1- first of all there is the transport problem: h2 is gaseous and less dense than air, so in an empty cylinder normally you'd find more air than possible h2. so you can pump it in, and then you'll have huge problems because of problem number 2.
2- h2 is pretty explosive. do you remember hindemburg? that's a boom... putting h2 in pressure in a bottle is a bad, bad idea.... may be there's another way, but here it comes problem 3
3- you can liquify it, in order to put more h2 in the same volume. unfortunately h2 liquifies at very low temperatures, and if you want to use this form you'll have to keep it freezed. always, with the car on or off, under the snow or the sun... pretty complicated...
4- h2 is pretty a bad energy keeper. unless you use it for nuclear reaction (which is not the case and is way over our possibilities, today) with chemical transformations gasoline ha way a better "energy density" than h2. a litre of gasoline or, even worse, diesel, will have about 4 times the energy of h2...
5- h2 is obtainable with low efficiency methods, as elettrolisis, which is possible only if you use a lot of energy to separate the water. where will you take this energy from? nuclear plants? good...

so h2 is a bird mirror, and would not work. bmw understood it, and they were by far the most involved in h2 technology research...

the best solution right now is a high efficiency hybrid, waiting for a new battery generation made from environmentally friendly materials and with higher capacity.


There is new technology that solves the first three problems. they have found a way to store H in solid lattices (not sure if theya re polymer or crystal or what) at densities far in excess of H liquid. It is also not explosive, and releases the Hi n safe queantities at the required times. It was on Gizmag I think.

The nice thing about H is that it can be trickle charged form a solar setup to fill up a tank a day from home. To wipe out petrol stations in general I reckon. Honda have been working on such a home setup.

[Pixie]

Yeah what is the electric bike motorway equivalent of the 'blue screen of death' exactly...?

The IC engine equivalent of a BSOD is...running out of gas,ignition failure,throwing a rod,dropping a valve etc.etc.etc.

[Pixie]

There is new technology that solves the first three problems. they have found a way to store H in solid lattices (not sure if theya re polymer or crystal or what) at densities far in excess of H liquid. It is also not explosive, and releases the Hi n safe queantities at the required times. It was on Gizmag I think.

The nice thing about H is tat ican be trickle charged form a solar setup to fllup a tank a day from home. To wipe out petrol stations in general I reckon. Honda have been working on such a home setup.

H2 is a very diffcult fuel to burn in an engine -it wants to explode all the time and at all mixture ratios.
Combustion chamber temperature control is critical.
Pivotal have even gone as far as water cooling their "pistons":

http://www.pivotalengine.com/hydrogen.html

[R-Soul]

here it is

http://www.gizmag.com/hydrogen-storage-breakthrough/9517/

[bogan]

Yeah what is the electric bike motorway equivalent of the 'blue screen of death' exactly...?

don't think any engineers would be stupid enough to run windows on an electric bike.

[R-Soul]

H2 is a very diffcult fuel to burn in an engine -it wants to explode all the time and at all mixture ratios.
Combustion chamber temperature control is critical.
Pivotal have even gone as far as water cooling their "pistons":

http://www.pivotalengine.com/hydrogen.html

Depends what kind of engine too - there has been some amazing work done on Sterling engines lately...
I believe that combustionproblmes can be relatively easily fixed by tweaking, as opposed to innovation. The advances in direct injection engines, and high speed engine management by computers will be able to deal with that easily enough.. (IMO)

[R-Soul]

don't think any engineers would be stupid enough to run windows on an electric bike.

I think most engineers are already reluctant to run windows on a computer!

[bogan]

I think most engineers are already reluctant to run windows on a computer!

oh contraere, most engineering design programs don't (or are a complete prick to make work) run on any other OS.

[Milts]

here it is

http://www.gizmag.com/hydrogen-storage-breakthrough/9517/

Friggin awesome.

And Bogan, I'm pretty sure that even if the design programs run in windows, much new technology in terms of computers in vehicles, mechatronics etc run under Linux?

[onearmedbandit]

All very interesting. However one person says H2 has a lower 'energy density' than petrol, one says the opposite. I'm lazy today and can't be bothered googling it, so what's the answer? Or does it vary?

[NighthawkNZ]

All very interesting. However one person says H2 has a lower 'energy density' than petrol, one says the opposite. I'm lazy today and can't be bothered googling it, so what's the answer? Or does it vary?

A H bomb makes a bigger bang than Petrol bomb...?

[Big Dave]

and it doesn't look like some deformed piece of shit from the 1940's


Pixie by name - Pixie by taste.

[onearmedbandit]

A H bomb makes a bigger bang than Petrol bomb...?



Never tried before. Off to the garage now, I'll report back soon.

[Big Dave]

Never tried before. Off to the garage now, I'll report back soon.

Remember the 'pop' of a test tube of Hydrogen in high school? Just bigger.

[onearmedbandit]

Remember the 'pop' of a test tube of Hydrogen in a test tube in high school? Just bigger.

It's a long while back now but yes I do remember Mr Jansen showing us that.

[Big Dave]

>> test tube of Hydrogen in a test tube<<

Rule - Don't answer phone mid-post.

[Pixie]

Pixie by name - Pixie by taste.

:bleh:.......

[Pixie]

Japps a developing a magneting motor which is pretty impressive to... it be on youtube some where

All electric motors are fuggin' magnetic

[Big Dave]

There's a polarising thought.

[onearmedbandit]

There's a polarising thought.

Positively.

[onearmedbandit]

There's a polarising thought.

Positively.

[Big Dave]

Your duplicate post are unattractive.

They should be poles apart.

[MattRSK]

ahhh I love electricity.

[onearmedbandit]

Your duplicate post are unattractive.

They should be poles apart.

Sorry, I put them in series by mistake.

[MattRSK]

We are making our own electric scooter at uni should be a laugh.

This is the stuff I am interested in anyhow

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/batteries-that-go-with-the-flow

Smart grids and such. Mostly non relevant to this thread.

[rustyrobot]

There are some advances being made in the field of cordless energy (http://www.nextgenpe.com/news/cordless-electricity/). Perhaps the battery part of the bikes could be replaced with receivers of some kind and there could be transmitters of some sort throughout the city (in the way mobile phone towers work today). Would be a bummer in 'black spot' areas, but might work well for urban commuters.

[MattRSK]

I know of a few places where battery powered buses are charged by induction at bus stops. Wireless power over short distances is used widely however over large distances there is severe losses and the strength of the magnetic field is cause for concern at this stage.

[avgas]

I think most engineers are already reluctant to run windows on a computer!
You are confusing engineers for Boffins.
Boffins ONLY run linux, talk to cats, work in dark rooms and drive Daihatsu Charades.

That's what Mr Wiggles told me as I was installing mint yesterday.

[avgas]

Sorry, I put them in series by mistake.
I can't currently find them, perhaps Henry has them?

[MarkH]

I'd like a sports tourer with 300+km range and 5 minute recharge. If those super-capacitors ever become reality in the field then it could happen.

[Big Dave]

Sorry, I put them in series by mistake.

Guilty as charged.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1s6WMCSGUlQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1s6WMCSGUlQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[bogan]

I can't currently find them, perhaps Henry has them?

think he just nipped out for some power converters...

[Laava]

So can this bike be registered as 49cc or less?

[Mudfart]

if its got instant torque, did it wheelie?

[Big Dave]

No - it didn't wheelie. It just accelerated crisply.

I don't know about the rego questions.

[NighthawkNZ]

All electric motors are fuggin' magnetic

but not all magnetic motors are classed electric... the ones they are developing don't need batteries to recharge or run... they are just using the magnetic pull of the magnets

[steve_t]

but not all magnetic motors are classed electric... the ones they are developing don't need batteries to recharge or run... they are just using the magnetic pull of the magnets

?? :blink: have the boffins nailed down perpetual motion machines?

[Spearfish]

Yhey have the same 2kw max as a moped then its a bike after that, They don't have to pay RUC either same as electric cars etc. I think the no RUC stands until the electric fleet get to around 20% of the total fleet.
All in the name of global warming...

[reemit]

Shit, if they made one to run on bottled methane then we'd be sorted for sure, who needs all this electrickery when yer bike can run on the biproducts of a good night out on the grog.
:drinkup::puke::scooter:

[Brian d marge]

I see the American bike , motoczyz? won the IOM at NEARLY 100mph

Are we running out of Dino juice ? there were hundreds of the buggers years ago , enough to feed my Enfield till I drop

I like batteries though , all the wifes devices are all battery powered

cept the big one for special occasions , that be 2 phase that one

Stephen

[Urano]

Hydrogen power is more efficient than petrol,

i'll put it simple: how many links you can brake up in a h2 molecule and how many in a petrol one?



don't think any engineers would be stupid enough to run windows on an electric bike.

think again: http://weblogs.asp.net/hpreishuber/archive/2006/06/07/Fiat-Punto-Grande-with-Windows-mobile.aspx

i always say: keep away from children AND italians... :(



there has been some amazing work done on Sterling engines lately

ya... there is this sport, lately, of think at pretty like everything EXCEPT the right one... we have the right engine running everywhere, it's been tested for years, it's reliable... no, let's use a sterling...

this is the evidence that words on a paper are more profitable than facts...


A H bomb makes a bigger bang than Petrol bomb...?

does petrol undergo nuclear reaction inside your toyota's engine?
don't mess up nuclear with chemical... we're talking about combustion, not fusion nor fission... :niceone:



Perhaps the battery part of the bikes could be replaced with receivers of some kind and there could be transmitters of some sort throughout the city (in the way mobile phone towers work today)

nope.
you can transform the "form" of the energy, as a transformer does from a voltage to another or from a continuous to alternate, but you cannot "create" energy.
if you have an engine that uses 2 kw you have to give it 2 kw. if you want to transmit energy to that engine by air you have to transmit 2 kw.
now imagine a beautiful aerial that sends 2 kw of energy for every car through the city, and remember that your microwave owen boils everything with just 800 w...

a mobile phone sends a signal of some milliwatt and still heat up parts of your head: if you want to send by air those kind of energy you'd boil every one...



I know of a few places where battery powered buses are charged by induction at bus stops. Wireless power over short distances is used widely however over large distances there is severe losses and the strength of the magnetic field is cause for concern at this stage.

at very short distances (or, to be more precise, on contact) things are different. anyway it's an interesting idea but in my opinion still a mess...

[Dare]

nope.
Ignore that...

Electrical energy can be transmitted by means of electrical currents made to flow through naturally existing conductors, specifically the earth, lakes and oceans, and through the upper atmosphere starting at approximately 35,000 feet (11,000 m) elevation[69] — a natural medium that can be made conducting if the breakdown voltage is exceeded and the constituent gas becomes ionized. For example, when a high voltage is applied across a neon tube the gas becomes ionized and a current passes between the two internal electrodes. In a wireless energy transmission system using this principle, a high-power ultraviolet beam might be used to form vertical ionized channels in the air directly above the transmitter-receiver stations. The same concept is used in virtual lightning rods[70], the electrolaser electroshock weapon[71] and has been proposed for disabling vehicles.[72][73][74] A global system for "the transmission of electrical energy without wires" dependant upon the high electrical conductivity of the earth was proposed by Nikola Tesla as early as 1904.[75]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_energy_transfer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnifying_transmitter

Granted wikipedia is roughly true but if you do some looking you can decide for yourself.

Also if you don't think there is power in the air already (albeit not ubiquitous, but still) consider this
<img src="http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/ecoart_richardbox1.jpg"></img>
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/05/02/eco-art-field-of-beams/

Unfortunately the energy transfer idea seems to be the realm of high budget military projects and hocus pocus 'free energy' websites.
Which is a shame because Mr. Tesla was probably onto something.

[NighthawkNZ]

does petrol undergo nuclear reaction inside your toyota's engine?
don't mess up nuclear with chemical... we're talking about combustion, not fusion nor fission... :niceone:

Some people have no sense of humour (or adventure)

[Mudfart]

The Poms are manufacturing an electric bike.
And it's got....wait for it.... SUSPENSION!!!!!!!!
and it doesn't look like some deformed piece of shit from the 1940's

210781

i like old skool. ive been getting into vincent admiring lately, (1930's-50's).

[MattRSK]

Certainly a shame that Teslas grand idea died with tesla. They pulled the tower he constructed for this purpose down shortly after his death. I cant seem to get my head around how they are planning to transmit electrical power through the air safely and efficiently. In a transformer the greatest losses are caused by the reluctance of the air gap not the reluctance of the iron core, and this gap is usually very small. I have done some reading on using resonant frequency to transfer power but the magnetic and electric field strengths are many times higher than the set limits (set by ICNIRP). It is a very interesting field of research however.

[Urano]

Ignore that...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_energy_transfer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnifying_transmitter

Granted wikipedia is roughly true but if you do some looking you can decide for yourself.

remember that you have to grant energy for ALL the cars and bikes at the same time, that to keep the energy level acceptable for humans you have to distribute it to a massive surface (it's a car, not a sailboat), and that you have to generate the signal from something smilar to an antenna that you have to put somewhere and that will generate a power level unacceptable within a large range from it...

the game sim city, years ago, had the possibility to install microwave plant that receive energy from solar satellite in the space.
beautiful.
still we don't have sats, and in anyway would be easier that givin energy to a massive quantity of mobile devices...

donno, maybe i'm wrong, but i don't see it as a practicable way...

[bogan]

the game sim city, years ago, had the possibility to install microwave plant that receive energy from solar satellite in the space.
beautiful.
still we don't have sats, and in anyway would be easier that givin energy to a massive quantity of mobile devices...


just chuck a big mirror up there and beam down into one of them solar power mirror array towers! even put a bunch of little ones to beam it down to power trains as they move along, sounds safe as eh?

[Ixion]

Ignore that...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_energy_transfer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnifying_transmitter

Granted wikipedia is roughly true but if you do some looking you can decide for yourself.

Also if you don't think there is power in the air already (albeit not ubiquitous, but still) consider this

http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/05/02/eco-art-field-of-beams/

Unfortunately the energy transfer idea seems to be the realm of high budget military projects and hocus pocus 'free energy' websites.
Which is a shame because Mr. Tesla was probably onto something.

What's with the references to Auckland Uni in the wiki article.:gob: Does the SMC know about this. If they're involved, I'm leaving town. :shit:

[R-Soul]

i'll put it simple: how many links you can brake up in a h2 molecule and how many in a petrol one?
I never said hydrogen was more energy dense than petrol, I said more energy efficient. Take into account how much energy is required to remove oil from the ground, produce 1 liter of petrol from it, and transport it around the world, compared to what you get from that 1 liter.

Now compare that to being able to manufacture H2 out of air from a local electrolysis process (even better if ithe eoctrcity is from a solar cell/wind generator). Compared to what you get from that liter.


ya... there is this sport, lately, of think at pretty like everything EXCEPT the right one... we have the right engine running everywhere, it's been tested for years, it's reliable... no, let's use a sterling...

this is the evidence that words on a paper are more profitable than facts...


I am sure thats exactly what the naysayers said about diesel before it came out. The only thing that petrol and diesel engines have going for it is that it has had a zillion years of development. The Sterling engine has had pretty much none. It can function on any source of heat. And it starts off with a theroetical temperature/pressure cycle that is more efficient than that of IC engines.

[R-Soul]

Check this:

http://www.greenoptimistic.com/2009/07/01/dean-kamen-stirling-engine-scooter/

[Urano]

Take into account how much energy is required to remove oil from the ground, produce 1 liter of petrol from it, and transport it around the world, compared to what you get from that 1 liter.
Now compare that to being able to manufacture H2 out of air from a local electrolysis process (even better if ithe eoctrcity is from a solar cell/wind generator). Compared to what you get from that liter.


ehm... actually... nowadays the main way of obtaining hydrogen is through oil.
after all is evident that there is much more hydrogen in a molecule of oil than in a molecule of water.
and this is also the reason why the believe that hydrogen is the way to set free from oil is not so straight...

this obviously as far as i know, so i could truly be wrong and i'd be glad to...



The only thing that petrol and diesel engines have going for it is that it has had a zillion years of development. The Sterling engine has had pretty much none. It can function on any source of heat. And it starts off with a theroetical temperature/pressure cycle that is more efficient than that of IC engines.

partly true.
the fact is, as you say, that IC engines had a whole history of development, and this leaded to strategic errors due only to the fact that is always easier to keep the route than steer away , even if the new way has benefits...

my point is simply that investing in stirling developing is not a good idea, because we have already invested in developing another type of engines which are way better that stirling too...
;)

[imdying]

just chuck a big mirror up there and beam down into one of them solar power mirror array towers! even put a bunch of little ones to beam it down to power trains as they move along, sounds safe as eh?I have this vision of people fleeing like ants from a magnifying glass when it goes wrong :D

[bogan]

I have this vision of people fleeing like ants from a magnifying glass when it goes wrong :D

well in any new system there will be some startup/calibration errors...

[R-Soul]

ehm... actually... nowadays the main way of obtaining hydrogen is through oil.
after all is evident that there is much more hydrogen in a molecule of oil than in a molecule of water.
and this is also the reason why the believe that hydrogen is the way to set free from oil is not so straight...

this obviously as far as i know, so i could truly be wrong and i'd be glad to...

this is clearly not what is meant by reverting to hydrogen as a form of energy for vehicles though. Clearly the future would be to find a way to harvest it from the air and/or water.

Have a look at this:
http://www.gizmag.com/molybdenum-oxo-catalyst-for-electrolytic-production-of-hydrogen/14967/

There are giants steps being made every day towards this.

Imagine this: Your solar/wind powered home electrolysis machine (with cheap catalyst) separates hydrogen from air/water while you are at work, and fills a tank of the stuff (in solid form as below) , ready for you to come home and swap tanks for the next day. Or you can buy additional fuel from the local service station if you go far.


partly true.
the fact is, as you say, that IC engines had a whole history of development, and this leaded to strategic errors due only to the fact that is always easier to keep the route than steer away , even if the new way has benefits...

my point is simply that investing in stirling developing is not a good idea, because we have already invested in developing another type of engines which are way better that stirling too...
;)


Sterling is also good because it can help get rid of waste products - our society produces a hell of a lot of waste that takes resouces to get rid of.

It depends whether you take a long term view or a short term. Do you throw good money after bad because you have already spent the bad? Or do you figure out the best way long term, and then start working towards it.

I suspect neither to be honest - it will just develop as quickly as anybody can commercailsie their own way of doing it (probably based on a short term, cost savings basis).
The quicker someone can get an electric bike (with Stirling engine generator chagrging batteries, so that of you run out of hydrogen, you can stuff a few leaves in the back) together with a sustainable hydrogen fuel generator out on the market, the quicker the pubic will move this way.

If I knew I would not have to buy any more fuel, I would seriously consider this. Especially if the bike offered generous performance ;)

[Dare]

What's with the references to Auckland Uni in the wiki article.:gob: Does the SMC know about this. If they're involved, I'm leaving town. :shit:

I think Jono is the one to ask about that... AU has some juicy patents, also Samsung ripped them off a little while back apparently..

[Urano]

this is clearly not what is meant by reverting to hydrogen as a form of energy for vehicles though. Clearly the future would be to find a way to harvest it from the air and/or water.
Have a look at this:
http://www.gizmag.com/molybdenum-oxo-catalyst-for-electrolytic-production-of-hydrogen/14967/
Imagine this: Your solar/wind powered home electrolysis machine (with cheap catalyst) separates hydrogen from air/water while you are at work, and fills a tank of the stuff (in solid form as below) , ready for you to come home and swap tanks for the next day. Or you can buy additional fuel from the local service station if you go far.


uhm... by air is pretty difficult as there's almost no hydrogen in earth air... much more easy by water, and the link is very interesting (and very new, just 3 months ago: i really hope it will work... :niceone: )

your scenario is what we all are longing for, but face it: it's a long term scenario. i'd say about 50-60 years in the future. hopefully, 'cause remember that in the 60s they thought that by now we'd had flying cars and mars colonies...
where are our flying cars?
anyway, let's say it's a 50 years scenario. i've got one question only: how do we move for the next 50 years?
we need a technology available sooner...


Sterling is also good because it can help get rid of waste products - our society produces a hell of a lot of waste that takes resouces to get rid of.
It depends whether you take a long term view or a short term. Do you throw good money after bad because you have already spent the bad? Or do you figure out the best way long term, and then start working towards it.

so you are aiming at EC engines because you see them as a way to burn waste?
no, sorry, i don't buy it. to me the idea of spending about ten-fifteen years of research to end up to an engine that at its best can have lower efficiency than today's engines just to burn waste with correlated emissions' problems is not so good.



I suspect neither to be honest - it will just develop as quickly as anybody can commercailsie their own way of doing it (probably based on a short term, cost savings basis).
The quicker someone can get an electric bike (with Stirling engine generator chagrging batteries, so that of you run out of hydrogen, you can stuff a few leaves in the back) together with a sustainable hydrogen fuel generator out on the market, the quicker the pubic will move this way. If I knew I would not have to buy any more fuel, I would seriously consider this. Especially if the bike offered generous performance ;)

and what about a bike that burns diesel, or methane, or petrol, or alcohol, or whaterver all with same engine, and that goes from a minimum of 20-25 to a maximum of 200-250 km per liter of diesel?
electric, with "generous" performance and acting as a platform for quick conversion as batteries tech steps forward. available today.
well, in a year...

[R-Soul]

uhm... by air is pretty difficult as there's almost no hydrogen in earth air... much more easy by water, and the link is very interesting (and very new, just 3 months ago: i really hope it will work... :niceone: ) The point is that it is freely available, and is everywhere.


your scenario is what we all are longing for, but face it: it's a long term scenario. i'd say about 50-60 years in the future. hopefully, 'cause remember that in the 60s they thought that by now we'd had flying cars and mars colonies...
where are our flying cars?
anyway, let's say it's a 50 years scenario. i've got one question only: how do we move for the next 50 years?
we need a technology available sooner...
In the 60's it might have taken 50 years to become reality. But you do not understand the pace of change of today. Look at this link - its happening already!
http://www.gizmag.com/honda-fuel-cell-fcx/8394/

At no stage in mans history (inlcuding the World Wars) have we EVER developed technology this fast before, and on so many fronts. And commercialised it as fast. The Internet has revoluionised the flow of information, and especially the flow of info across technology spaces.

Globalisation is the new "war". Now countries aim to buy countries rather than invade them .




so you are aiming at EC engines because you see them as a way to burn waste?
no, sorry, i don't buy it. to me the idea of spending about ten-fifteen years of research to end up to an engine that at its best can have lower efficiency than today's engines just to burn waste with correlated emissions' problems is not so good.

No - thats just an additional benefit. Sterling engines are MORE EFFICIENT in their thermodynamic cycle,and burn whatever fuel that they are using more cleanly and efficiently. They do not lose enrgy as waste heat like IC engines- they USE the heat as the main driver. Used in combination with electric motors and efficient batteries (which are also moving in leaps and strides, together with supercapacitors) , they
provide a great solution.

As Dean Kamen says - Sterling engines are the insurance policy for electric cars, because if the battery dies, you can put whatever you want in them to drive them to recharge the batteries.



and what about a bike that burns diesel, or methane, or petrol, or alcohol, or whaterver all with same engine, and that goes from a minimum of 20-25 to a maximum of 200-250 km per liter of diesel?
electric, with "generous" performance and acting as a platform for quick conversion as batteries tech steps forward. available today.
well, in a year...

Well that is exactly what a Sterling engine does, when used in conjunction with an electric motor an battery. Available NOW.

[R-Soul]

Another aspect is that we are developing technologes really fast on a broad range of technologies, that are helping each other.

For eg, We are developing (at teh same time)
- nanotechnology
- power storage (batteries and superconductrs)
- pharmaceuticals
- genetics
- computing and electronics (normal)
- quantum computing

We have never develooped so many technologies all at teh same time before, and so fast

As an example of how one can influence the other, check thsi out;

http://www.gizmag.com/new-virus-built-battery-could-power-cars-electronic-devices/11523/

Mark my words, in ten years time we will be seeing stuff we never thought was possible.

[Urano]

Sterling engines are MORE EFFICIENT in their thermodynamic cycle

i begin to think you are misunderstanding me.
let's find out: more efficient than WHAT?

;)

[R-Soul]

i begin to think you are misunderstanding me.
let's find out: more efficient than WHAT?

;)

Than the OTTO/diesel IC engine thermodynamic cycle.

[Urano]

and WHO -EVER- talked about otto/diesel ic engines in these pages?

;) ;)

you see? we have engines already developed much more efficient than sterling...

[reemit]

beep.... primitive earthdwellers.... beep.

[R-Soul]

and what about a bike that burns diesel, or methane, or petrol, or alcohol, or whaterver all with same engine, and that goes from a minimum of 20-25 to a maximum of 200-250 km per liter of diesel?
electric, with "generous" performance and acting as a platform for quick conversion as batteries tech steps forward. available today.
well, in a year...

So what engine are you talking about here then?

[Urano]

a turbine.
obviously.
what am i a pilot for? :laugh: :laugh:

[R-Soul]

a turbine.
obviously.
what am i a pilot for? :laugh: :laugh:

Sure, but then you have heat dissipation problems (or alternatively low efficiency if you have low heat), expensive material requirements, and hiogh wear.

[Urano]

heat?
you mean from the exhaust?
not at all... you USE the heat and pressure drop to make the turbine run. modern fan engines have core exhaust temperature not much more than 300-400 °C, which can be still lowered if you don't need residual thrust at all, and the thermal emission can generate current directly for the richardson law (the inverse of joule effect...).
at the end you have a thermal residual which is not so much more than a normal reciprocating engine, and way less than some fuel cell.

about the expensive materials... yep, it's surely more critic than a cast iron carter, but not so much more than high technology fuel cells or exotic material batteries...
and for the high wear, well, turbine engines have service interval larger than normal 4 stroke bike engines as for hour of use.

donno, there are obviously large margins of improvement and refinement, but at least we KNOW that it works: it works everyday in planes' apu, it works everyday in any modern vessel...
it's already developed and studied, we know the problems and the solutions...
other configurations as sterling, wankel, miller or atkinson at today time are blind jumps...

[bogan]

heat?
you mean from the exhaust?
not at all... you USE the heat and pressure drop to make the turbine run. modern fan engines have core exhaust temperature not much more than 300-400 °C, which can be still lowered if you don't need residual thrust at all, and the thermal emission can generate current directly for the richardson law (the inverse of joule effect...).
at the end you have a thermal residual which is not so much more than a normal reciprocating engine, and way less than some fuel cell.

about the expensive materials... yep, it's surely more critic than a cast iron carter, but not so much more than high technology fuel cells or exotic material batteries...
and for the high wear, well, turbine engines have service interval larger than normal 4 stroke bike engines as for hour of use.

donno, there are obviously large margins of improvement and refinement, but at least we KNOW that it works: it works everyday in planes' apu, it works everyday in any modern vessel...
it's already developed and studied, we know the problems and the solutions...
other configurations as sterling, wankel, miller or atkinson at today time are blind jumps...

thats the thing, we know it works, it's been around for ages, yet it hasn't replaced four strokes yet, why not?

[Urano]

investment and marketing.
it has replaced the reciprocating engines everywhere efficiency and cost effectiveness are more interesting than commercial solutions.

you have a thing that works properly after 50-60 years of developing. the performance are sufficient, factory costs are plained, at the same time you have mounting costs on other side as safety and electronics, why oh why should you put your effort to find something else and make it works, stated that you are selling so well what you already have and there are even parts of customer base that DON'T WANT something different?

on planes and boats things are different. planes and large vessel are mostly sold to companies, not individuals, and companies are more interested in efficiency and performance than "the sound of the exhaust".

with bikes the things are even more complex. nowadays when you buy a car you have a vague interest on how much does it go with a liter of petrol. how many bikers ask for fuel consumption before buying a bike? i don't know in nz, but here in italy almost nobody.
they want the noise, the creepy power, the vibration, the reassuring knowledge that behind the tank nothing different than what they so well know is happening...

with bikes there is a so big emotional part, and that is one of the main wrong thing the proposal of a bike that makes no noise, no vibration, and have a "on-off" idea of riding.
here you come with a sterling or a miller: you have less cv, but it's more efficient.
and the biker says: "LESS CVs???????"
"but it's more efficient!"
"LESSSS CVs??????????"
"but... well, nevermind..."
:)

come with a turbine instead.
"here it is, something that consumes fuel on hour and not on kms, and it's more efficient!"
"uhm... nothing going up and down?"
"nope, but is the same technology of a fighter jet!! do you hear the top gun noise and the red blinking lights??!!"
"OH YEAH! IT'S FUCKIN AWSOME!!!! give me three of that!"

and that's the way the world goes... :niceone: :laugh:

[bogan]

come with a turbine instead.
"here it is, something that consumes fuel on hour and not on kms, and it's more efficient!"


what the? how does something consume fuel on hours not kms? the more km/hr you go, the more energy is required. I think you need to go back to basics with the whole energy and efficiency thing, also post up some figure to back your claims that turbines are more efficient than four strokes.

[Urano]

nope...
the turbine has to go always at the same rpm at his max efficiency rotation, and connected to the generator charge the batteries.
then the batteries feed the electric engine that run the bike.
the turbine consumes always the same on hourly basis, so if you have a 1 l/hr consumption and you are going at 15 km/h you'll have a 15 km/l of consumption.
but if you are going at 100 km/h you'll get 100 km/l.
average speed in cities for cars is nowadays about 20-30 km/h, bikes do something more. so is not illogical expecting a maximum consumption of 20-30 km/h, with the possibilities of going down to 100-120 km/l
then actually a 1 l/h of consumtion is very low, it could be possible for a very small turbine, but a twice one is still acceptable, and don't forget the possibilities of using different fuels with little adjustments...

all the apus work this way... ;)

[R-Soul]

heat?
you mean from the exhaust?
not at all... you USE the heat and pressure drop to make the turbine run. modern fan engines have core exhaust temperature not much more than 300-400 °C, which can be still lowered if you don't need residual thrust at all, and the thermal emission can generate current directly for the richardson law (the inverse of joule effect...).
at the end you have a thermal residual which is not so much more than a normal reciprocating engine, and way less than some fuel cell.

about the expensive materials... yep, it's surely more critic than a cast iron carter, but not so much more than high technology fuel cells or exotic material batteries...
and for the high wear, well, turbine engines have service interval larger than normal 4 stroke bike engines as for hour of use.

donno, there are obviously large margins of improvement and refinement, but at least we KNOW that it works: it works everyday in planes' apu, it works everyday in any modern vessel...
it's already developed and studied, we know the problems and the solutions...
other configurations as sterling, wankel, miller or atkinson at today time are blind jumps...

Nope sterling is not a blind jump. It is avery simple piston engine with known, developed (enough) piston tech, slow speeds, and made of simple cheap materials. It burns anything - even leaves and coal (try put those in a turbine!) - and provides high efficiency combustion, and high efficiency thermodynamic cycle.

No fancy materials - except in the batteries- which your proposal will use too.

(And TBH - only a subjective thing of course - I would be a little nervous sitting on top of something rotation at 30,000 rpm, on the odd chance that things do go wrong...)

[R-Soul]

investment and marketing.
it has replaced the reciprocating engines everywhere efficiency and cost effectiveness are more interesting than commercial solutions.

........
on planes and boats things are different. planes and large vessel are mostly sold to companies, not individuals, and companies are more interested in efficiency and performance than "the sound of the exhaust".

Actually they have replaced IC engines only in situations where other features are required.
In planes, it is their ability to work at high altitude with low oxygen levels.

In racing (and tanks - the Abrahams M1) because they offer a higher power to weight ratio. Notice, however, that trucking and haulage has stayed with diesel. So have the ultimate efficiency people - the shipping people. If turbines offered them efficiency gains, together with reliability and cost to buy, they would be on it like a shot. But turbines are found in luxury superyachts, because the owners of these are not so worried about efficency, or even relaibility.

Granted, power stations use turbines, because they are efficient when high temperatures are available, but they expect a massive capital outlay for it. And have very strict maintenance regimes.

Even if the effiecncies are higher thermodynamically (which they may be if set out right), the materials required to sustain 30k rpm for long times periods are very specialised, and the only reason why service intervals could be "higher in hours than IC engines" is because they have those materials. Not even so long ago, turbochargers on cars were failing because they just wore out so quickly at high speeds with unspecialised materials (i.e plain old steel).

The efficiency of turbines are also directly related to temperature difference. So effectively, the higher the temperature in the engine, the better the efficiency. For really efficent turbines, you need to have really high temps - and again really specialised materials.
The titanium-aluminium alloys used in aerospce engines are ridiculously specialised.





with bikes there is a so big emotional part, and that is one of the main wrong thing the proposal of a bike that makes no noise, no vibration, and have a "on-off" idea of riding.
here you come with a sterling or a miller: you have less cv, but it's more efficient.
and the biker says: "LESS CVs???????"
"but it's more efficient!"
"LESSSS CVs??????????"
"but... well, nevermind..."
:)

come with a turbine instead.
"here it is, something that consumes fuel on hour and not on kms, and it's more efficient!"
"uhm... nothing going up and down?"
"nope, but is the same technology of a fighter jet!! do you hear the top gun noise and the red blinking lights??!!"
"OH YEAH! IT'S FUCKIN AWSOME!!!! give me three of that!"

and that's the way the world goes... :niceone: :laugh:

You are probably right there LOL!
Mind you I think it would be intriguieing to ride at speed silently. I went on a trip in a tandem glider - no engine. The sheers silence of it was exhilarating! Not quite like biking I know...

[bogan]

nope...
the turbine has to go always at the same rpm at his max efficiency rotation, and connected to the generator charge the batteries.
then the batteries feed the electric engine that run the bike.
the turbine consumes always the same on hourly basis, so if you have a 1 l/hr consumption and you are going at 15 km/h you'll have a 15 km/l of consumption.
but if you are going at 100 km/h you'll get 100 km/l.
average speed in cities for cars is nowadays about 20-30 km/h, bikes do something more. so is not illogical expecting a maximum consumption of 20-30 km/h, with the possibilities of going down to 100-120 km/l
then actually a 1 l/h of consumtion is very low, it could be possible for a very small turbine, but a twice one is still acceptable, and don't forget the possibilities of using different fuels with little adjustments...

all the apus work this way... ;)

so basically you are saying that the turbine is always run at a set speed with a set amount of fuel consumption? What is the efficiency of the engine when it is running like that? (referenced please) cos if it isn't fucking amazing, it blows your theory out of the water.

[Urano]

Nope sterling is not a blind jump. It is avery simple piston engine with known, developed (enough) piston tech, slow speeds, and made of simple cheap materials. It burns anything - even leaves and coal (try put those in a turbine!) - and provides high efficiency combustion, and high efficiency thermodynamic cycle.
No fancy materials - except in the batteries- which your proposal will use too.

all true.
i don't agree only with the "high efficiency combustion" part. the sterling has an high efficiency in transforming the heat provided in motion, but the combustion efficiency can be high or low, independently by the rest of the engine...


I would be a little nervous sitting on top of something rotation at 30,000 rpm, on the odd chance that things do go wrong...)

LOL... :)
remember it when you decide to put yourself inside a metal condom pumped with air kept at 10 km high by two o more barely contained conflagrations... :laugh: :laugh:
once i was in the cockpit of a md11 in the middle of atlantic at fl390, and suddenly realized that under my feet there was about 1 meter and a half of metal, then 12 km of nothing...what a dive! :D :D


Actually they have replaced IC engines only in situations where other features are required.
In planes, it is their ability to work at high altitude with low oxygen levels.


yes, but flying at high altitudes is a bag of hurt.
everybody would be more than happy to fly at 3000 ft.
if you want to fly at fl 410 you have problems to keep persons alive, to keep the structure together, to keep the temperatures controlled, to fight winds at 360 kmh, to resist to severe turbolence, all the problems to go up there and to come back home in one piece.
everything is made for one reason only: efficiency.
a turbine consumption is much less at high altitudes and with 55° subzero exactly because, as you said, the pressure and temperature jump is much higher (then you have other aspects as ram and temperature raise...whatever...)
this reason is so much important that long range cruises are usually made keeping the balance, the equilibrium, between the risk to fall because you are going to slow and to fall because you are going to fast (the so called "buffet onset"): this thin region of safe flight is thins as you climb reaching a "cuspid". you'll can climb further only when you'll weight less cause of fuel consumption.
and keep fuel consumption low is the only way to reach brazil from europe without stopping to refuel at salt island in the middle of atlantic.
so, as you see, flying high is not the reason: speed and efficiency are the reasons, flying high is an extremely difficult consequence...



But turbines are found in luxury superyachts, because the owners of these are not so worried about efficency, or even relaibility.

actually, taking about vessels, i was not referring to yacht.
but to stuff like these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Queen_Mary_2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Canberra
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_Magic
and many others... ;)

nowadays is the normal design: electrical driven propeller, without shaft passing the hull (or very short shafts anyway), with electrical power always on provided with turbines or diesel/turbines, as little electrical plants...
(maybe "vessel" is not the right word: sorry about my poor lexical choices...)




so basically you are saying that the turbine is always run at a set speed with a set amount of fuel consumption? What is the efficiency of the engine when it is running like that? (referenced please) cos if it isn't fucking amazing, it blows your theory out of the water.

it's fucking amazing.
goes from 35 to 65 % depending on the use and specialization.
wikipedia can give you a gross (and not perfectly exact) idea here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GFImg7.png
consider that petrol bikes' engines have efficiency of 25% average, best petrol engines come up to 35% maximum.
diesel do better. with an average of 35% up to 40%, but should be used at idle only, even if modern turbo diesel (being disconnected by stoichiometric needs ps:thanks google translator :) :) :) ) can go higher, to around 45%.

the problem is, for bikes and cars, that turbines are so efficient but at high rpm only.
so the concept is to completely disconnect their revving by the needs of the pilot: they have to serve the needs of the batteries. only. you need speed but the batteries are full because you've charged them all night at home? it stays off. you are slowing down but the batteries are low? the turbine goes at maximum to charge efficiently...

that the concept.
not saying it couldn't be refined or improved, but this works, right now. it can be working on your bike. you can choose to go to the dairy within 10 km from home electrical only, or you can go further relaying on your little turbo generator without the fear of 6 hours of charge needed to come back home...
give it a centesimal of the effort fiat put on that shit of multiair, and the world would change.
;)

[Urano]

this post duplication is becoming pretty annoying.... :(

[bogan]

it's fucking amazing.
goes from 35 to 65 % depending on the use and specialization.
wikipedia can give you a gross (and not perfectly exact) idea here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GFImg7.png
consider that petrol bikes' engines have efficiency of 25% average, best petrol engines come up to 35% maximum.
diesel do better. with an average of 35% up to 40%, but should be used at idle only, even if modern turbo diesel (being disconnected by stoichiometric needs ps:thanks google translator :) :) :) ) can go higher, to around 45%.

the problem is, for bikes and cars, that turbines are so efficient but at high rpm only.
so the concept is to completely disconnect their revving by the needs of the pilot: they have to serve the needs of the batteries. only. you need speed but the batteries are full because you've charged them all night at home? it stays off. you are slowing down but the batteries are low? the turbine goes at maximum to charge efficiently...

that the concept.
not saying it couldn't be refined or improved, but this works, right now. it can be working on your bike. you can choose to go to the dairy within 10 km from home electrical only, or you can go further relaying on your little turbo generator without the fear of 6 hours of charge needed to come back home...
give it a centesimal of the effort fiat put on that shit of multiair, and the world would change.
;)

ok, now we're getting somewhere :yes: but to compare apples with apples, you need to find the efficiency of the smallest turbine you can find, as generally large engines are more efficient. Also the Otto cycle is around 35% efficient, the 25% average is due to emission controls and regulations, would a turbine have problems with emissions laws?

Another point to consider is system losses, you may get 60% at the turbine output shaft, but then you need a generator, BMS, and electric motor. Even if each of those is 90% efficient you have just dropped the system efficiency down to 43% which is only a 25% efficiency gain over the otto cycle. And good luck finding the components listed above with efficiency that high!

Then there's the manufacturing costs of the high spec components needed in the vehicle, and the increased emissions associated with that (apparently its far more energy efficient just to keep an old car on the road than buy a new one). Seems a far better idea to take the generator bits off the vehicle, leave the battery and electric motor and charge from mains then use universal batterys that can be swapped for full ones at fuel stations.

[MarkH]

Seems a far better idea to take the generator bits off the vehicle, leave the battery and electric motor and charge from mains then use universal batterys that can be swapped for full ones at fuel stations.

I completely agree about removing the generator, look at the Toyota Prius and every other hybrid ever made - talk about a steaming pile of shit! Take a hybrid, remove the petrol tank & petrol engine & generator, replace them with an equal weight of batteries and you have a zero emission vehicle with a respectable range. Greater range can be achieved by designing more efficient batteries that store more watts hours of power per kg of mass. If the superconductors ever get usable for commercial applications then we could one day have 5 minute charging at service stations - a couple hours of driving followed by a 5 minute coffee break then another 2 hours of driving, sounds pretty good.

Swapping batteries at a service station is an interesting idea. But pretty much every chemistry of batteries suffer from declining performance over time, so swapping your 3 year old battery for a new one would be a bit too good to be true and no way would you want to swap your new battery for a 3 year old one. Maybe a primary battery fitted to the car could be charged from a secondary battery that you could swap at service stations - but there would need to be some working out of cost/weight/performance of such an idea.

Another option would be to have enough range for a good half day of travelling and fast enough charging at specialized stations to get a full charge within a one hour lunch/dinner break. Home charging equipment could charge from empty to full in 8 hours (or even 12) and that would be fine, obviously the charging stations would have high performance charging equipment that could deliver more amps/watt than you will be able to at home. Day to day commuting could be handled just fine with only home charging. Running on batteries provides energy efficiency much better than any diesel car can provide.

Yet another option for families with multiple vehicles - electric commuter vehicle & petrol powered weekend/holiday vehicle. Normal daily driving for most people is easy to achieve on batteries. Maybe removable battery packs should be used to give lighter vehicles with more luggage space for short trips and add weight (losing luggage space) for when longer range is required. Even the motorcycle in the OP has room for more batteries to increase range (as mentioned in the video).

As much as many enjoy the exhaust sound of many bikes, the future will eventually be battery powered, though it may take another decade or 2 for the improvements required for some to change over.

[bogan]

I completely agree about removing the generator, look at the Toyota Prius and every other hybrid ever made - talk about a steaming pile of shit! Take a hybrid, remove the petrol tank & petrol engine & generator, replace them with an equal weight of batteries and you have a zero emission vehicle with a respectable range. Greater range can be achieved by designing more efficient batteries that store more watts hours of power per kg of mass. If the superconductors ever get usable for commercial applications then we could one day have 5 minute charging at service stations - a couple hours of driving followed by a 5 minute coffee break then another 2 hours of driving, sounds pretty good.


agreed



Swapping batteries at a service station is an interesting idea. But pretty much every chemistry of batteries suffer from declining performance over time, so swapping your 3 year old battery for a new one would be a bit too good to be true and no way would you want to swap your new battery for a 3 year old one. Maybe a primary battery fitted to the car could be charged from a secondary battery that you could swap at service stations - but there would need to be some working out of cost/weight/performance of such an idea.


but you don't own the batteries in the first place, a yearly lease cost of say $500 + $10 each time you fill up would be the go I reckon.



Another option would be to have enough range for a good half day of travelling and fast enough charging at specialized stations to get a full charge within a one hour lunch/dinner break. Home charging equipment could charge from empty to full in 8 hours (or even 12) and that would be fine, obviously the charging stations would have high performance charging equipment that could deliver more amps/watt than you will be able to at home. Day to day commuting could be handled just fine with only home charging. Running on batteries provides energy efficiency much better than any diesel car can provide.

Yet another option for families with multiple vehicles - electric commuter vehicle & petrol powered weekend/holiday vehicle. Normal daily driving for most people is easy to achieve on batteries. Maybe removable battery packs should be used to give lighter vehicles with more luggage space for short trips and add weight (losing luggage space) for when longer range is required. Even the motorcycle in the OP has room for more batteries to increase range (as mentioned in the video).

As much as many enjoy the exhaust sound of many bikes, the future will eventually be battery powered, though it may take another decade or 2 for the improvements required for some to change over.

yeh, though for any manufacturer to commit to any of the ideas we listed, the development of batteries would need to slow down a bit, no point commiting to something only to have the batteries superseded in a year or two.

[MarkH]

yeh, though for any manufacturer to commit to any of the ideas we listed, the development of batteries would need to slow down a bit, no point commiting to something only to have the batteries superseded in a year or two.

Yeah, but naah - that ain't gonna happen! Anything they can do to bring better batteries into the market they will. Every improvement in battery technology increases the benefits of switching to electric powered vehicles - even hybrids can be improved by using better batteries.

[bogan]

Yeah, but naah - that ain't gonna happen! Anything they can do to bring better batteries into the market they will. Every improvement in battery technology increases the benefits of switching to electric powered vehicles - even hybrids can be improved by using better batteries.

seems like we are on the steep bit of the developement slope atm, but it'll flatten out eventualy, hopefully at that point the batteries will be so awesome there'll be no need for swappas etc :D but if not, that'd be the way to go I reckon.

[Milts]

Found this link today, would certainly make for one hell of a sexy commuter:

http://www.gizmag.com/brammo-empulse-electric-motorcycle/15717/

I can actually imagine someone (admittedly someone with money to burn) buying and using this bike regularly, especially if it were possible to charge while you are at work. Just one step closer to a fully functional and practical electric bike....

And imagine, in a year or two, that bike with a power unit from these guys: http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/

I can imagine this becoming a reality within five or ten years (in the USA, Europe and Japan, anyway; probably a good 20 years till it hits the NZ market :dodge: )

[javawocky]

Found this link today, would certainly make for one hell of a sexy commuter:

http://www.gizmag.com/brammo-empulse-electric-motorcycle/15717/

I can actually imagine someone (admittedly someone with money to burn) buying and using this bike regularly, especially if it were possible to charge while you are at work. Just one step closer to a fully functional and practical electric bike....

And imagine, in a year or two, that bike with a power unit from these guys: http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/

I can imagine this becoming a reality within five or ten years (in the USA, Europe and Japan, anyway; probably a good 20 years till it hits the NZ market :dodge:

slap a fairing to cover those ugly batteries and I'll take it to work and back. Price would have to drop quite a bit more though.

[avgas]

Found this link today, would certainly make for one hell of a sexy commuter:

http://www.gizmag.com/brammo-empulse-electric-motorcycle/15717/

I can actually imagine someone (admittedly someone with money to burn) buying and using this bike regularly, especially if it were possible to charge while you are at work. Just one step closer to a fully functional and practical electric bike....

Some hi-res images of the Brammo Empulse here:

http://farrst.blogspot.com/2010/08/brammo-empulse.html

with more to come when I get time

[DarkLord]

Very, very cool.

What if you come to a red light... does it have any sort of neutral or does the motor just sit at idle if you don't rev it?

Edit: I am assuming it can be ridden in the rain?

[bogan]

Very, very cool.

What if you come to a red light... does it have any sort of neutral or does the motor just sit at idle if you don't rev it?

most of the electrics are direct drive, so no neutral, the motor just stops spinning so you use no power at lights. No start up lag to worry about like normal engines. However that also means if you turn the throttle at the wrong moment it wont just rev like a car, it'll fuck off into whatever its aimed at :shit:

[cave weta]

However that also means if you turn the throttle at the wrong moment it wont just rev like a car, it'll fuck off into whatever its aimed at :shit:

Ahhh- you mean like this! -3:20-
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YV8_meso6kU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YV8_meso6kU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[Suntoucher]

I do like that Empulse, although the fuel tank is faux, so maybe they could have put the batteries vertical, and hid half of them under the fuel tank. If you're making an electric bike, why pretend it has a regular engine?

Wouldn't mind one if NZ did some sort of decent EV rebate. Although soon enough the 250cc limit rule will have to be rescinded. As you could invest in something like that 500kW one that crashed in the above and ride it on your learners.

And some nice fairing which streamlines the entire thing would be good.

[bogan]

Ahhh- you mean like this! -3:20-

sort of, but doing a skid like that even on a normal bike is asking for trouble. I was meaning the one where the reporter is just standing round in the garage and idly puts his hand on the throttle of an electric scoot, is pretty hilarious as it jams on and fucks off all round the workshop :laugh:

[avgas]

I do like that Empulse, although the fuel tank is faux, so maybe they could have put the batteries vertical, and hid half of them under the fuel tank. If you're making an electric bike, why pretend it has a regular engine?

And some nice fairing which streamlines the entire thing would be good.
Even though the tank is fake - underneath it is all the control gear so its not wasted. As for making it looks like a normal bike - that is just down to ergonomics and aesthetics. No one would buy an electric motorbike if it did not look or feel like a motorbike. If you want a faired one they make and race this http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=brammo+iom&aq=f