Author Topic: The Wreck of BC  (Read 9897 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #345 on: March 28, 2018, 11:02:48 pm »
equal opportunity waldo: are there not Indigenous communities/leaders actively engaged in resource development, who support pipelines - who support Trans Mountain?

again, what should PM Trudeau have done - what would you have PM Trudeau do?
the waldo dilemma:


 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City
Funny Funny x 2 View List

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #346 on: March 28, 2018, 11:15:49 pm »
Electrical vehicles *will* replace reciprocating piston vehicles sooner or later. It's inevitable.
I am not convinced they will. I could see hybrids becoming common but the charge time problem is a bigger issue than the EV capacity and I don't see that being solved. Note that the charge time will show up in 2 ways: the inconvenience of waiting 20 mins+ for a "fill" and the inevitable lack of charging capacity because we will be unable to build the grids needed to supply a large number EVs in a timely fashion.  People will see hybrids as the best compromise.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #347 on: March 28, 2018, 11:20:31 pm »
I'm the greenest person here. I walk to work, and I live in a small home with the most efficient lighting and heating available.

However, I appreciate the importance of energy to our way of life.   Next time you're out and about, stop by a construction site and check out all the wind-powered cranes and solar-powered bulldozers on site.

 -k

Well actually gas turbines are quite happy to change their RPM as the load requires. Ask any pilot. However they are probably much better used to generate electric power so you can charge up your Volt while it's in the driveway overnight. One of the benefits of an electric car s that it has so many fewer many moving parts than a piston engine. Let one big turbine provide power for a bunch of cars. And then of course continue the trek toward clean renewables.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #348 on: March 28, 2018, 11:36:21 pm »
charge time problem is a bigger issue than the EV capacity

Yes, but I am not sure I would bet against technology.

Graphene batteries look like they will offer charge times about 25-30 times faster than lithium-ion. There is also some very promising research using gold nanowires to increase battery lifetime a couple of orders of magnitude. There is also a lot happening in the super capacitor (ultra, whatever) arena that might address both charge time and durability, but they still have the issue of slowly bleeding over a few days but that does allow for hybrid solutions.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #349 on: March 28, 2018, 11:37:06 pm »
I am not convinced they will. I could see hybrids becoming common but the charge time problem is a bigger issue than the EV capacity and I don't see that being solved. Note that the charge time will show up in 2 ways: the inconvenience of waiting 20 mins+ for a "fill" and the inevitable lack of charging capacity because we will be unable to build the grids needed to supply a large number EVs in a timely fashion.  People will see hybrids as the best compromise.

Hybrids are a good choice just now if you have to travel a ways out of town and maybe have "range worry" due to lack of charging sites. But it is much more efficient to generate electricity to power vehicles that can come to a halt at a traffic light and not emit CO2 while they sit doing nothing. How many times have we all done that with their gas guzzlers? and large strides have been made by the likes of Tesla with new batteries that can store enough energy to relieve the range stress problem. Maybe you should sell your shares in Exxon Mobil.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #350 on: March 28, 2018, 11:37:15 pm »
Yes, probably so. Note however that most of the hydrogen in fuel-cells is derived from natural gas in a very energy intensive process so it is no magic bullet.

Hydrogen isn't the only fuel cell technology available. I was reading yesterday about a company that is building propane and LNG fuel cells on a power/weight density that appear to be (based on some rough calculations) not far off of what would be viable for a vehicle's backup generator.   Propaine is very interesting because it's already widely available for consumer use almost everywhere.  And fuel cells are very interesting because they can create electricity without the mechanical losses associated with typical heat engines or the toxic byproducts of combustion. The idea of being able to drive your electric vehicle wherever you like and refuel by filling up your propane tank (if you don't have time for an electric charge, or if an electric charging station isn't available) is very appealing.

My long-time special guy worked at Ballard Power Systems for a while. His opinion on their technology was that fuel cells are great but hydrogen sucks.  But just about everybody has used propane... and it doesn't suck.

Concerning a turbine generator / electric drive train, that is also being looked at for aircraft as well. While we are still a long ways off from it coming to market, the advantage there is the high cost of a turbine is more easily justified in an aircraft. Certainly volume will bring price down, but for consumer products it seems like a long shot. The target advantage for aircraft will be weight savings.

Gas turbine trains have been experimented with, and a few went into service about 50-60 years ago. The original French TGV prototype was a gas turbine locomotive, but they opted for overhead wires after that. Not too many years ago Bombardier was working on a gas turbine locomotive, but I have not heard of any customers.

I'm not an engineer... I'm sure that real engineers and scientists will be able to knock holes in my ideas.  But big picture, I am convinced that electric motors are simply too much superior to chemical-fuel heat engines to not win out eventually.  I view energy storage as the only real obstacle holding electric motors back right now. I believe that supplemental generating capacity might be the key to eliminating that shortcoming in the short term. I view piston-engine generators as an unpleasant third choice as a supplemental power source, a gas turbine as the runner up, and a fuel cell system as the best possibility for using chemical fuel to supplement the energy storage capacity for an electric motor system.  Ideally at some point electrical storage would reach a point that chemical fuel backup is completely unnecessary. Imagine rolling into a "gas" station, pulling your depleted graphene super-capacitor cartridge out of your car and swapping it for a fully charged super-capacitor cartridge.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline msj

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 368
  • I'm outta here...
  • Location: Vancouver Island
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #351 on: March 28, 2018, 11:39:46 pm »
Horgan has disappointed me not only in LNG but also in the way he's tackled the housing crisis.  It's better than what the Liberals did, but not good enough. 

But let's stay focused here.  Are you saying I should give Trudeau a pass on breaking his promises because Horgan is giving carbon tax subsidies to LNG?

Trudeau has effectively killed the NGP and also brought in national carbon taxes.

His compromise to allow a twinning of an existing pipeline which has lots of approval from First Nations is an effective compromise.

Horgan wants to subsidize one of the largest carbon emitters in BC history but that’s just A ok?

As I have stated before: you’re insane.  You are the opposite of a Trump supporter and I do not mean that in a positive way at all.

Just a left wingy chaos crazy rather than a right wingy chaos crazy.

Both rooted in the worst kind of pessimism that 20 years from now hopefully some will look back on as their “stupid” period as they realize all their pessimism has been a gnashing of teeth all for naught.

A pox on both types of crazy. 

« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 11:51:49 pm by msj »
I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9120
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #352 on: March 28, 2018, 11:41:45 pm »
Gas turbines are more efficient and will operate at different speeds but they are high power low torque engines that respond more slowly to throttle inputs, Todays CVT transmissions might make them more viable but meeting emission standards could be a major obstacle and it doesn't help that they are kerosene burners.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #353 on: March 28, 2018, 11:45:52 pm »
Damn her for not being fanatic enough to satisfy the fanatics!  ::) 

Yes, better that Alberta be perpetually in the hands of the Conservatives than an NDP Premier who fails the NDP Purity Test.

"The left eat their own", as somebody put it.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline msj

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 368
  • I'm outta here...
  • Location: Vancouver Island
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #354 on: March 28, 2018, 11:49:32 pm »


My long-time special guy worked at Ballard Power Systems for a while. His opinion on their technology was that fuel cells are great but hydrogen sucks.  But just about everybody has used propane... and it doesn't suck.

I'm not an engineer... I'm sure that real engineers and scientists will be able to knock holes in my ideas.  But big picture, I am convinced that electric motors are simply too much superior to chemical-fuel heat engines to not win out eventually.  I view energy storage as the only real obstacle holding electric motors back right now. I believe that supplemental generating capacity might be the key to eliminating that shortcoming in the short term. I view piston-engine generators as an unpleasant third choice as a supplemental power source, a gas turbine as the runner up, and a fuel cell system as the best possibility for using chemical fuel to supplement the energy storage capacity for an electric motor system.  Ideally at some point electrical storage would reach a point that chemical fuel backup is completely unnecessary. Imagine rolling into a "gas" station, pulling your depleted graphene super-capacitor cartridge out of your car and swapping it for a fully charged super-capacitor cartridge.

 -k


Itunes is done with downloading. After 35 billion downloads streaming music has become quite the disruption.

The same will happen to transport.

Autonomous EV’s will solve a lot of the storage problem.

I’m paying about $11,000 per year for my car (depreciation, r&m, insurance, gas) so I would have no problem not owning a car and renting one to pick me up when I need to go somewhere.

Given that I use my car about 4% of the time I can see immense savings in doing this.

Once people get the “ownership” vs “renting” attitude extracted from their ego we will see some interesting developments.

Well, that and improvements in technology such as turning safety features on in the AEV’s.

I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #355 on: March 28, 2018, 11:57:48 pm »
Autonomous EV’s will solve a lot of the storage problem.
Assuming people learn to trust them.
 
Once people get the “ownership” vs “renting” attitude extracted from their ego we will see some interesting developments.
It really depends on wait times. People will pay a lot of for convenience. If the the 'rental car' fleets have enough idle capacity that people can get a car within minutes then I could see that happening.  However, a more likely scenario is it will be difficult for these companies to have enough idle capacity to satisfy people all of the time. This will mean that those can afford will still prefer a personal car even if the cost is higher.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #356 on: March 29, 2018, 12:32:38 am »
Assuming people learn to trust them.
 It really depends on wait times. People will pay a lot of for convenience. If the the 'rental car' fleets have enough idle capacity that people can get a car within minutes then I could see that happening.  However, a more likely scenario is it will be difficult for these companies to have enough idle capacity to satisfy people all of the time. This will mean that those can afford will still prefer a personal car even if the cost is higher.

The more likely scenario is that people will continue to buy EV's if they work around town, or hybrids if they have to go a bit farther afield. This is just the updated version that follows peoples demands to clean up exhaust emissions from cars that started years ago.   

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #357 on: March 29, 2018, 12:37:16 am »
If the the 'rental car' fleets have enough idle capacity that people can get a car within minutes then I could see that happening.  However, a more likely scenario is it will be difficult for these companies to have enough idle capacity to satisfy people all of the time.

To offer a product that is cost competitive with owned cars, what overhead do you think is necessary? While a car sharing model would have some savings from things like lower in-house maintenance costs lets assume those are zero for now and everything is overhead. Would 100% overhead (costs + profit) be enough?

I think it is very easy to demonstrate that usage is well under 50%, even at peak times. On my block there are about 60+ cars and and unless something special is happening I never have a problem finding a parking spot, and usually right in front of my door. On snow plow days (my street starts at noon) I generally need to find a spot by 11am, or I am stuck hunting although only rarely do I need to go to a different street. That tells me that in the middle of work days, more than 50% of the cars are idling at peoples houses. I would also bet that over 45% are idling at work as well. The point is however the worst peak is 50% utilization, and more likely it is less than 5% with a rush hour peak maybe 25% (400% overhead available).

Certainly my generation is attached to their shiny car, that is cultural. I am seeing much less of that in newer generations, they are more open to things like car sharing (we have 2 spots dedicated to them on my block, and they started to put in an electric spot as well but never completed it). Can we break those cultural bonds?

What is left is personal belongings we like to leave in the car. Certainly those dedicated to the car itself (eg. shovel, traction aids, etc) can be handled by the car company. That leaves things like an extra hat & glove I like to have in the winter, and jacket or hoodie for the rest of the year in case I am out and the weather changes; and of course the inevitable sun glasses. Years ago a cassette (or CD for you youngsters) collection was necessary, but that has been obsoleted by the cell phone we carry.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #358 on: March 29, 2018, 12:45:16 am »
Graphene batteries look like they will offer charge times about 25-30 times faster than lithium-ion. There is also some very promising research using gold nanowires to increase battery lifetime a couple of orders of magnitude. There is also a lot happening in the super capacitor (ultra, whatever) arena that might address both charge time and durability, but they still have the issue of slowly bleeding over a few days but that does allow for hybrid solutions.
Charging times are a limitation of the grid and physics - not the battery. From physics energy = volts * amps * time. So a 30 KWh battery charging time depends only on how much power the grid can deliver. A typical home connection is limited to ~24 kW or 1h 20 mins assuming no losses. A supercharger station could can go up to ~120kW which would reduce it to 15min which is almost tolerable except when you think about the transmission lines that would needed everywhere to supply a network of "gas stations" with 10 bays or so.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #359 on: March 29, 2018, 12:56:27 am »
I think it is very easy to demonstrate that usage is well under 50%, even at peak times.
I live in a urban area. Buses near my house run once 10-15 mins and the system needs subsidies. Paid taxis take about the same. I find it implausible that any company could guarantee a pickup anywhere within 10-15 mins anytime but it will come down to a cost vs. convenience equation. i.e. faster service means more cost which will mean there will likely be a point where a personal vehicle will continue to be more economic depending on how much inconvenience a person is willing to put up with.