> -----Original Message----- > From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On > Behalf Of Bruce Bostwick > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:42 PM > To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion > Subject: Re: Scouted: U.S. to collapse in next two years? > > On Jan 5, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Dan M wrote: > > >> The few > >> productive industries we have in the USA now (the auto industry > >> springing immediately to mind) are in such sad shape -- in the auto > >> industry's case, from putting more energy into fighting a phase c > >> hange into a PHEV/BEV based market than they are into any real R&D or > >> new product development -- that they cost more than they generate in > >> value. To me, that seems unsustainable. Am I missing something > >> here? > > > > They don't have to put any energy into fighting it; the consumers are > > happily doing it for them. The sale of the hybrid Prias (sp) has > > fallen > > about 50%. Electric cars are toys for the rich. Battery technology > > has not > > improved much in the last 20 years, even though there is a multi- > > billion > > battery market where one can make a handy profit right now, outside > > of the > > car market, by marketing a better battery. > > Battery technology has matured to the point where it's definitely > possible to build a NiMH powered car with at least 140 mile range. If > it weren't, it probably would be only academic that Cobasys/Ovonics > holds patents to large format NiMH batteries that it refuses to > license for automotive use, primarily because it's a wholly owned > subsidiary of Chevron.
Hmmm, that sounds like the common conspiracy theory, like the 200 mpg carburetor design that was held as a trade secret by an oil company (the company varied with the theory) back in the '60s and '70s. We know that these batteries are buyable on the market in standard over the counter battery usage, and have found a good niche as a camera battery. If they were that good, why didn't they overtake this market? Second, if you look at at http://www.cobasys.com/news/20070313.shtml you will find the proud announcement of their use in automobiles. You will find a confirmation of this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_metal_hydride_battery where their use in Saturns is mentioned. > > The demand is there, make no mistake about it. That's a fairly strong statement. At a low enough price, I'd believe it. But, there are real problems with batteries. Look at http://www.allaboutbatteries.com/Battery-Energy.html and you'll see what I mean. We know that the energy density of gasoline is about 46 MJ/Kg. Compare this to the best, most expensive battery (Li ion), and we get a factor of 100. Electric cars are more efficient (90% vs 20%), so this gets down to a factor of 22 or so in power/weight. And, using the highly efficient batteries has a cost, that's why the Tesla Roadster costs >100k. We know that the modest amount of batteries in a hybrid raises the prices 4-5k. We know that the Prius hybrid sales are now falling like a rock (factor of 2 Dec-Dec, and probably significantly more June-Dec), due to the added cost and the cheap price of gas. So, why would there be extensive demand for an expensive commuter car that can only be used for relatively short trips? As soon as a 100-mile- > range battery powered car is available, there are plenty of people who > would much rather charge their cars overnight (on off-peak electrical > power, at home) and get the energy equivalent of 150 mpg (even > counting the overall 70% charge efficiency of the battery system) for > the daily commute. Enough that even one production generation will > bring the concept close enough to maturity for them to displace > gasoline-powered vehicles. They are available, they are much more expensive than ICE based cars, and they are selling only in small numbers to those with _a lot_ of discretionary income. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
