Electric Pulsar

They still don't get it: it's about energy, stupid!

2009-06-04T20:07:00.000-07:00

The bank-swine (much more deadly than the flu-carrying ones) still don't get it.

Neoclassical economics consistently undervalues the role of energy in the economy, therefore keeping it's "cost" low.

The based on its impact, the price of oil and electricity (especially oil) should be about 15 times what they currently are, to accurately reflect the economic growth they represent.

Our whole economic system is based around artificially cheap energy. When energy got close to its real value in mid-2008 - the economies went into meltdown because they are based on a fallacy.

Low oil prices stimulate demand, which leads to increased energy costs. But energy supply has been static for the last 5 years or so (a ceiling). So as demand rises back towards this ceiling, the price rises exponentially. Causing another recession.

Repeat the process until the economic systems are re-engineered around the true cost of energy. Something like the Kibbutz system in Israel circa 1930s...

Green Shoots, Red Ink, Black Hole
Truly terrifying data about the real state of the U.S. economy.
By Eliot Spitzer
Posted Wednesday, June 3, 2009, at 7:23 AM ET

I have an unfortunate sense that the "green shoots" in the economy that everyone is talking about are nothing but dandelions. Sure, forcing $1 trillion of taxpayer money—in direct capital, guarantees, and diminished cost of borrowing—into the banking sector has permitted the major banks to claim solvency for the moment. Yet we should not forget that this solvency has come not through a much needed deleveraging of the banking sector but rather from a massive transfer of the obligations of private banks to the public, with the debt accruing to future generations. And overall loan quality at U.S. banks is still the worst in 25 years and deteriorating at the fastest pace ever.

It's a terrible mistake to confuse the momentary solvency of the financial sector and the long-term health of our economy.
While we have addressed the credit collapse, we have not begun to tackle the far more daunting, and more significant, structural problems in the economy. Instead of focusing on the green shoots, let's examine the macro data that will determine our national prosperity in the next generation. These data are terrifying.

Start with the job front. Long term, nothing is more fundamental than good jobs to creating the middle-class wealth that must drive the economy. The creation of true middle-class jobs was the great success of our economy from 1950s through the mid-1990s. Consider the job data, in aggregate and by sector, from the past decade. (All data are from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.)
Unemployment Rate by Industry

Year Unemployment rate Manufacturing Jobs
(in millions) Serv. Jobs Gov't. Jobs Total Jobs Population
1999 4.3 18.48 102.23 20.09 133 272
2004 5.6 14.3 108.64 21.5 138.38 292
2009 8.9 12.4 113.82 22.54 141.57 305

One-third of our manufacturing jobs have disappeared in a decade! And while population grew 12.1 percent over the decade, jobs grew by only 6.4 percent. The unemployment number, moreover, doesn't count those who are "marginally attached to the labor force," because even though they want to work and are available to do so, they have not sought a job in the past four weeks. In raw numbers, the total number of individuals counted as currently unemployed and those who are marginally attached is a staggering 15.8 million. That is an enormous mountain of job creation to climb.
This transition away from actual goods production is not merely a consequence of the current economic cataclysm. The trend line has been clear for years and is reflected in the overall escalation in the trade deficits we have incurred:

Aggregate Deficit/Goods/Services
Year Aggregate Deficit
(in millions of dollars )
Goods Services
1994 -98,493 -165,831 67,338
1999 -265,090 -347,819 82,729
2004 -607,730 -669,578 61,848
2008 -681,130 -820,825 139,695

The actual deficit in goods has multiplied fivefold in 15 years. The notion that service exports will somehow balance our increasing goods deficit has not been borne out and is increasingly less likely to be in the future, given that certain service sectors, such as financial services, are in sharp decline domestically. Moreover, the services we had expected to export are increasingly becoming sources of growth overseas. It is hard to believe that China will want or need to import U.S. investment banking services a decade (or a month) from now.

Even more dramatic than the growth of the trade deficit, of course, is the escalation of the federal budget deficit.

Annual Deficit/Aggregate Federal Debt
Year Annual Deficit
(in millions of dollars) As Percent of GDP Aggregate Federal Debt
(in trillions of dollars) As Percent of GDP
1994 -203,186 -2.9 4.692 66.35
1999 125,610 1.4 5.656 61.03
2004 -412,727 -3.6 7.379 63.14
2009 [est]
-1,845,000 -13.1 11.305 82

The argument until now has been that the virtually unlimited appetite for American T-bills would permit us to issue this increasing debt without interest rates accelerating and the dollar suffering. Recent events have cast serious doubt on this assumption. The spread between two-year Treasury notes and 10-year notes is wider than it's ever been. And the Chinese government seems less and less enthusiastic about purchasing an unlimited supply of T-bills. (Has anyone wondered why we have said not a word about Chinese human rights abuses during this economic crisis and why Treasury Secretary Geithner has withdrawn the well-founded assertion that the Chinese have been manipulating the value of their currency?)

Now all of this might have been acceptable had we seen a remarkable increase in per capita income. We have not. Indeed, we have seen just the opposite: stagnation.
Median Household Income in Constant Dollars

Year Median Household Income in Constant Dollars
1999 50,641
2004 48,665
2007 [most recent avail.] 50,233

So, despite trillions in public spending, we are short millions of jobs, are rapidly sliding further into debt, are losing our capacity to borrow at a manageable cost, and are producing fewer of the goods that will generate real wealth.

The remarkable payments to the financial services sector and the auto industry—a quarter-trillion-dollar investment in AIG and GM alone—have produced no structural change at all. We are rebuilding the same edifice—fragile as before.

Where does this leave us? We have had a fundamentally misguided industrial policy over the past decade. Yes, industrial policy is a dirty phrase to many, some of whom would argue that we haven't had one, and indeed shouldn't. But the truth is we did have one: to leverage up and guarantee the bets of a financial services sector that has now collapsed and left nothing of value in its wake.

What would be a better approach? A policy to support those sectors that actually create goods and value. Investment in transformational technology and infrastructure are core national needs. So why not start with a government order for 500,000 electric cars, subject to an RFP two years from now, by which time a true electric car prototype will have been developed? It should be open to any manufacturer, as long as 75 percent of the value of the car is domestically produced. I don't care if the name on the plate is GM or Toyota, as long as the value added is here. (I prefer a "Toyota" produced in Tennessee to a "GM" produced in China. Why struggle to save the shell of a company—GM—that intends to ship jobs overseas anyway?) Guaranteeing an order of 500,000 will give manufacturers the needed scale to generate profits and reassure private customers that service and support will be around for the long haul. And the federal government could also issue an RFP for recharging stations, to be built by private companies, along the interstate highway system, wherever there is a traditional filling station, so that recharging will be possible.

Second, why not take an amount equal to the AIG bailout (more than $180 billion) and invest in a product that would be truly worthwhile: high-speed rail along our major economic corridors? If we transform the L.A.-San Francisco corridor with high-speed rail, and D.C.-Boston similarly, the savings and technological advances would be enormous. The $8 billion dedicated to high-speed rail in the stimulus package will accomplish little.

Wouldn't these be dollars better spent than those dedicated to propping up GM and AIG? The longer we fight the creative destruction of the marketplace by resuscitating dying companies, the slower our ability to shift capital to truly creative sectors in the economy will be.

http://www.slate.com/id/2219599/pagenum/all/#p2

Goodbye, GM

2009-06-01T18:29:00.000-07:00

Subject: Goodbye, GM ...by Michael Moore

Goodbye, GM
by Michael Moore
June 1, 2009
I write this on the morning of the end of the once-mighty General Motors. By high noon, the President of the United States will have made it official: General Motors, as we know it, has been totaled.

As I sit here in GM's birthplace, Flint, Michigan, I am surrounded by friends and family who are filled with anxiety about what will happen to them and to the town. Forty percent of the homes and businesses in the city have been abandoned. Imagine what it would be like if you lived in a city where almost every other house is empty.

What would be your state of mind?

It is with sad irony that the company which invented "planned obsolescence" -- the decision to build cars that would fall apart after a few years so that the customer would then have to buy a new one -- has now made itself obsolete. It refused to build automobiles that the public wanted, cars that got great gas mileage, were as safe as they could be, and were exceedingly comfortable to drive. Oh -- and that wouldn't start falling apart after two years. GM stubbornly fought environmental and safety regulations. Its executives arrogantly ignored the "inferior" Japanese and German cars, cars which would become the gold standard for automobile buyers. And it was hell-bent on punishing its unionized workforce, lopping off thousands of workers for no good reason other than to "improve" the short-term bottom line of the corporation. Beginning in the 1980s, when GM was posting record profits, it moved countless jobs to Mexico and elsewhere, thus destroying the lives of tens of thousands of hard-working Americans. The glaring stupidity of this policy was that, when they eliminated the income of so many middle class families, who did they think was going to be able to afford to buy their cars? History will record this blunder in the same way it now writes about the French building the Maginot Line or how the Romans cluelessly poisoned their own water system with lethal lead in its pipes.

So here we are at the deathbed of General Motors. The company's body not yet cold, and I find myself filled with -- dare I say it -- joy. It is not the joy of revenge against a corporation that ruined my hometown and brought misery, divorce, alcoholism, homelessness, physical and mental debilitation, and drug addiction to the people I grew up with. Nor do I, obviously, claim any joy in knowing that 21,000 more GM workers will be told that they, too, are without a job.

But you and I and the rest of America now own a car company! I know, I know -- who on earth wants to run a car company? Who among us wants $50 billion of our tax dollars thrown down the rat hole of still trying to save GM? Let's be clear about this: The only way to save GM is to kill GM. Saving our precious industrial infrastructure, though, is another matter and must be a top priority. If we allow the shutting down and tearing down of our auto plants, we will sorely wish we still had them when we realize that those factories could have built the alternative energy systems we now desperately need. And when we realize that the best way to transport ourselves is on light rail and bullet trains and cleaner buses, how will we do this if we've allowed our industrial capacity and its skilled workforce to disappear?

Thus, as GM is "reorganized" by the federal government and the bankruptcy court, here is the plan I am asking President Obama to implement for the good of the workers, the GM communities, and the nation as a whole. Twenty years ago when I made "Roger & Me," I tried to warn people about what was ahead for General Motors. Had the power structure and the punditocracy listened, maybe much of this could have been avoided. Based on my track record, I request an honest and sincere consideration of the following suggestions:

1. Just as President Roosevelt did after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the President must tell the nation that we are at war and we must immediately convert our auto factories to factories that build mass transit vehicles and alternative energy devices. Within months in Flint in 1942, GM halted all car production and immediately used the assembly lines to build planes, tanks and machine guns. The conversion took no time at all. Everyone pitched in. The fascists were defeated.
We are now in a different kind of war -- a war that we have conducted against the ecosystem and has been conducted by our very own corporate leaders. This current war has two fronts. One is headquartered in Detroit. The products built in the factories of GM, Ford and Chrysler are some of the greatest weapons of mass destruction responsible for global warming and the melting of our polar icecaps. The things we call "cars" may have been fun to drive, but they are like a million daggers into the heart of Mother Nature. To continue to build them would only lead to the ruin of our species and much of the planet.

The other front in this war is being waged by the oil companies against you and me. They are committed to fleecing us whenever they can, and they have been reckless stewards of the finite amount of oil that is located under the surface of the earth. They know they are sucking it bone dry. And like the lumber tycoons of the early 20th century who didn't give a damn about future generations as they tore down every forest they could get their hands on, these oil barons are not telling the public what they know to be true -- that there are only a few more decades of useable oil on this planet. And as the end days of oil approach us, get ready for some very desperate people willing to kill and be killed just to get their hands on a gallon can of gasoline.

President Obama, now that he has taken control of GM, needs to convert the factories to new and needed uses immediately.

2. Don't put another $30 billion into the coffers of GM to build cars. Instead, use that money to keep the current workforce -- and most of those who have been laid off -- employed so that they can build the new modes of 21st century transportation. Let them start the conversion work now.

3. Announce that we will have bullet trains criss-crossing this country in the next five years. Japan is celebrating the 45th anniversary of its first bullet train this year. Now they have dozens of them. Average speed: 165 mph. Average time a train is late: under 30 seconds. They have had these high speed trains for nearly five decades -- and we don't even have one! The fact that the technology already exists for us to go from New York to L.A. in 17 hours by train, and that we haven't used it, is criminal. Let's hire the unemployed to build the new high speed lines all over the country. Chicago to Detroit in less than two hours. Miami to DC in under 7 hours. Denver to Dallas in five and a half. This can be done and done now.

4. Initiate a program to put light rail mass transit lines in all our large and medium-sized cities. Build those trains in the GM factories. And hire local people everywhere to install and run this system.

5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses.

6. For the time being, have some factories build hybrid or all-electric cars (and batteries). It will take a few years for people to get used to the new ways to transport ourselves, so if we're going to have automobiles, let's have kinder, gentler ones. We can be building these next month (do not believe anyone who tells you it will take years to retool the factories -- that simply isn't true).

7. Transform some of the empty GM factories to facilities that build windmills, solar panels and other means of alternate forms of energy. We need tens of millions of solar panels right now. And there is an eager and skilled workforce who can build them.

8. Provide tax incentives for those who travel by hybrid car or bus or train. Also, credits for those who convert their home to alternative energy.

9. To help pay for this, impose a two-dollar tax on every gallon of gasoline. This will get people to switch to more energy saving cars or to use the new rail lines and rail cars the former autoworkers have built for them.

Well, that's a start. Please, please, please don't save GM so that a smaller version of it will simply do nothing more than build Chevys or Cadillacs. This is not a long-term solution. Don't throw bad money into a company whose tailpipe is malfunctioning, causing a strange odor to fill the car.

100 years ago this year, the founders of General Motors convinced the world to give up their horses and saddles and buggy whips to try a new form of transportation. Now it is time for us to say goodbye to the internal combustion engine. It seemed to serve us well for so long. We enjoyed the car hops at the A&W. We made out in the front -- and the back -- seat. We watched movies on large outdoor screens, went to the races at NASCAR tracks across the country, and saw the Pacific Ocean for the first time through the window down Hwy. 1. And now it's over. It's a new day and a new century. The President -- and the UAW -- must seize this moment and create a big batch of lemonade from this very sour and sad lemon.

Yesterday, the last surviving person from the Titanic disaster passed away. She escaped certain death that night and went on to live another 97 years.
So can we survive our own Titanic in all the Flint Michigans of this country. 60% of GM is ours. I think we can do a better job.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com

Master of Puppets

2009-05-31T18:32:00.000-07:00

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2009/05/29/BAET17SV0U.DTL&o=2

Tar sands won't help oil production much

2009-05-27T23:51:00.000-07:00

I've been looking for an electronic version of this article for a while now...

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/03/canadian-oil-sands/kunzig-text

Goes to show just how damaging and unproductive making fuel from shale and tar sands really is.

The sooner we reduce consumption and switch to EVs the better.

Bank error couple flee to China

2009-05-25T18:59:00.000-07:00

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25539422-5001021,00.html

I'm sure you've heard of this news story: but have a quick look at the price of unleaded guzzoline in the pic of the service station they used to own:

$1.589 NZ per litre is about $4 US per gallon - while oil is hovering around $60 per barrel.

Just you wait until scarcity pushes the price back up to $150 per barrel and see how expensive fuel is then!!!

Oil supplies tightening

2009-05-20T19:45:00.000-07:00

China doesn't only buy oil on the world market. They are also buying entire oilfields in foreign countries in an effort to lock-in supply for the long term. This is creating tension in the USA who are increasingly aware of the approaching oil crunch (where demand exceeds supply). At least the Chinese haven't invaded anyone to secure their oil supplies. Yet...

From today's Financial Review, Page 11

Australia watches China, Brazil's new strategy

There's no worrying equity issue in deals with state-owned suppliers, writes Colleen Ryan in Shanghai.

China's strategy of offering bus loans from its cash-rich supplies of energy and resources took a significant step forward with the signing of a $US10 billion (($13 billion) loan agreement with Brazil's state-owned oil group, Petrobras, in return for the supply of up to 200,000 barrels of oil a day for the next 10 years.
China Development Bank will provide the funding - the same bank that is leading the consortium to fund Chinalco's proposed acquisition of an 18 per cent stake in Rio Tinto.
The Brazillian deal follows three similar deals in recent months to secure oil supplies. In February, China agreed to provide $US25 billion in loans to Russian state-owned companies in exchange for 300,000 barrels of oil a day for the next 20 years. Earlier, Beijing signed a $US10 billion deal with Kazakhstan and a $US4 billion deal with Peru in return for energy supplies.
The latest deal was announced during a high profile state visit to Beijing by Brazillian President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, who brought 180 business leaders to push along new deals between Brazil and China.
Mr da Silva was given a lavish welcome by Chinese Preseident Hu Jintao and a 21-gun nilitary salute at Tiananmen Square.
China surpasses the United States last month to become Brazil's largest trading partner. And the focus that Mr da Silva and Mr Hu are placing on the China relationship provides an interesting comparison with the sensitive nature of Australia-China relations.
There is no thorny question of Chinese equity in either Brazil's major oil or iron ore producers - Petrobras and Vale are both state-owned. This removes an element of tension that tends to dominate Australia's relationship with China.
In the trade policy area, Brazil has still not approved China as a market economy. Australia, meanwhile, gave away market economy status to China before launching free-trade agreement talks that have now stalled after limping along for years.
Mr da Silva lauded the strategic relationship between China and Brazil, established 16 years ago, after meeting Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao on Tuesday.
"I believe Brazil and China are consolidating their strategic partnership, which is reflected in bilateral trade. I also believe the current status is just 10 per cent of the potential" Mr da Silva said. Australia has not yet established a strategic partnership with China.
Brazil and China also have the membership of the BRIC group, which includes Russia and India, to cement their relationship. The BRIC couuntries took the unusual step of releasing their own communique during the G20 summit in London last month. A summit of BRIC leaders is scheduled to be help in Russia next month.
Prior to his visit to China, Mr da Silva gave an interview to Chinese business magazine Caijina in which he gave voluble support to a plan foloated in Beijing recently by the centralk bank governor to replace the US dollar as the international reserve currency.
"Brazil and China need to establish a trade that is paid for in our own currencies", Mr da Silva said. "We don't need [US] dollars. Why do two important countries like China and Brazil have to use the dollar as a reference instead of our own currencies?"
In the Great Hall of the People this week, the two presidents witnessed the signing of 13 co-operative agreements. The oil and financing deal was the most prominent one and others covered agriculture, ports, science and space technology.
The chief executive of Petrobras, Jose Sergio Gabrielle, said after signing that the interest rate of the $US10 billion loan from the China Development Bank was less than 6.5 per cent. He said the loan used oil revenue as collateral and would be repaid in cash, not oil. The deal does not include guarantees to buy Chinese products or services.
Mr Gabrielli said concessions for Chinese oil companies to produce oil in Brazil could be discussed in the future. Petrobras may also look into exploring for oil in China. The company sells about 60,000 barrels of oil a day to China, he said.
In a separate deal, the China Development Bank also agreed to lend Brazil's development bank, Banco Nacional de Desenvolvinmento Economico e Social, $US800 million to bolster its cash in the middle of the financial crisis.
Sinopec, China's largest oil refiner, will also explore for oil in Brazil, said Zhang Guobao, the head of China's National Energy Administration.
WEhile the Brazilian deals have generated a lot of attention in China, cynics point oit that the proof is in the execution of the agreements, not the rhetoric.
For examplem when Mr Hu visited Brazil 4 years ago he promised $US7 billion of Chinese investment. So far, only $US142 million has been invested, which is equal to about $US2c on the dollar.

End of article, start of analysis:
1. The Chinese have loads of cash to toss into securing their energy supplies. While the US is trying to bail out their dinosaur car makers, the Chinese have spent $US49 billion THIS YEAR on securing access to oil. While this is less money than the US has spent in Iraq, I'd say the Chinese approach seems to be pretty darn effective.

2. Trading in their own currencies will place more pressure on the $US. Petrodollar recycling is the only thing keeping the US economy afloat and once oil starts being traded in Euros (like Saddam proposed shortly before the US so clearly declared their displeasure with him) or Yen then other countries will no longer need to keep a stash of dollars to trade with. The US has been the world's oil banker since the 1970's and it looks like the party is well and truly OVER.

3. The Brazil deal does not require Brazil to buy anything from the Chinese economy. Very strange and an excellent deal for the Brazillians - they get the cash and all China wants is that liquid gold...In effect they are saying "We know there's enough world demand for the goods made in our ultra-low-cost factories (prison slave labour camps) - but we're so desperate for that oil we'll even give you a low interest rate on the money.

4. If the Chinese are SO desperate to buy oil from Brazil, I seriously doubt the Brazillian prospectors will find much in China. Their back yard would be pretty well picked over by now if they are prepared to pay top dollar for Brazillian crude.

5. And to further isolate Brazil from US influence, we'll even toss in $800 million in cash to keep your banking system afloat.

6. Four years ago, the Chinese tested the waters and made a lot of promises. But that was before the oil supply peaked and drove the price to $140 a barrel. Now that the writing is on the wall, the Chinese are ready to make their move.

It won't be long before the Chinese use their petty cash tin to buy up all the infrastructure in the USA. Ports, airports, electricity, communications, manufacturing and turn the US worker in a serf. Just watch the US Auto Worker's Union try to organise a strike when the Chinese military intelligence owns the phone lines and mobile phone companies. The longer they wait, the weaker the US dollar becomes, the cheaper the takeover is.

You might call it the python's approach to business: financially strangle to victim, then swallow them whole.

Better Place battery swapping

2009-05-14T16:55:00.000-07:00

Here's a quick update from Better Place with a pic and some video of how fast their battery swap is.

So using their model, you can charge your emission-free EV at home, work or other stations around the city for 80% of your driving. When you need to go to the beach or visit grandma, you can swap out the dead battery any number of times you need to get where you need to go...

http://media.drive.com.au/?rid=48782

Batteries Not Included

2009-04-22T16:28:00.000-07:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/magazine/19car-t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

Batteries Not Included

By CLIVE THOMPSON
Published: April 16, 2009
Shai Agassi stood in a warehouse on the outskirts of Tel Aviv one afternoon last month and watched his battery-swapping robot go to work. He was conducting a demonstration of the curious machine that is central to his two-year-old clean-energy company, which is called Better Place. Agassi’s grand plan is to kick-start the global adoption of electric cars by minimizing one of the biggest frustrations with the technology: the need for slow and frequent recharges. The robot is the key to his solution. Unlike most electric-car technologies, which generally require you to plug your car into a power source and recharge an onboard battery for hours, the Better Place robot is designed to reach under the chassis of an electric car, pluck its battery out and replace it with a new one, much the same way you’d put new batteries in a child’s toy.

Agassi told me previously that his goal was five minutes or less for the whole process. “If we can’t do this in less time than it takes to fill your gasoline tank,” he said, “we don’t have a company.”

On the day of the presentation, a group of investors and employees milled around, peering down with interest at the mechanism. The robot — a squat platform that moves on four dinner-plate-size white wheels — scuttled back and forth along a 20-foot-long set of metal rails. At one end of the rails, a huge blue battery, the size of a large suitcase, sat suspended in a frame. As we watched, the robot zipped up to the battery, made a nearly inaudible click, and pulled the battery downward. It ferried the battery over to the other end of the rails, dropped it off, picked up a new battery, hissed back over to the frame and, in one deft movement, snapped the new battery in the place of the old one. The total time: 45 seconds.

Agassi — a 41-year-old Israeli-American with a piercing stare — beamed. “Check this out,” he said, dragging me over and pointing at a set of thick two-inch metal hooks on the frame. The latches use the same technology as those used “to hold 500-pound bombs in place on bombers,” he explained. Designed to release bombs with millisecond precision, the technology is also perfectly suited to keeping batteries safely inside the cars, yet allowing them to be extracted in a blink. Agassi obviously enjoyed the swords-to-ploughshares imagery too.

Electric cars have long been a fetish object for environmentalists: electricity can be produced from wind, solar or nuclear sources with little or no CO2. But now even the auto industry seems to be taking the idea of the alt-car seriously. When the Big Three filed their restructuring plans earlier this year, all aggressively emphasized their intentions to begin producing electric vehicles and hybrids. General Motors has promised to begin selling its electric-powered Volt sedan next year. Toyota and other manufacturers have their own offerings as well.

Yet all these alternatives suffer from a common problem: refueling. The most advanced electric car currently for sale, the Tesla Roadster, runs for no more than 250 miles on a charge, and others can do only 50 miles or so; then they require two or more hours of plug-in time to recharge. The problem of refueling is so significant that fans of electric cars have a phrase for it: range anxiety, the nagging fear that you’ll run out of juice before you can find a charge spot and be stranded at the side of the road. It is the major reason that most Americans, even as they cheer on the development of low- or no-emissions vehicles, are leery of actually buying one. And if people won’t buy them, carmakers won’t make them.

Agassi aims to solve this problem. Going country by country, his start-up firm has begun to construct what it hopes will ultimately be a worldwide network of millions of small-scale “charging spots,” parking-meter-like posts scattered around downtown areas and along highways. But crucially, he is also building roadside robotized battery-swap stations that provide fresh, fully charged batteries without having to wait hours for a charge. It’s a dual system: on most days, his customers would charge their cars by plugging into a charge spot at home or at work; a long drive would entail pit stops every 100 miles or so for a battery swap. Agassi plans to make his money by buying electricity in bulk from solar arrays and wind farms and then reselling it to his customers.

The idea is a little odd, to say the least: a car with a replaceable battery? It is also extraordinarily bold, requiring carmakers to fundamentally rethink the way they build cars. But Agassi, a charismatic entrepreneur who walked away from one of the world’s top software jobs, is “amazingly persuasive,” Shimon Peres, the president of Israel and an admirer of Agassi’s, told me. In barely two years, Agassi has persuaded investors to contribute $400 million, and several countries and states — including Israel, Denmark and Hawaii — have offered him lucrative tax breaks. The French automaker Renault is spending $600 million over three years to develop a car with swappable batteries, to be released in 2011. In Israel, where Better Place has already installed hundreds of its signature blue car-charging stations, Agassi is credited with convincing the nation’s jaded political class that they have an opportunity to actually wean their country off oil. But the question is whether he can convince the most important group of all: customers.

“Some people say I’m missing the fear gene,” Agassi mused when we first met in Tel Aviv in February, and I couldn’t entirely tell if he was joking. Agassi has darkly brooding eyebrows and a square jaw, and carries himself with a granite self-confidence that is striking, even unsettling. When he came down from the hotel penthouse he was staying in — he lives in California with his wife but travels to Israel often for business — he greeted me in the lobby dressed in a sleek black suit with no tie. “He has very high self-esteem,” Idan Ofer, head of the Israel Corporation and Better Place’s first big investor, told me. “He sees himself as a world-recognized figure.”

At age 14, Agassi persuaded his father to buy him an Apple IIe by promising him 10 percent of his “lifetime profits” from writing software. It turned out to be an excellent deal: at age 21, the younger Agassi founded TopTier Software — which made portals to help companies organize their internal information — and sold it nine years later to the German software giant SAP for $400 million. SAP put him in charge of developing new software for Fortune 500 businesses.

“I’ve learned every industry in the world,” Agassi told me as we drank coffee in the hotel’s business lounge. “One day, it would be Apple and Sony. The other day it would be BP and Chevron.” By 2007, Agassi had built his division at SAP from zero sales to $2 billion annually, and he was being groomed to replace the C.E.O.

Agassi never regarded himself as a particularly ardent environmentalist. But in 2005, he attended a meeting of young global leaders at the World Economic Forum at Davos where they discussed the question “How would you make the world a better place?” After giving it some thought himself, he ultimately decided the answer was: By ending the world’s addiction to oil, which would mean finally getting people to drive electric cars. Hybrids, he argued, were a half-measure. Alternative fuels like hydrogen or natural gas or bio fuels weren’t going to be readily available anytime soon. Only electricity fit the bill. It is plentiful, already widely distributed and can be generated from extremely low- or zero-emissions sources like solar or wind farms.

The only way to get consumers to use electric cars, Agassi realized, was to solve the problem of refueling. That meant, to begin with, that some entrepreneur would have to build networks of recharging spots, going country by country. As he crunched the numbers, what really struck Agassi was how lucrative a business like this could be. Powering a car by electricity — even relatively expensive “clean” energy like wind or solar — costs far less than powering it by gasoline. The Tesla all-electric sedan, for example, uses about 1 cent of electricity per mile. A comparable gasoline car uses 16 cents of gasoline per mile. And with the United States market for automobile gas at roughly $275 billion, Agassi figured that a company controlling a world network of charging stations would become so profitable so quickly that it could subsidize its customers’ electric cars, much the way mobile companies give out free phones to people who sign two-year contracts. The electric-car business, in fact, could function like the mobile-phone industry: you could pay, say, $10 for 1,000 miles, $20 for 3,000 miles, or perhaps a few hundred a month for unlimited driving.

“If I can give you miles in a more convenient, cheaper way than gasoline, you will take them,” Agassi says. “If your neighbor is driving an electric car and paying me only $30 a week for the electricity, you’re going to buy an electric car, too. If I do it without killing your kids and the planet, then it won’t even matter if it’s cheaper or not; you will just do it.”

In 2006 Agassi delivered a speech about his idea at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, and then went back to his job at SAP. A week later, the phone rang; it was the gravelly voice of Shimon Peres. The Israeli president had been in the audience, and he practically commanded Agassi to quit SAP. “You have to do this thing,” Agassi remembers Peres telling him. “If you don’t do this, why would anybody else do it?” Agassi also had another motive: SAP’s existing C.E.O. had announced he was staying on for another two years, pushing back Agassi’s possible ascension. He announced his resignation.

Within months, he had acquired crucial political and financial backing for Better Place. Peres’s support helped; the president wanted Israel to be the company’s first test market, and Peres began working as an icebreaker inside the government, getting skeptical politicians to begin designing tax incentives and cheap debt to finance the firm. “I convinced the ministers,” Peres said. “I helped him to break through.” Peres also brokered an introduction to Carlos Ghosn, the C.E.O. of Renault-Nissan, who agreed to make the first cars with compatible batteries.

Agassi received his first investment — $200 million from Israel Corporation, a firm that owns many oil refineries — after a single conversation with the C.E.O., Idan Ofer. “He didn’t have to sell the CO2 story,” Ofer told me. “Climate change is real. The CO2 equation has gone haywire. And coming from the oil business, I know that oil is becoming more and more difficult to find — I mean, this planet, how much oil can you have?”

But Agassi realized he needed one more breakthrough: some way to rapidly charge a vehicle. No drivers, he knew, will tolerate a two-hour wait to recharge when they’re on a 500-mile haul. Then one day, he and an automotive engineer were chewing over an impractical method for quickly replenishing batteries. The engineer wondered aloud: Wouldn’t the fastest way to charge an electric car be to simply replace the battery?

It was, Agassi says, his “aha” moment. The auto industry’s conceptual error, he says, is in regarding the battery as a built-in component of the car, like a gas tank. Instead, you could think of the battery as more analogous to gas itself — an entity that goes in and out of a car as needed, owned not by the driver but by the company that sells you the fuel. Think of the problem that way, Agassi realized, and the recharging company could refill its customers’ cars using battery technology and the existing electric grid without making any radical new technological innovations. The solution to electric cars lay not in re-engineering the battery but in re-engineering the car.

To get a sense of what it would be like to actually use the Better Place system, Tal Agassi — Shai’s 33-year-old brother, who works as his global manager for infrastructure — took me for a drive around Tel Aviv in a Renault Mégane, a luxury sedan that had been converted to run on electricity.

The car pulled into a parking lot that had been outfitted with Better Place’s electric charging posts — triangular columns that look a little like parking meters. Tal took a charging cord from the car’s trunk; it was an inch thick and one end was topped by a nozzle that had several round, nubbly electric-socket prongs. One end plugged into the charging post; I took the other end, went to the car, flipped open a little flap and inserted the nozzle with a satisfying click. A blue Better Place logo began gently glowing on the meter, indicating that electricity was now flowing.

“We want to make the cord smaller and thinner, so it’s more like a USB cord or a cord you use on your computer,” Tal said. “It’s all about making people comfortable with the idea of using electricity in your car.” Most customers, Agassi and Tal predict, will do the majority of their charging at home — Better Place will include a charging cord free for any customer who signs a contract — or while parked at work. They anticipate that their battery-swapping stations will be used for longer drives — or in an “emergency,” like when someone forgot to charge up at home or needed to leave suddenly but hadn’t finished charging. According to studies by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, almost 80 percent of American commuters travel less than 40 miles a day to work and back. Range anxiety is, in a sense, more about psychology than practical reality. Even today’s average electric cars, with a 50-mile range, can cover most daily driving easily.

Still, the anxiety can be hard to shake, as I discovered when we drove the Megone across Tel Aviv. When we started our journey, the battery stood at 90 percent; barely 15 minutes later, it was down to 75 percent. I found myself staring at the battery meter, realizing that if we kept up at this rate, we’d be risking a dead battery in another hour or so. That’s another problem with electric cars: even if there are tons of charging spots, you still have to plan ahead.

In an attempt to quell this anxiety, Better Place has designed software that effectively does the thinking on behalf of the customer — providing directions to the nearest recharge location whenever the need arises. I headed back to the Better Place offices, where I met Barak Hershkovitz, a former doctor who is designing the in-car software. Turning on a modified G.P.S. device, Hershkovitz picked a route that a driver might select — from, say, Tel Aviv to a town nearby. The device displayed the location of every charge spot and battery-swapping station along the way. With the G.P.S. mounted in your car, the computer would determine whether you could make your drive without charging; if you needed a swap, it would guide you to the most convenient swap station. When you parked to plug in, the system would tell you how full your battery will be depending on how long you charge. Hershkovitz showed me a virtual example. His on-screen car drove up a charging spot with a battery 49 percent full. The system told him that if he plugged in for one hour while shopping, it would rise to 66 percent. Another half-hour would get him to 79 percent.

“Now let’s go to Sderot,” he said, picking as his next destination the embattled Israeli city on the border of Gaza. “It’s a town which is under rocket attacks. Let’s say that I’m afraid to park there, so I’m not going to charge.” The system quickly identified two places where he could swap batteries along the highway leading to and from Sderot, so he could drive the entire 100-mile journey there and back without needing to park and charge.

“Electric vehicles are software-driven vehicles,” Alan Salzman, Agassi’s main American investor, told me. In his view, this makes Agassi — who spent years designing precisely this type of complex software for mobile-phone and courier firms — well suited for the job. “You need a software-industry guy,” Salzman added. “He’s the Steve Jobs of clean energy.”

It is an apt comparison, perhaps even more so than Salzman intended. The automobile is going through a transition quite similar to the computer industry of the early 1980s, when nobody knew which company was going to dominate — Microsoft or Apple? I.B.M. or Wang? — and a company needed a talented pitchman like Jobs to make a compelling case for its own model.

The race to produce alternative-fuel cars is certainly confusing to consumers, because automakers are pursuing five or six different options. Many are planning to produce hybrids like the Toyota Prius, which includes a regular gasoline engine and an electric motor. In hybrids, an electric motor starts the car moving from a standing stop, saving precious gasoline, and the batteries charge whenever the car brakes. But a hybrid typically can drive only a short distance on electric power alone, so it improves the gasoline fuel economy by perhaps only 30 percent. A more ambitious alternative is the plug-in hybrid, which contains an additional battery and can be plugged in to get the charge as high as possible. These cars can drive for longer on pure electricity — Toyota’s plug-in Prius, due out next winter, runs for at least 10 miles at highway speed, but eventually the gas engine needs to take over.

Electric cars, meanwhile, are coming in a variety of formats. Some are all-electric, like the Tesla Roadster. But other vehicles are not. The Chevrolet Volt, due out next year, runs for 40 miles on its batteries, and after the batteries die, a small gasoline engine under the hood turns on, powering a turbine that generates more electricity to drive the car. This “range extender,” as it is called, may become a common feature in the coming wave of electric cars, because it solves range anxiety in a way that is elegant, if not emission-free: if you can’t find a place to plug in, you can just gas up.

Perhaps the most ambitious cars are those that are powered by alternative-energy fuel-cells that take hydrogen and convert it to electricity to drive the car’s motor, producing only a trickle of water as a byproduct. But hydrogen is not widely available. Last summer, Honda began releasing its fuel-cell Clarity — but will do so only in small numbers (150 cars). And the only U.S. market for it is in California, where hydrogen can be bought in a handful of stations.

So where does Agassi’s Better Place fit into this electric universe? Because Agassi plans to buy only “clean” electricity, from wind and solar farms, Better Place customers will be, in theory, producing nearly zero emissions. But Agassi requires the cooperation of automakers. To use the charging spots, the electric ports on any car must be designed to work with the Better Place nozzle (or include an adapter); to reap the benefits of Agassi’s battery-swapping stations, the entire car must be built so the battery can be removed from beneath. This is a serious engineering challenge: the batteries in electric cars can weigh hundreds of pounds.

No carmakers other than Renault have announced plans to design cars to suit Agassi’s grid. Sue Cischke, Ford’s group vice president for Sustainability, Environment and Safety Engineering, told me that she found Better Place’s battery-swapping “an interesting concept.” She continued: “It solves this range-anxiety problem, and it’s also a way to solve this problem of battery cost.” But it requires carmakers to all agree to design cars around one standard-size battery bay. Cischke says she thinks it’s too early to settle upon a single battery standard, because battery technology is still advancing, producing new potential styles of battery each year. “It’s, in my mind, going to be a long time before we ever standardize the batteries,” she said. “The chemistry is still changing, and it’s still a developing technology rather than a mature technology.” Designing a car takes at least one year and often several; making the wrong call on a standardized battery could be economically fatal for a carmaker.

When I talked to John Hanson, Toyota’s manager of environmental communications, he was candid about the problems that automakers have shifting to new models and new fuel structures. That’s why his company is beginning with such a tiny run of plug-in hybrids.

“There is no market,” he said, for electric cars, hydrogen fuel cells or even plug-in hybrids. “People say, ‘If you build it they will buy it,’ but we don’t know. Can we sell these in significant volume? Significant volume is important so that the manufacturer can make a profit, and you need significant volume if you’re going to have a positive effect on the environment. What good does it do if we only sell 500 a year? We sell 175,000 Priuses alone in North America. Those are the kind of volumes you need to have to make an impact on the environment. You cannot expect manufacturers to do this at a loss; there has to be a response by the market. So not only are we being asked to invest in a technology and bring it to market; we’re being asked to create a market that doesn’t exist yet.”

Agassi regards the various gasoline-based “range extenders” in electric cars with undisguised contempt. Indeed, he regards cars that rely on any oil at all with a certain amount of derision — not merely because they cause greenhouse gases, but because from his perspective, oil simply isn’t a very efficient way to store energy. To Agassi, it is enormously wasteful both in terms of physics and of economics. Far better to simply trap the sun’s energy with solar arrays — or wind, which is generated by the uneven heating of the earth by the sun — and put it directly into a car’s batteries.

“You always have to start with the science,” Agassi says, riding shotgun in his sister’s hybrid. “There’s nothing better than taking a photon, converting it to an electron and converting that to motion. Physicswise, you can’t beat that. The rules of energy conservation say that the minute you turn energy into a molecule” — into oil — “you’ve lost.

“Everybody says we have an energy-dependency problem,” he continues. “It’s not true. We have an oil-dependency problem. We can’t make oil. But all the rest of the energy we know how to make. Seriously. We know how to make it.” He was working himself up into a intense, nerdy lecture. Agassi is an extremely charming guy; he has the born salesman’s ability read people and connect with them. But he also has the obdurate quality I’ve seen in so many people who are drawn to computer programming and logical thinking. Once Agassi has convinced himself of the optimal solution to a problem, he develops a nearly pathological monomania about it, disgorging encyclopedic data to buttress his points. As we drove, he delivered a passionate disquisition on the superior physics of solar energy.

How much total solar energy, I idly wondered, hits the earth every day?

To my amazement, he fired back instantly with a figure precise to the terawatt. “By the way,” he added, “that’s just the land surface.”

Agassi does not appear to be worried that the automakers aren’t lining up behind him. He argues that he doesn’t need them: Renault’s commitment alone, he expects, can produce enough cars for the 25 million potential customers of the grids he is laying out in Israel, Denmark and Hawaii, his first test markets. Renault has not announced how many cars it will produce, though Olivier Floc’hic, a spokesman, told me that the company “intends to arrive on the market massively in 2011. It’s going to be about global volumes. We’re not talking about niche.” By 2015, he added, the company plans for between 10 and 15 percent of its annual production to be electric.

The small size of Agassi’s test markets is also an advantage. Anders Eldrup, the C.E.O. of Dong Energy — the Danish firm that will sell its wind-farmed electricity to Better Place — suspects the country would need no more than 150 swapping stations nationwide. If all goes well, Agassi figures he and Renault will make enough money that competitor automakers will quickly follow. And there’s the potential of moving into China, where electric cars are expected to sell briskly to an emerging middle class that has never owned a car and thus is presumably less conditioned to feel range anxiety.

But the United States’s market will be much harder to crack. “Covering the United States with battery-swap is hard,” says Richard Lowenthal, the founder of Coulomb Technologies, a rival firm that is creating its own network of electric-car-charging stations, beginning with San Francisco and San Jose. In densely populated regions, Better Place’s model “could work really well,” he says. “But in the United States, we’ve got a lot of places where people don’t go very often. I’m thinking of Montana.”

The problem is ultimately political. Everyone agrees that the government will have to spend a lot to create enough demand for alternative-fuel cars. Automakers want subsidies to offset the cost of developing them; consumers want subsidies to buy them; and people who are building electric charging networks — like Lowenthal and Agassi — are straightforward about the fact that they, too, need government money. “I don’t need a government handout forever,” Agassi says. “But we do need something for, say, two years, until there are enough electric cars on the road to make a viable market.”

Agassi was pleased to learn that Obama’s stimulus package included $2.4 billion in development grants for electric cars and plug-in electric hybrids, as well as tax credits for customers and $300 million for state and local governments to buy electric vehicles. But even all that money would put only an estimated 600,000 electric vehicles on the road — close to 2 percent of the U.S.’s 251-million-vehicle fleet. A recent report by the Boston Consulting Group argued that for 1.5 million electric cars to be on the road in the U.S., Europe and Japan by 2020, it would require $49 billion to develop the cars and batteries and $21 billion to build charging networks. It is possible that some of this money will come from Better Place’s profits. But Agassi cannot do it alone. He has figured out a way to get the electric car rolling. It just needs a little push.

Clive Thompson, a contributing writer for the magazine, writes frequently about technology.

A little off-topic

2009-04-08T16:46:00.001-07:00

I know it's a little off-topic, but I couldn't help myself. I've loved dirt bikes since I was a kid and the time I've spent riding has been too short and too infrequent.

Here's my dream: And it's rapidly becoming reality. It will be mine. Oh yes, it will be mine...

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/04/24-hours-of-ele.html

Electric Motorcycle Impresses Motocross Crowd
By Chuck Squatriglia April 06, 2009 | 7:31:25 PMCategories: Electric Vehicles

SAN JOSE, California -- Dirt rider Brandon Savory had just cleared the last jump on the last turn of the last lap of the "24 Hours of Electricross" endurance race when it all went bad in grand fashion.

Savory was among 50 riders onhand to show the Zero X electric motorcycle is a real motorcross machines, and he showboated the last few laps. He got big air off the jumps and threw dirt rooster tails over teammates gathered at the last turn of the half-mile track. With excitement mounting as the end of the unprecedented 24-hour race drew near, Savory launched the bike high in the air and nailed the landing before going head over heels.

The rear suspension had collapsed faster than one of Bernie Madoff's investments after a nut securing the bolt holding it together apparently snapped came loose.
"All I can say is thank God for the helmet," Savory said moments after he and several other people carried the crumpled bike across the finish line Sunday. "That was a full head skid. I'll be feeling it tomorrow."
It was a spectacular end to an unprecedented race that otherwise went off without a hitch. Zero Motorcycles had invited 50 people to flog 10 of its Zero X electric motorcross bikes for 24 hours straight. The company wanted to prove that these new battery-powered bikes are every bit as competitive as those burning fossil fuel.
"We want to show the world we can do a 24-hour race with EVs," Neal Saiki, the company's founder and chief technology officer, said. "The technology is here, and it works."
The Santa Cruz startup leads a growing field of companies hoping to shake up the motorcycle industry by offering electric bikes to the masses. As electric motorcycles from Zero, Brammo and Vectrix catch on, big players like KTM and Honda are ramping up plans for green bikes of their own.
If last weekend's race was any indication, these rivals will have their work cut out if they want to catch Zero Motorcycles.

The Zero X is an EV you can buy right now for $7,450. It weighs in at a bantamweight 150 pounds, delivers as much as 40 miles on a charge from a lithium-ion battery, and with a 23-horsepower motor it'll hit 57 mph (and throw up a big spray of dirt getting there). Sakai says it offers the same power as a 250-cc gasoline powered bike, and with 50 foot-pounds of torque it'll smoke the tires on pavement.

Sakai, a longtime rider who previously designed mountain bikes for the likes of Santa Cruz and Haro, started developing the Zero X about five years ago. He was convinced electric drivetrains are the best way forward and motorcycles the logical place to develop them. They're smaller and less complex than cars, and the regulatory hurdles to getting them on the road aren't as high.

Off-road bikes also lend themselves to electric power because they're typically ridden short distances, so range isn't a huge issue. Electric motors also provide loads of torque, a big plus in motocross riding. The Zero X produces power instantaneously, which can catch you off guard because the bike is all but silent. Snap the throttle too hard and you'll lift the front wheel.
The company he founded has shipped 200 bikes in the past 14 months and expects to ship another 400 to 500 this year, says CEO Gene Banman. Eager to show the technology works, Sakai and Banman thought it would be cool to stage a 24-hour endurance race and set a Guinness record for longest electric vehicle race. Some 50 people on 10 teams came from as far away as England to participate.

"We're going back to spread the word about electric bikes," said Scott Snaith, who arrived in San Jose from Loughborough, England, the day before the race. He and his brother Tim sell electric bicycles at their shop 50 Cycles and have been looking to add a motorcycle to the mix.

"We've wanted something like this for five years, but it's only now been available," Tim Snaith said. "There's definitely a need for them. Gas is about a pound a liter (about $5.50 a gallon)."

Advocates of electric motorcycles believe the bikes could help preserve access to parks and public trails because they're silent, they don't pollute and they don't do as much damage to the landscape because they're smaller and lighter.
"I think the fact people are starting to lose access because of noise and pollution issues will really accelerate the development and acceptance of this (technology)," said Jay Friedland, Zero's VP of sustainability and legislative director for Plug In America, the EV advocacy group. "These bikes are quiet. We're staging a race in an urban area and we aren't pissing off the neighbors."
The race started at 11 a.m. Saturday in what had to have been the quietest start to a motorcycle race ever. Ten bikes streaked away from the starting gate with nothing more than the whir of their 8-inch, air-cooled electric motors and the chatter of their chains. Each team was allowed three batteries, and the first bikes headed for the pits about 20 minutes in. Zero says the 2 kilowatt-hour batteries are good for 40 minutes of hardcore riding, bbut the teams were pushing them hard all day and didn't want to risk running out of juice on the track.

Swapping the batteries proved remarkably easy: Loosen a thumbscrew, remove a bracket and slide it out. Installation is the reverse of removal. Even with a stripped thumbscrew, one team managed to get in and out of the pit in less than two minutes. The best of them were doing it in less than a minute.

By noon, the field had spaced out as bikes came and went to swap riders and batteries and quickly douse the motors with water to keep them cool. Riders did 15- to 30-minute stints to start - motorcross racing can be grueling - but as evening fell they starting getting tired.

"We were all starting to feel it about 7 (p.m.)," said Wired's own Ryan Meith, a member of Team Marin Zero-Wired. "We'd all been going flat-out until then."
Things really started getting tough in the wee hours, as riders tried to catch a little sleep between stints on the bike.

"I was trying to sleep, but every time I'd move, my legs would lock up," said Jason Matson, a materials manager at Zero who was participating in the race. "It was getting tougher and tougher to kick a leg over the bike."

They key to success was maintaining a consistent pace, managing battery use and keeping the bike in one piece. Teams were replacing brake pads with some regularity, a few shock absorbers blew out and one team managed to fry its motor. Still, several people were impressed by how well the bikes took the beating. The riders took almost as much abuse, and by morning many of them were stiff and limping.
"It's been a long event," Meith said.

But as the sun rose, so too did the adrenaline, and with every passing hour the teams got more excited as the end of the race drew near. Suddenly the bikes were a little faster, the jumps a little bigger. Savory was putting on a spectacular show before the back end of his bike broke; it looked like the swingarm mounting bolt snapped under the abuse incurred during 300-plus miles of hard riding.

Savory and his teammates carried the bike across the finish to take ninth place, having completed 858 laps. That was well short of first-place finishers Hotchalk, which racked up an impressive 1015 laps (507.5 miles) and clocked a top speed of 27.49 mph.

"We were behind several times," said rider Rex Halepesha. "We really had to work for it. Saving the battery and saving the bike was key. It was a whole lot of fun."
As for Team Marin Zero-Wired, it took fourth place, completing 927 laps after team captain Dave Wood literally crept across the finish line with a dead battery.
UPDATE: Tuesday, April 7: Gabriel DeVault, production manager for Zero Motorcycles, dropped us an email late Monday night to say the bolt didn't snap, a nut came loose. "It sounds bad when you say the bolt snapped," he notes. He also notes that all 10 bikes finished the race.

He's got the frame and offered to send pictures and more info; we'll post it once we've got it.

Photos: Jim Merithew / Wired.com
Video: Andrew Lebov / Meatier Media. Courtesy Zero Motorcycles
See Also:
The Zero X: Two Wheels, Zero Emissions, Loads of Fun
KTM Promises a Race-Ready Electric Dirt Bike in 2010
Motorcycles Finally Go Green

Riders pushed the bikes hard on the half-mile course, racking up as many as 507 miles in 24 hours and averaging 25.86 mph. Many riders said the bikes took the abuse remarkably well, although brake pads wore with some regularity and a couple of shocks blew out.

The Zero X uses a 2 kilowatt-hour battery that weighs 40 pounds and is good for about 40 minutes of hard riding. Each team was allowed three batteries and two chargers - a standard 10 amp unit that did the job in 2 hours and a "quick charger" that cut that time in half.

Lloyd Clarkson of team 50 Cycles catches a few Zs after a two hour stint on the bike. Although most riders did no more than 15 to 30 minute stints, Clarkson spent two hours on the bike in the wee hours so his teammates - all of whom came over from England - could get some shut-eye.

Members of Team Hotchalk gather at the track's last turn to catch the last minutes of the race, which they won after completing 1015 laps.

Brandon Savory gets a hand carrying the remains of his bike across the finish line after the rear suspension collapsed following an especially hard landing. His team finished 858 laps.

Yahoo! BuzzStumble ShareThis

It's so weird to not hear the loud, buzzing, screeching, two-cycle engines!
Posted by: Kevin Cotham | Apr 6, 2009 6:53:33 PM

This is a great idea for motorcycle world :-)
Posted by: isma | Apr 6, 2009 8:55:15 PM

@ Rodax - an average speed of 27 mph over 24 hours and 507 miles on a tight and twisting dirt track is pretty damn quick. keep in mind they rode for 24 hours, so the average speed would come down as fatigue set in.
Posted by: EVs RULE! | Apr 6, 2009 8:59:56 PM

The article has a misprint. 27.49mph is probably the winner's average speed, not top speed.
Posted by: Jeremy | Apr 6, 2009 9:00:57 PM

I WANT ONE!!!
Posted by: Sparcus | Apr 6, 2009 9:17:20 PM

I agree, averaging 27mph for 24 hours, replacing brake pads, batteries, etc. is a good pace. It's hard to say how good without gas cycles doing the same test on the same track. Either way, I can't wait for them to come down in price.
Posted by: Steve | Apr 6, 2009 9:35:30 PM

They claim 23 horsepower is the same as a 250cc gasoline-powered bike?
News flash: 250cc motocross bikes have been making 45-50 horsepower for 30 years.
I love electric technology, but it's not well served by dishonest hyperboly. Watching these machines make laps, I was more reminded of BMX bicycles than motorcycles.
Instead of a 24 hour challenge where "anyone" could ride, why not two 45 minute motos? In the first, use pro riders and their factory machines; in the second, the same riders on electric bikes.
Compare apples to apples: bike vs. bike, rider vs. himself.
Posted by: KBCraig | Apr 6, 2009 10:16:33 PM

There are a few technical mistakes in this article.
The top AVERAGE speed was 27 mph, this includes pit stops and slow corners, etc... That means they're spending a lot of time at 35-45 mph to hold that average.
The bike that failed on the last jump of the race simply had a nut come loose on the swingarm pivot. Nothing snapped. It should have been checked regularly, things tend to come loose during a 24 hour race.
All 10 of the bikes that started the race finished, even if the last one was pushed the final 50 yrds to the finish line.
The fastest riders could dump a battery in 15-20 minutes, but as they learned how to properly utilize the energy available they streched their stints to 30 minutes or so. I'm looking at the transponder data now and will post some further info on the Zero site soon.
Most of these riders had never even tried a Zero before jumping on and going at it for 24 hours. It was simnply amazing to see how fast they adapted and while there may have been a few complaints about battery life, not one person complained about the performance of these machines.
The bottom line? These bikes proved their mettle and it's beyond question that electric motorcycles have arrived in a big way! It's only a matter of time untill you see electric classes at every track, and you may very well see electric-only tracks in urban areas where gas bikes are simply too loud.
Posted by: Gabe | Apr 6, 2009 10:17:35 PM

@KBCraig:
comparing 23 hp electric to 50 hp ICE power is not that far off - especially when it comes to off-road and racing conditions.
The reason is that the electric drivetrain delivers the full torque at /any/ RPM, including standstill.
There are no interruptions, no shifting is necessary. This gives the driver full control over the power at any given time!
You cannot overstate the advantage this gives you in an offroad race.
Posted by: Tom | Apr 6, 2009 10:33:54 PM

Gas and gas-powered vehicles will become the new status symbol. Rich people are always looking for new symbols. There will be ultra-exclusive clubs where if you don't burn some amount of hydrocarbons regularly, you won't be considered proper breeding material. :)
Posted by: ray | Apr 6, 2009 11:26:21 PM

You lost me three paragraphs in with this horrendous metaphor: "The rear suspension had collapsed faster than one of Bernie Madoff's investments..."
That's not very fast. In fact, it took years for Madoff's (and Nadel's) Pomzi shemes to start unraveling. The Bush administration went in and out of office faster than Madoff's economic implosion.
That wasn't a misfired pop-culture reference, that was a reference to major news, actual bona-fide REAL NEWS. You might as well have misspelled "9/11."
I have no idea what the rest of this article was about. I stopped at the third paragraph, not wanting to read more from the clueless.
Do you guys have any editors? Do you want one? I'm available.
Posted by: John Patten | Apr 7, 2009 4:25:49 AM

god bless you
http://www.myshoess.com/womens-converse-shoes-flanged-white-pink-p-581.html
http://www.myshoess.com
http://www.eshooes.com
Posted by: wsty | Apr 7, 2009 5:31:37 AM

Not impressed. About the only one I would consider is the KTM, and even then no thanks. 40 miles per charge? 27hp?? That is less than a 250cc MX 4 stroke bike (just a whopping 7 more than a 150cc 4 stroke CRF150R), long way to go and the price needs to come down, 7k for a bike that could only compete against 85cc 2 strokes and 150cc 4 strokes? please.
2 Stroke DI for me (KTM needs to bring this on over), MX bike prices have gotten stupid crazy and now with these they'll be even worse and environazis will STILL ban them because of (enter one of a million reasons here).
Posted by: Rickey | Apr 7, 2009 5:32:32 AM

Too bad all you horsepower haters don't understand electric motors and torque. Have you seen the Hp and torque curves for a 250cc engine? VERY peaky. This electric motor probably makes more overall power.
Posted by: 50pascals | Apr 7, 2009 6:13:16 AM

I too choked at "The rear suspension had collapsed faster than one of Bernie Madoff's investments..." John Pattern nails why this is a poor metaphor. Besides the factual issues, it reads as pathetic knee-jerk cuteness. Analogies should heighten consciousness, this one was instead numbing. I hope the author doesn't cook the way he writes.
Posted by: Dave | Apr 7, 2009 6:56:35 AM

Unfortunately, after market products to increase the sound of the bike will become commonplace because the loudness of motocross is what makes it so fun to watch, and you could also say, ride, negating one of the main reasons environmentalists and the such would adore it. But other than that, this is a pretty impressive concept.
Posted by: Aaron | Apr 7, 2009 7:00:48 AM

John Patten is a douchebag. Stay on topic dummy.
Posted by: batman | Apr 7, 2009 7:30:21 AM

and apparently Dave is too...dummy
Posted by: batman | Apr 7, 2009 7:32:36 AM

This will make an awesome trail bike.
I know that there are many off-roaders who really like the destruction of the environment, giant horsepower, noise and general rudeness in the back-country, but, alas, I am not one of them, I think this would be perfect for my old days riding back-country in the Colorado mountains at 12000 feet, and no power loss from altitude, no jetting problems, no scarring animals away.
And, no, for me or any other man who is confident in themselves, this not a threat to our manhood.
Posted by: bvocal | Apr 7, 2009 9:09:44 AM

"and quickly douse the motors with water to keep them cool."
Can you do that with an electric motor? Or am I missing something here?
Posted by: madmax | Apr 7, 2009 9:21:15 AM

If you waterproofed the circuit boards in this bike you could literally run it underwater. The motor and battery will happily churn along fuuly submersed.
Check out the river crossing in the video on this page...
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/hunting.php
Posted by: Gabe | Apr 7, 2009 10:03:22 AM

As a former 2-stroke enduro rider, I can't tell you how much fun I would have with one of these. I watched my youth unfold with one area after another close to off-road riding, due mostly to noise. Neighbors get on your case. But electric - wow - you could ride ten of these things past someone's backyard and not wake the baby. You could put motocross parks in any city or town with no complaints about pollution or noise. You could allow trail riding on tons of lost access areas by eliminating the noise and smoke. Bring it!
Oh, yeah, and by the way: I've done almost every conceivable sport and thrill ride from rapelling, rock climbing, catamaran sailing, river kayaking, scuba, mountain bikes, street motorcycles, ultralight aircraft; and I will say that off-road motorcycling is probably the most consistently fun. Find the right riding area and it's like an all-day roller coaster ride.
Posted by: ArtInvent | Apr 7, 2009 10:12:33 AM

Totally cool story and even cooler product. There was a show, I think on the discovery channel, that pitted an earlier prototype of this bike against a gas powered one and did well, even beating the gas bike in some tests. To the genius who questions horsepower at 23 for the electric bike against 45-50 for a 250 gas powered - did you even read the part about the ebike weighing 150 lb..? How much does the 250 weigh? Ever hear about power to weight ratios? I mean come on do you have a clue or are you just being negative to be annoying? To all the other nay sayers - what is it exactly about moving forward that terrifies you so much? Even the most dim witted of the herd should be able to see that there is little down side to this direction and it is approaching becoming inevitable when stacked against all the obstacles motor sports are/and will be experiencing (environment, noise, gas prices). Not a perfect solution yet, but then how many of us would like to drive around in a model T. Amazing for a first gen. attempt.
Posted by: Ledhead | Apr 7, 2009 10:18:05 AM

@ madmax-The motors would have to be sealed from dust anyway, so yes water is fine to spray on them, they'd probably have fins on the outer case for air cooling, water would just accelerate the cooling.
I've ridden an electric-converted honda 50. With two tractor batteries and a 12 volt automotive starter motor for power. the range wasn't great, but then again the parts were not new tech either. It ran fine and the speed off the line was very surprising for such a relatively heavy setup. having ridden many larger (than a honda 50) bikes, I'd say it was as good off the line as a 1978 Yamaha 175 dualsport I had in high school. Bring the tech up to date and it would have been much better. The one I rode weighed probably twice what was quoted in this article.
Electric doesn't need the horsepower that gas does due to nearly constant tourque across it's rpm range, that's a part of why hybrids are efficient. Imagine sitting at idle and slipping your hand off the clutch. A gas engine would die, the electric (if it had a clutch for some stupid reason)would just bog down, draw a lot of current and take off, probably spinning the back tire the whole way. These electrics probably won't compare to a gas on the track, but then again how long has the gasoline motorcycle engine been in development vs. the electric motorcycle motor? How close has it gotten in a short time?
Posted by: Hoax | Apr 7, 2009 10:21:16 AM

Give me my 2-stroke smoke and BRAAAAAAPP!
Posted by: ScottieBoy | Apr 7, 2009 11:11:07 AM

Just like one of the comments above, Once I see it on a real Supercross track with real riders keeping up with the current 250 and 450 Four-strokes I'll be excited.
Posted by: Ben | Apr 7, 2009 11:17:32 AM

@bvocal - this bike and others like it are going to be fun for the track, this test was an impressive performance. But you would have to be nuts to take it into the back-country of Colorado or anywhere else far from an electricity source with range this limited. Over time I'm sure that the range will improve as the technology continues to evolve but for now people need to be realistic.
Posted by: Rider | Apr 7, 2009 12:37:21 PM

Excellent idea, I would love to own one. I am going to research online right now where can I purchase mine.
Keep the great job!
Posted by: | Apr 7, 2009 12:40:57 PM

@John- "plenty of speed and power without the noise and pollution."
Ah-- yeah, those Lion batteries won't cause any pollution when you are done with them (or in their manufacture). And I'm sure the power you use to charge them isn't coming from Coal or Gas fired plants either... Oh-- dreams of fuzzy bunnies playing in the meadows.
Remember the burning laptops? Now your car or bike can too!
Posted by: libtard | Apr 7, 2009 1:28:57 PM

Wow, we have some petro-fascists, well Rome was not built in a day, I am sure you would have laughed an Noah too, hope you can tread water well, LOL. Yah lets trash the planet for a few extra horsepower, nice.
These bikes are just plain cool and, maybe they don't have the specs of the petro bikes, but again, the last I checked petro is not a renewable resource at this point, meaning we are finding resources stored a long time ago, we are not creating the resources today via a renewable method like solar, wind, water movement... yes today's economy and grid still runs on petro products, but I think it should not take too much vision for where we need to go, and renewable sources must be sought..
Batteries will be recycled, why will that generate pollution? I do not follow. Burning batteries is a design and manufacturing problem, ever see a petro spill? you know how much water can be contaminated by an improper oil change?, ever see a fire caused by a petro tank? again I think those are specious arguments focusing on a relatively young technology. I on the other hand see tremendous breakthroughs in practicality and I really believe more will follow, this is just the beginning not the end.
Electric motors actually have tremendous potential for rapid torque, its the power plant/ battery that needs research and Development, but it will come, I have no doubt.
Actually alcohol is renewable, there could be bikes made for running ethanol, this is the best of both worlds, but I think battery breakthroughs will be needed because the larger passenger car demands will not be satisfied with ethanol, unless we find a way to make ethanol with electricity, hello garage innovators .... :-)
Posted by: David | Apr 7, 2009 2:34:36 PM

My only whine as an avid hiker (I support multiple activities on FS lands, etc; i'm not anti-ATV), is that the silence could actually cause some issues if the drivers aren't paying attention. I'm used to being able to hear these bikes before they come whining down the trail and around a corner so I can step out of their way. If they're practically silent, it could be dangerous.
Posted by: BWS | Apr 7, 2009 4:29:14 PM

I took part in this event and we did cool the motors by pouring water on them at the pit stops. 24 hours of motocross racing and the bike kept running.
How many high strung modern 4-strokes could survive 24hrs of racing with out mechanical failure?
As far as riding in the back country, if you are trail riding at a moderate pace you could get about 1.5 hours of ride time. We changed batteries after 30 min. to keep the batteries from discharging to far down that would increase charging time and to keep the riders from getting too tired. Besides we were accelerating hard out of corners and braking hard into them. This style of riding burns more juice.
They are now working on a purpose built MXer. I can’t wait!
Posted by: rob | Apr 7, 2009 4:34:55 PM

Why use electric on already efficient motorcycles? 'cause you get a big bang for the buck.
+++
@ Steve, who said:
"It's hard to say how good without gas cycles doing the same test on the same track."
_
Gas motorcycles actually can't do the same test on the same track. That's why they used electrics.
+++
@ KBCraig, who said:
"Instead of a 24 hour challenge where "anyone" could ride, why not two 45 minute motos?"
_
For this first event, because 1) electrics can do a 24 hour off road motocross challenge in the middle of a large city, which gassers cannot, and 2) a 24 hour endurance test truly stress tests both riders and equipment, which a 45 minute ride does not to the same degree. The first step was apparently to demonstrate off road durability and overall track long term range - mission accomplished, I'd say.
+++
In the case of this event, electrics did what gassers cannot, so a comparison isn't possible.
+++
Nonetheless, you might eventually see both electric and gassers at some of the same events.
+++
Keep in mind that all existing tracks are set up with gasser performance in mind which has basic characteristic differences from electrics (as displayed by some of the poster confusion trying to understand why electrics can do better in some situations with less horsepower). Wait until you see both gassers and electrics (and hybrids, eventually) on courses that are specifically set up for the relative strengths of electrics. For a fairly unrelated example, consider Formula One automobile racing, where the electric KERS system doesn't win you a race automatically (there are too many other factors than just power train type), but it makes those that use it harder to pass on straight sections.
+++
Just a guess, I suspect for pure no shift electrics vs pure gassers it'll be a low end torque no shifting electrics at the very start of acceleration areas vs. faster top end speed gassers at the end of long straight aways see-saw to some extent.
+++
Stay tuned - the racing world is just starting to get interesting.
+++
In the real world, how often do you get to go at your maximum top gasser speed on your way to work before you hit a red lightm stop sign or traffic, the police stop you for speeding or some soccer mom in a big SUV cuts you off without warning?
Posted by: Nice job in that 24 hour electric enduro, rob. | Apr 8, 2009 4:01:12 PM

Good news in the news

2009-04-07T21:49:00.001-07:00

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25307759-5001028,00.html

Electric car given green light in Australia
Article from: AAPFont size:DecreaseIncreaseEmail article:EmailPrint article:Print
April 08, 2009 12:00pm
THE Federal Government has given an electric car the green light to drive on Australian roads.

The Mitsubishi i MiEV (Mitsubishi innovative Electric Vehicle) was designed and produced in Japan, and can be driven 160km at speeds of up to 130km/h when fully charged.

Unlike hybrid vehicles such as the Toyota Prius, which run on a combination of fuel and battery power, the MiEV is an all-electric car which can be charged from a household electricity supply.

The MiEV is the first such car to receive federal registration approval after passing 83 safety requirements.

Subaru and Toyota are also eyeing the Australian market, Toyota with its all-electric FT-EV, which is not expected to be on sale here for at least another three years.

The Subaru Stella is a better chance to reach these shores earlier, but it is likely to carry a prohibitive $100,000 price tag.

While Mitsubishi have so far refused to put a price on the MiEV, it is expected to be around the $30,000 mark.

Transport Minister Anthony Albanese said the MiEV's all-electric design brought Australia a step closer to emissions-free driving and the design was a win for the challenges of climate change.

"If powered by 100 per cent green energy (the car) would result in no emissions,'' Mr Albanese said.

He admitted there was no infrastructure for electric car drivers at service stations to recharge.

Because of longer distances, the current model is unsuitable for country dwellers, and would be targeted towards city commuters.

"Given that 85 per cent of Australians drive less than 100km a day, this vehicle would suit the lifestyles of most in our community,'' Mr Albanese said.

"Australia is the most urbanised country on earth - most of our citizens live in our cities around the coast.

"In terms of dealing with issues of reducing carbon pollution ... but also the effect of smog in our cities, the effect of noise pollution, all of those are advantaged by this vehicle.''

While the initial cost of the car might seem high, long-term savings could be made without petrol bills.

"The Government has not been asked to provide incentives - this is a commercial operation by Mitsubishi,'' he said.

Mitsubishi in Japan will enter large-scale production in June for the domestic market, but approval to sell the car in Australia has yet to be granted.

In the news

2009-04-05T22:08:00.000-07:00

Good news for all as mass production leads to economies of scale leading to lower prices.

The Last Oil Shock

2009-04-05T15:54:00.000-07:00

You really need to read this book. If you don't want to buy it, you can probably borrow it from your local library (like I did).

It's easy to read, doesn't have too many formulas and figures (just enough to back up the point being made) and flows very well. The conclusions are pretty impressive.

Covers such topics as:
- Why the oil supply can run out long before the oil in the ground is gone
- Specific research into reserves, and why the oil peak has already happened and supplies are in decline
- Economic consequences of high oil prices
- Debunking the Hydrogen-car myth. Hydrogen needs so much electricity to produce, there isn't enough energy in the world to allow us to swap to H2 and still drive the same amount of miles
- The vulnerability of our economies to high oil prices, particularly food. Much of our food travels a LONG way to our supermarket shelves, and if the oil price doubles, most of it will be un-affordable

If you don't start your own electric-conversion after you read this book, you should!

Automatic parking!

2009-03-20T01:41:00.000-07:00

Isn't it amazing what you can do when all 4 wheels are powered independently by electric motors?

Some EV's are set up like this and while I can't see this concept car style taking off anywhere except retirement villages and large corporate facilities, you have to admit, it takes care of the old reverse parallel park!

Project Better Place

2009-03-09T18:55:00.001-07:00

I just had a call from Guy at Project Better Place Australia.

A few weeks ago, I submitted my resume with a request/offer to help them with their massive project of rolling out a high-tech EV recharge network in Australia.

I didn't get a response initially, but Guy explained that they have been working almost 20-hour days getting the planning foundation right, and they will soon release an email update to everyone with a Situation Report.

Guy said that once they know exactly what needs they have, and what skills they require, they will be in a position to recruit a variety of people. Basically it was a catch-up call to let me know things are in motion, and to stay tuned.

I responded that I understood their constraints, and appreciated his call. I also reiterated that I was still keen to work with them and emphasised my communication and public speaking experience. I really want to work with these guys and look forward to hearing more.

For more details, go to www.betterplace.com or for Australian-specific details, www.betterplace.com/Australia

Family addition

2009-03-06T07:36:00.001-08:00

Sorry for the delay in posting - I've been very busy for the last week or so getting the house ready for the new baby.

Nathan Finlay Sawell arrived on the 5th March 2009. Both mum and bub are doing fine.

The "Pollution Solution" - unused and covered in pollution

2009-02-18T16:07:00.000-08:00

What a sad example of the current state of society.

Covered in muck, and ignoring the answer, while it's already available!

Electric vehicles and public charge stations. If you need more proof, go to your car, connect a hose from the tailpipe to the inside, get in, roll up all the windows and close the doors and then start the motor.

HOW LONG WILL YOU LAST?

I think the planet is doing pretty well, considering THAT'S THE SAME THING WE ARE DOING TO IT!

Adapter Plate Template

2009-02-18T14:58:00.000-08:00

With the gearbox requiring some TLC and a wire brush and maybe some WD-40, I quickly traced the outline onto some stock wood to cut a template.

As you can see from the second pic, I'm going to have to cut a space for the drive shafts to fit. I don't think it's necessary to be 100% accurate, since the adapter plate doesn't need to be watertight, but I'd like to get it as close as possible, just to eliminate the possibility of vibration or problems in the future.

You can also see the dashed lines at the "top" of the adapter plate. Rather than making the top match the curve of the gearbox, I'm thinking of extending it up and having a flat top with a series of holes drilled into it. This would make it like a modified Picatinny Rail and enable me to bolt a shelf to the top of the adapter plate to hold the controller or support the battery rack.

The good news is that now I can start talking to my local machine shop/fabricators and actually have something they can see, measure and work with, rather than just drawings on paper. YAY!

Transmission arrived!

2009-02-16T14:37:00.000-08:00

Thanks to Shaun (aka Phineas Q Butterfat) on the Pulsar Forums, I now have a used manual 5 speed N13 gearbox. I swapped a 6-pack of Coronas for it.

I will be using this to design my Adapter Plate. Gav at KiwiEV has a neat little diagram to show how the pieces fit together:

Shaun advised against putting it in the car since it's been behind a turbo and is pretty tired. I'm not sure the high torque of my electric motor won't to damage, so it's best not to risk it.

As you can see, there's a little rust on it, but nothing a soak in WD40 and some TLC won't fix.

Manual Safety Disconnect

2009-02-05T16:53:00.000-08:00

I already have a circuit breaker installed in the control box to cut the power if anything goes wrong and there is a power spike.

But I also wanted something I can control. If I park the car and start charging it, I want to be able to disconnect the battery without opening the bonnet (hood).

Gav over at KiwiEV has hooked a choke cable to his circuit breaker to cut the power manually, but he then has to open the bonnet to reset the breaker. Here's where my solution comes to the fore:

A pair of Anderson Plugs, mounted to drawer runners and activated by a cable and returned using a spring. Pulling the cable breaks the connection and "safes" the car. Letting the spring pull the handle back "powers" the car and lets you drive again.

If I make a little catch on the cable, I'll be able to pull and lock the handle "open" and leave it there indefinitely, then hop in, release the handle (just like a park brake), turn the ignition and drive away.

When it is better to have a small car...

2009-02-01T14:30:00.000-08:00

Yeah yeah, I know some smart alec's going to say "Oh, but the Hummer would still be driveable after an impact like that!" That's no justification for burning a gallon of terrorism-sponsoring gasoline every 5 miles just driving to the office, school and soccer practice.

EV-wise, I've finished soldering the wires in the battery display, and finished the drawings for my Anderson cut-off switch. That will probably be my next post.

In the meantime, I still need about $1,000 for the motor, so please, please , please donate a few dollars?

Instrumentation pics

2009-01-15T03:07:00.000-08:00

As of tonight, I've got the ammeter wired in and the other wires tinned and ready to go.

The actual plugs need some proper adhesive, at the moment they're just held there with gasket glue. I'll buy another tube of liquid nails or super glue tomorrow.

Instrumentation progress

2009-01-14T15:32:00.001-08:00

For the last few days I've been putting the finishing touches to my instrumentation. I have the ammeter and voltmeter installed in the dash-box and the challenge was to wire it up efficiently.

I decided not to wire the instruments directly to the car, since this would cause problems if I needed to remove the dash-box (which I probably WILL at some stage). So that means I need to utilise some plugs.

I reviewed the entire range at Jaycar and Dick Smith Electronics and settled on some large auto-style plugs. I had considered using some square "pin & socket" ones that you make up yourself, but I've had a bad experience with them previously (not being able to match up the plug & socket inside the frame) so I went with pre-wired plugs.

The 4 pins are aligned in a 3-1 style, with 3 pins and a socket on one plug and 3 sockets and a pin on the other. To eliminate the potential of accidentally plugging voltmeter input into the ammeter, I used alternate plugs on the box. So the "A" style is for the voltmeter and the "B" style is for the ammeter and never the twain shall meet!

Now that the box is almost complete, I'm very happy with the results. I'm just waiting for the glue to dry before I get busy with the soldering iron, heatshrink and hair-dryer. I'll post up some pics when it's all done so you can see the results.

Winning the oil end-game

2009-01-14T15:22:00.000-08:00

It's a few years old now, but still quite a good read. I hadn't realised the impact that increasing efficiency would have on oil consumption.

You need to register to download the PDF, but that only takes a second.

http://www.oilendgame.com/ReadTheBook.html

A Current Affair - EV conversion

2009-01-09T18:15:00.000-08:00

Electric Car Savings

A very nice, clean conversion. Pity the hostess had to make the stupid "Don't try this at home" comment at the end.

Hybrids impress with economy

2009-01-02T18:09:00.000-08:00

From today's courier-mail:

"Barnett Couriers has achieved a 32 per cent fuel saving in its initial three months of operation with a Hino 714 Hybrid.
So impressed is the company that it has ordered a second vehicle.
A back-to-back comparison with a similar-sized truck on the same route has shown a reduction in average fuel use from 27.8 litres to 18.8 litres per 100km.
The hybrid has returned a saving of $560 in direct fuel purchase over 3 months."

Why low fuel prices mean "full steam ahead" on my conversion

2008-12-26T15:32:00.000-08:00

Here's the latest analysis and opinion on oil & fuel prices. Enjoy it while the "gas price holiday" lasts...

http://www.energyandcapital.com/newsletter.php?date=2008-12-24

Oil Prices are Wrong--Very Wrong
By Chris Nelder | Wednesday, December 24th, 2008

Everybody seems to have the same question for me lately: What's the deal with gasoline prices?

How could it go from $2 a gallon to over $4 and then back to $1.66 in a single year? Was it speculators? The evil machinations of OPEC? Badly-timed fills and draws of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR)? A financial calamity engineered by the masterminds of a shadowy wealth conspiracy?

It's never an easy question to answer, but I can easily say "none of the above."

The price of oil and gasoline is set daily and globally by a complex interaction of many factors, including the relative valuations of currency, speculation in oil futures, the fact that oil is "priced at the margins," delayed supply and demand feedback to the market, economic growth rates, money flows of hedge funds and big institutional investors, geological factors, geopolitics, and many more.

Oil shot to $147 this year because of a particular highly-leveraged alchemy of those factors, and it fell as the leverage unwound. It's down now because the world is heading into a major recession and traders are, as usual, overdoing their bearish reaction.

OPEC's responses this year have been mostly late to the game, so they were regularly ignored by the market. Last week's production cuts by the cartel, and the subsequent sell-off in oil, was a fine example of this.

Filling the SPR is too negligible to move the markets either. In May, the debate over filling the SPR raged on with hardly anyone seeming to realize that its 68,000 barrels per day of demand is a mere blip against the US consumption of 21 million barrels per day. Traders ignored it.

Much more to the point is an analysis of over 100 studies on gasoline price elasticity by the trade magazine Energy Journal, which found when gas prices increase 10%, they cut demand by 2.6%. When prices fall, consumption picks back up.

Anatomy of a Frenzy
Oil and other commodities shot up in the first part of the year as investors sought a safe haven against the financial calamity stemming from the subprime meltdown and levered up their bets with wild abandon.

That trend reversed course in June as the world's central banks began cutting interest rates and the US flooded the markets with dollars. The global deleveraging that ensued caused a rout in the commodity markets, and absolutely everything was sold indiscriminately as money managers scrambled to meet redemption calls and raise cash.

The progressively worsening news about the health of the global economy has only fed the selling frenzy, pushing down oil prices further still. It's now more profitable to store oil than to sell it immediately, and OPEC has made yet another belated and ineffectual move to curb a supply glut.

The Asian tigers that were widely expected to support demand, even as OECD demand fell, have reported extremely bearish numbers in the last week as their economic growth stalls.

Oil consumption is off 3.2% from a year ago in China, the world's second-largest consumer of oil, and its crude imports are now at their lowest levels this year.

Japan's oil exports fell to record lows in the sharpest monthly decline since such records have been kept; meanwhile, imports to the world's third-largest oil consumer are down 17% year over year. South Korea's oil imports are also down 6.5% year over year.

Oil consumption by the world's top oil consumer, the US, has led the global decline with an expected 1.2 million barrels per day decline from past levels through 2009, according to the latest EIA report.

And voila: after thirteen straight weeks of price declines, gasoline is back to $1.66 a gallon.

Some have even suggested that oil in the $40s, and the current glut of oil supply, is proof that fears about peak oil supply were wrong.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

A False Sense of Complacency
A sub-$40 fill-up only lulls us into a false sense of complacency. As I have written repeatedly in recent weeks, we are setting ourselves up for a serious supply problem in the future with oil prices now below their replacement costs.

The facts are sobering:

Current petroleum stocks in the US are still within the average range for this time of year, according to EIA. They're now about 8% higher than this time last year, but that's really nothing to write home about, and it's not much of a "glut."

In a recent interview with Jim Puplava, energy analyst Robert Hirsch commented that a 1 million barrels per day decline in world demand would only move back the global peak of oil production by one month. By that metric, the allegedly huge cutback in oil consumption has bought the world about one month more before we peak—whoop-de-do.

Oil production in Canada, the US's top source of crude imports, is faltering as prices are now too low to justify new projects that tap its large-but-costly and difficult reserves in tar sands and heavy oil.

Our number-three source of imports, Mexico, is in serious trouble. Crude output from our southern neighbor has fallen 7% over last year, and exports are falling much faster, at a 20% decline, according to Pemex. (As I wrote back in June, exports fall faster than overall production. See "The Impending Oil Export Crisis.") Production from its largest field, Cantarell, one of the four "supergiant" oil fields in the world, is crashing at the rate of 33% per year. At the current rate, Mexico's oil exports will cease altogether in just seven years.

Experts at the ASPO and elsewhere believe that, within the next two years, world oil production will go into permanent decline, with depletion removing 2.5 million barrels per day from the world market— that's roughly equivalent to the total oil imports of Germany. There are no oil projects that can overcome a decline rate like that. And yet, no major economy is even preparing for this inevitability.

Saudi oil minister Ali al-Naimi has warned that the world needs $75 oil to ensure future supply, and that current prices "are wreaking havoc on the industry and threatening current and planned investments."

With gasoline now well below $2 a gallon, hybrids and other higher-efficiency cars are staying on the dealer lots. According to an analyst at Edmunds.com, a new hybrid would pay for itself in gasoline savings in two or three years with gasoline at $4 a gallon; but, below $2 a gallon, it's more like seven to eight years. Less than a year ago, you had to get on a waiting list and pay a premium over sticker to buy a new Prius. Now dealers have lots full of them, and Toyota has experienced such a sharp decline in sales that it posted its first operating loss in 70 years. Hopes that we will quickly replace a large percentage of our rolling stock with higher efficiency vehicles are now on hold, along with the hopes for a massive campaign of drilling shale formations and deepwater reservoirs.

A steep contango condition in oil futures is still in place, reflecting the market's near-term oversupply and long-term uncertainty.

Given the evidence, the price of oil is wrong. Very wrong. Crude for under $65 a barrel is a bargain, and crude in the low $40s is a steal. I would not be at all surprised to see a sudden and violent move back up for oil prices within the next year, once the current extreme market conditions revert to the mean.

I am still long oil (United States Oil Fund LP ETF, NYSE:USO) and will add to my position if it goes lower. My expectation is to hold it for a year, in case it further overshoots to the downside before recovering.

I'm also on the hunt for top-notch oil companies with low production costs, sizable reserves, and balance sheets healthy enough to let them acquire smaller competitors at basement prices.

I know it's been a tough year for most investors; but, we're nearly done with this turkey, and I'm setting my sights on profits for 2009. The buying opportunity of a lifetime is upon us. All we have to do now is wait for the right moment to pull the trigger.

Here's to a restful and joyous holiday!

Until next time,

Chris

Energy and Capital

P.S. Although oil prices may not have bottomed yet, that doesn't mean investors should sit back and be lazy. The problem is that the window for finding those up-and-coming energy stocks is running out. Many of your fellow Energy and Capital readers have already begun to prepare their portfolio for oil's comeback. Perhaps it's time you joined them. Click here to learn more about the $20 Trillion Report.

Really, really cheap fuel

2008-12-21T03:22:00.000-08:00

Not surprisingly, petrol is quite cheap now in the lead-up to the holidays.

Nothing like a little economic uncertainty to encourage people to stay home for the holidays, so the oil companies appear to be keeping prices lower in an attempt to encourage people to travel a little more.

Today I bought ordinary unleaded for 92.9 cents per litre - the lowest I've seen for a very long time.

I know it won't last, but it's nice to have a few extra dollars in my pocket to spend on EV parts. There's no way the lower fuel prices have slowed this project down.

I'm planning to go into Jaycar tomorrow and pick up the plugs I need to connect my Ammeter and Voltmeter to the battery pack, so that will tie up another loose end. Browsing their catalogue, I've also learned that I can pick up Ni-MH batteries and make a 120v 90Ah pack for about $2,190 - not bad for a starter pack!

Once the instrumentation in complete I'll make another video and post it up.

Heater Core Video

2008-12-18T02:15:00.000-08:00

Here's the latest video - The Heater Core.

I planned to film myself talking about the process, but it was just so hot, I look physically ill on film, so I put together a quick slideshow instead.

Call it a homage to the Forkenswift boys!

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=PKNQ1Txlpqg

Also, Phil Karn has some FABULOUS research on "the long tailpipe" issue. Many people seem to think that EV's are just as bad as petrol cars because of the emissions generated by electricity production. Well, Phil conclusively proves that even burning coal, phasing in the EVs will significantly reduce the emissions. With the rise in renewable energy in places like California and Texas, it's easy to see how EVs are a win for everyone (except OPEC).

Anyway...here's the research. Thank You Phil!

EV Emission Analysis
I discovered a wealth of energy and pollution info on various California state agency web sites, particularly CARB and CEC. So I computed my own figures for per-mile power plant emissions for EVs.

Gasoline/Diesel Emissions

From http://www.energy.ca.gov/fuels/gasoline/gasolinesales.html I see that the total taxable motor fuels (gasoline & diesel) sold in CA in 1996 was 15,791,759,000 gallons.
And from http://www.energy.ca.gov/reports/stats/table49.html I see that the CA average fuel economy in 1993 (latest year available) was 17.7 miles/gallon.
17.7 mpg * 15,791,759,000 gallons = 279.5e9 miles driven per year. That's 765.8 million miles/day, a figure I wasn't able to find directly. From http://www.arb.ca.gov/ceidars/emssumcat.query?F_DIV=0&F_YR=1995&F_AREA=CA" we see that the total pollutants from all that gasoline burned and on-road miles driven are (1995 figures)

Pollutant: Tons/day - grams/mile
Total organic gases: 1,800 - 2.1323
Reactive organic gases: 1,600 - 1.895
Carbon monoxide: 15,000 - 17.77
Nitrogen oxides: 2,100 - 2.488
Sulfur oxides: 56 - 0.06634
Particulates: 80 - 0.09477
Particulates < 10 micron: 67 - 0.07937
("1 ton" = 2000 pounds, not 1000 kg)

Electric Generation Emissions
Now let's look at the situation for electricity. From http://www.energy.ca.gov/electricity/electricitygen.html I get an in-state annual electricity generation from all sources of 202,022 GW-hr, which works out to 553.44 GW-hr/day or an average of 23.06GW, which seems about right. From the emissions inventory page mentioned earlier, we can see that in 1995 in-state electric generation produced

Pollutant: Tons/day - grams/kW-hr
Total organic gases: 28 - 0.0459
Reactive organic gases: 6 - 0.009835
Carbon monoxide: 36 - 0.059
Nitrogen oxides: 69 - 0.1131
Sulfur oxides: 8 - 0.0131
Total particulates: 6 - 0.00983
Particulates < 10 microns: 5 - 0.00819

So if we use that electricity to charge EVs getting 4 miles/kW-hr, the electric generation emissions attributable to each EV mile driven would be

Pollutant: grams/mile - % of internal combustion
Total organic gases: 0.011475 - 0.5%
Reactive organic gases: 0.002459 - 0.13%
Carbon monoxide: 0.01475 - 0.083%
Nitrogen oxides: 0.028275 - 1.136%
Sulfur oxides: 0.003275 - 4.9%
Total particulates: 0.0024575 - 2.59%
Particulates < 10 microns: 0.0020475 - 2.578%

Obviously it depends on the specific pollutant, but this all is pretty consistent with the 97% reduction figure I've heard for some time (power plant emissions per EV mile being 97% less than the per-mile emissions for an average gasoline or diesel vehicle). And those emissions are at the power plants, not in downtown LA or SD or wherever the cars are.

Caveats
• I wasn't able to find all my statistics from the same year.
• The electric generation figures are probably gross totals, so they don't include transmission losses (I think I've seen 20%).
• I assume the current electric generation mix would apply to large numbers of EVs. This may or may not be true, depending on how much capacity is available from which kinds of plants when the EVs are charged. If all of the miles driven in California could be electrically powered at 4 miles/kW-hr, that would work out to an average electrical load of about 8GW, which is about 35% of the average in-state electric generation of 23.06GW. About three and a half San Onofres (@2.2 GW each) would do it (just had to say it :-))
• Most of the petroleum fuels go to cars and trucks, but the total taxed fuel sales figures might include other users (aviation, trains); depending on how polluting these users are, and how much they use, it could affect the figures either way.
• My EV "mileage" of 4 miles/kW-hr, referenced to the AC socket, is for the EV1, and may be optimistic for larger EVs -- though given the number of cars you see on the freeway with exactly one occupant, it's clear that a lot of people could commute in the EV1.

Despite these caveats, it's pretty clear that EVs have the advantage when it comes to air pollution.

Phil Karn, January 1999

Heater progress

2008-11-18T01:01:00.000-08:00

I bought a small ceramic heater off ebay as outlined in previous posts. Now it's time to rip it open, void that warranty and see what we've got to play with.

The original heater - fresh out of the box, with that acrid plastic smell still clinging like London mist...

The heater core from a wrecked Pulsar. It's just begging to be sliced open and stuffed like a Thanksgiving Turkey.

The unit was screwed together with little star-headed screws. No screwdriver or allen key in the toolbox could get it open, so I did what any 32-year old boy would do...BATTERY DRILL!!! FUNFUNFUN!! Here's the result of me playing Dr House MD on a sick ceramic heater.

I've taken out the core element and lined it up on the heater unit - plenty of room there and I'll even be able to hook the wires out through one of the water holes to keep it all nice and tidy.

I like this pic. Something about the confluence of the light, shape and texture make it appealing to my eye.

Now all I have to do is cut open the old heater core and fix in the ceramic element. Gav from KiwiEV used a gasket seal to stick it in place so that's what I'll do also.

The latest on peak oil...

2008-11-15T04:35:00.000-08:00

http://www.energyandcapital.com/newsletter.php?date=2008-11-13

IEA Oil Report: "Time is Running Out"

By Chris Nelder | Thursday, November 13th, 2008

After some six months of leaks and previews, the long-awaited World Energy Outlook report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) is finally out. And in many ways, it is the bombshell we expected.

The agency struck a new tone of urgency in the report, as it sharply reduced its outlook for the growth of world oil production.

The opening paragraph was blunt and on the mark:

The world's energy system is at a crossroads. Current global trends in energy supply and consumption are patently unsustainable - environmentally, economically, socially. But that can - and must - be altered; there's still time to change the road we're on.[1] It is not an exaggeration to claim that the future of human prosperity depends on how successfully we tackle the two central energy challenges facing us today: securing the supply of reliable and affordable energy; and effecting a rapid transformation to a low-carbon, efficient and environmentally benign system of energy supply. What is needed is nothing short of an energy revolution.

For the first time, the IEA included in its analysis a study of the depletion rates of the world's top 800 oil fields. Why they didn't include that crucial information in the past we don't know, but as readers of these pages are well aware, it's the hole in the bucket that is the very heart of the peak oil study.

The rates they found were high enough to surprise even me: 6.7%[2] for past-peak fields, increasing to 8.6% by 2030 (the end date of the report's "reference scenario"). Averaged across all fields, the rate is 5.1%,[3] but that includes 3.4% for the very largest fields, 6.5% for the next-largest and 10.4% for the next size down.

This is important, because the fields being discovered today are all in the smaller categories. As the world's largest and most productive fields, which are also its oldest, go past their peaks and into decline, the smaller newer fields with the higher depletion rates play a more dominant role.

But these are only the "observed decline rates." The authors distinguish that from a "natural decline rate," which "strips out the effects of ongoing and periodic investment" (whatever that means; as far as I am aware, all oil fields require some sort of ongoing investment). The authors note that the natural decline rates "are about a third higher on average than observed decline rates," with a current global average of about 9%, increasing to 10.5% by 2030.

Against such high decline rates-up from a generally accepted 4.5% estimate only a year ago-the agency calculates that the world will need to add a whopping 64 million barrels per day (mbpd) of new capacity between 2007 and 2030 in order to meet an anticipated demand growing at 1.6% per year.

That's like adding six new Saudi Arabias (up from five less than two years ago, when I wrote Profit from the Peak).

That's like adding a new Kuwait every single year.

The report goes on to say if the world does not add 30 mbpd of new capacity by 2015—equivalent to three new Saudi Arabias—it "will cause an oil-supply crunch" by 2030. More incredibly, that 30 mbpd must include 7 mbpd of new capacity above and beyond all currently planned projects! That's over 1 mbpd of new, unplanned, unfunded capacity, plus a presumed 5 mbpd of planned new capacity (which seems highly doubtful) every year for the next 6 years.

Where Do You Find Six New Saudi Arabias?

One might reasonably ask then, just where exactly do they think all that new oil is going to come from, since global oil discovery has been in continuous decline for over 40 years?

The IEA sidesteps this question, blithely noting that "The volume of oil discovered each year on average has been higher since 2000 than in the 1990s, thanks to increased exploration activity and improvements in technology, though production continues to outstrip discoveries (despite some big recent finds, such as in deepwater offshore Brazil)."

A chart of the history of world oil discovery quickly nullifies that thin argument:

Here is the IEA's scenario, in graph form, on where those six new Saudi Arabias will come from:

You can see the clear peak of "currently producing fields" right around now, after which we'll have a massive increase in "fields yet to be developed" followed by another big chunk of "fields yet to be found." A steady increase in "non-conventional oil" and natural gas liquids round out the supply picture. (We'll get to the problems with this scenario in a moment.)

Finally, they project that the rate of oil production will increase fairly steadily to 104 mbpd (excluding refinery gains) by 2030, at which point a peak in global production is implied, but not directly stated:

Although global oil production in total is not expected to peak before 2030, production of conventional oil - crude oil, natural gas liquids (NGLs) and enhanced oil recovery (EOR) - is projected to level off towards the end of the projection period. Conventional crude oil production alone increases only modestly over 2007-2030 - by 5 mb/d - as almost all the additional capacity from new oilfields is offset by declines in output at existing fields. The bulk of the net increase in total oil production comes from NGLs (driven by the relatively rapid expansion in gas supply) and from non-conventional resources and technologies, including Canadian oil sands.

Out of morbid curiosity, I dug up a few older World Energy Outlook reports from the IEA for comparison. Their 2006 report had oil production increasing to 116 mbpd by 2030, needing only $4.3 trillion in investment to achieve. And their 2004 report didn't see any peak before 2030, and needed only $3 trillion to achieve 121 mbpd by 2030.

See a pattern here? They're slowly backing into the truth.

Here's my prediction: their 2010 report will state that the new peak is only 95 mbpd, at a cost of over $30 trillion. And by 2012, they'll admit that the peak was in fact in June of this year, at 87 mbpd. By 2030, fully 20 years past the peak, world oil production will likely be under 70 mbpd.

Coming Clean

Several new admissions caught my eye.

For one, they finally seem to have put their hopes for a resurgence in non-OPEC production to rest, saying it is "at plateau and is projected to start to decline by around the middle of the next decade." This was a bit of a vindication for me, as I had struggled with the lower-quality data I could get nearly three years ago when researching Profit from the Peak, and concluded that all future production would have to come from OPEC, despite what the official projections said.

Another pleasant surprise was this statement: "The super-majors have been struggling to replace their proven reserves and expand production, while the share of their cash earnings that is returned to shareholders has been growing." Back when I was writing Profit from the Peak I suspected as much, but wasn't able to round up the data to completely prove it, and besides, my Wall Street buddies thought I was being too "conspiratorial" about that point. Boo-yah, boys!

I also have to applaud their sharp criticism of the way that the corrupt governments of the African oil-producing nations do not share their oil revenue wealth with their desperately impoverished peoples. This is an issue I wrote about in the book that is hardly ever mentioned in the energy press, but which remains a serious threat to future oil production. So long as the criminal inequity of the status quo maintains, Africa will never be stable enough that we can count upon her to help produce the world's precious few remaining barrels.

The $26 Trillion Question

In order to accomplish all this, the IEA projects that the world will need to spend $26 trillion[4] by 2030, or over $1 trillion per year. Of that, over $13 "goes simply to maintain the current level of supply capacity" because so much of the world's energy infrastructure will need to be replaced by then. As Matthew Simmons has often noted, most of the existing worldwide oil industry infrastructure is literally rusting away.

Ultimately, this report chooses to lay the question of future oil production at the feet of investors. If that $1-trillion-plus a year materializes, the IEA believes the energy can be had. If not, it won't be the fault of geology or technology that oil production doesn't meet our projected demand. And their projected increases will have to come from essentially unproven sources.

So much for their scenario. Our question is: Can it be done? Or perhaps more accurately, will it be done?

Yhprum's Law

The only way I can see the IEA scenario coming to pass is under the opposite of Murphy's Law, which Wikipedia tells me is "Yhprum's Law." That is, everything that can possibly go right, will. In particular:

Most of the new oil and gas production would have to come from OPEC, since non-OPEC is "at plateau." [That phrasing is so pretentious that from now on, I shall refer to the oil peak as a plateau with an aristocratic French accent.] Yet only Saudi Arabia has any real hope of significantly increasing its supply. It has recently produced around 10 mbpd, it has a stated capacity of about 12 mbpd, and some anticipate (while others doubt) that it will eventually reach 15 mbpd. But that's really about it for any OPEC production growth. The Saudi king has also stated more than once that he's more interested in long-term stewardship of the resource than in short-term maximization of profits. So let's be generous and give all of OPEC a net production increase of 5 mbpd over current levels.
IEA anticipates a massive new wave of production from the Canadian tar sands. Yet Suncor and other major tar sands producers have recently announced that they are scaling back their production plans due to the low price of oil, the uncertain global growth outlook, and problems in arranging credit for the massive capital needed to expand these projects amid a global credit market lockup. From a current level of about 1.5 mbpd production from the tar sands, I believe the research that points to a possible 3.5 mbpd a plateau by 2030. But the absolute peak of 5 mbpd looks increasingly doubtful, due to the availability and cost limitations on water and natural gas. So I'd allow no more than another 2 mbpd for the tar sands by 2030.
Third, the reliance on enhanced oil recovery (EOR) will prove, I think, to be a false hope. The decades-long history of EOR suggests that perhaps it doesn't increase total recovery at all, it just produces some of the remaining oil faster; or in the best case, it thickens and lengthens the tail of production somewhat. The implication in the report that the global recovery rate might be raised from the current roughly 30% to some 40% seems highly unlikely to me based on the historical evidence.
The report still claims that reserves are growing in a significant way (which is wishful thinking) and that current proven reserves of oil and NGLs of around 1.2-1.3 trillion barrels "is enough to supply the world with oil for over 40 years at current rates of consumption."

This is truly one of the low points of the report, since the authors surely know that oil production doesn't go a plateau for decades, then suddenly hit a wall and go to zero. After the peak, it declines, gradually, on the back of a bell curve. By avoiding any clear statement on the global peak, and pinning such enormous hopes on such slim straws as EOR and undiscovered fields, the report avoids having to deal with such unpleasant details.

The fact is that 20 years from now, we'll likely be down to three-quarters of today's energy budge, and 40 years from now, we'll be down to less than half. That's the fact that any honest assessment of our situation would emphasize, not some misleading statistic about 40 years' worth of oil. It's more like 100 years' worth, at production rates that decline relentlessly, starting right about now.
The report claims that ultimately recoverable conventional oil resources will prove to be 3.5 trillion barrels. Again, this seems extremely unlikely, as it is based on a significant amount of oil yet to be found, and highly questionable reserves growth. I believe 2.3 trillion barrels is closer to the right number here, with 1.1 already produced and 1.2 still to go.
Similarly, the report anticipates a production of 1-2 trillion barrels from tar sands and extra-heavy oil (the stuff that Venezuela has in abundance), plus oil shales (which I believe will never prove to be economical), for a total of some 6.5 trillion barrels. Then they add in another 2.5 trillion barrels for coal-to-liquids and gas-to-liquids, for a total of 9 trillion barrels in unconventional what-have-yous. This conjecture would require another entire article to debunk, so I won't get into it now (it's all in my book anyway), but suffice to say that I would be very surprised to see this lot, put together, add more than half a trillion barrels to the recoverable total.
The money, the money, the money. Can anybody really conjure up a scenario, given the current state of the financial markets and the prospect of a global recession for the next year or more, that the world is somehow going to commit to spending more than $1 trillion per year for the next 22 years straight? When oil is hitting new lows daily, and a global deleveraging is sucking money out of every energy investment under the sun? If they can, I want some of what they're smoking.

IEA chief economist Fatih Birol expressed his own concerns: "We see and hear about energy investments being delayed ... This is a major worry and could lead to a supply crunch and much higher oil prices than we've seen before."

The press slide deck reinforced this point, asking if the financial crisis and economic slowdown will affect investment in energy to the point where it sets us up for a supply crunch once the economy gets back on its feet. (This is an important question I plan to take up in a future article.)

The $35 Trillion Challenge

As for the price outlook on oil, I think the agency's assessment was good:

Prices are likely to remain highly volatile, especially in the next year or two. A worsening of the current financial crisis would most likely depress economic activity and, therefore, oil demand, exerting downward pressure on prices. Beyond 2015, we assume that rising marginal costs of supply exert upward pressure on prices through to the end of the projection period.

The report also placed a heavy emphasis on controlling carbon emissions, and was unequivocal about the importance of merging the energy and climate change challenges into a unified effort—something I have advocated for years. I have no doubt that carbon emissions will soon come with a global price, and that those who are well positioned to profit from it, be they carbon credit marketers or wind power generators, will see a booming future. In addition to the $26 trillion investment in energy infrastructure, the report suggests another $9.2 trillion will need to be invested in carbon control in order to meet a goal of 450 parts per million of CO2 equivalent in the atmosphere.

So that's our global challenge: to invest another $35 trillion in energy and carbon emissions over the next 20 years. That means an unprecedented market opportunity for clean energy technologies like wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and marine energy. It means that we literally must throw money hand-over-fist at renewable energy and an electrically powered infrastructure.

In sum, I don't find their scenario terribly credible. Adding another 64 mbpd of oil production capacity from the existing, very well explored, and very well exploited resource base-a 74% increase over current levels-seems quite impossible even under the best of circumstances, let alone attempting it even as the largest fields are going into decline.

Which means that the real outlook for oil production and its cost is likely much worse than even this dire-sounding warning from the IEA suggests. And the outlook for renewable energy is even greater.

While the report certainly has its flaws, on the whole I think it's a big move in the right direction for the IEA. It's heartening to see them stepping up and addressing the twin devils of climate change and peak oil more directly, and I hope that the world is paying attention to its unflinching warning.

We'll let them have the last word:

For all the uncertainties highlighted in this report, we can be certain that the energy world will look a lot different in 2030 than it does today. The world energy system will be transformed, but not necessarily in the way we would like to see...[W]hile market imbalances could temporarily cause prices to fall back, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the era of cheap oil is over...It is within the power of all governments, of producing and consuming countries alike, acting alone or together, to steer the world towards a cleaner, cleverer and more competitive energy system. Time is running out and the time to act is now.

Until next time,

Chris

It's Remembrance Day

2008-11-10T19:53:00.000-08:00

In Brisbane, it's the 11th of November, it's the date on Blogger that's lagging.

Lest we forget...

Also, my dad emailed this little news piece over to me:

The billion dollar electric car plan

By Victor Bivell

November 10, 2008

PORTFOLIO POINT: Better Place of California has plans to put Australians behind the wheel of emission-free cars, complete with a network of ‘filling stations’.

Australians could be driving electric cars by 2012 if Californian company Better Place has its way and introduces its innovative electric car network in Australia. Better Place has announced agreements with financial adviser Macquarie Capital Group to raise $1 billion to develop the initial infrastructure, and with AGL Energy to supply the renewable energy.

Better Place has developed a model for “sustainable mobility”, which allows consumers to own an electric car for a fraction of the cost of a comparable petrol-engine car.

Under the business model, Better Place would own the specially developed batteries that power the cars, and these would be recharged or exchanged at numerous Better Place network stations forming an Electric Recharge Grid. The electricity to power the batteries comes solely from renewable sources; in Australia it would be supplied by partner AGL Energy.

The Electric Recharge Grid infrastructure “is a massive network of battery charging spots” around cities and in the country. A computer in the car shows the remaining power supply and the nearest charging spot. Changing batteries is said to be quicker than filling up.

Better Place says it will offer several car models and subscription packages that will reduce the total cost of ownership and subsidise the car as part of the package.

Better Place has a partnership for the production of mass-produced electric vehicles with the Renault-Nissan alliance, which it says is the world leader in electric car development.

Nissan, with joint venture partner NEC, has created a battery pack that is suitable for electric vehicles and can be produced in mass volume. Renault is working on the development of exchangeable batteries for continuous mobility.

Renault’s vehicles will run purely on electricity, achieving the objective of zero emissions. They will “offer driving performances similar to a 1.6-litre gasoline engine. Equipped with lithium-ion batteries, they will give driving range and longevity.”

Consumers will have a choice of make and model. “Consumers will buy and own their car and subscribe to energy, including the use of the battery, based on kilometres driven. This model is similar to the way mobile phones are sold, with an initial purchase and a monthly subscription for the mobility service,” Better Place says.

“Combined with the lower cost of electricity as opposed to fuel-based energy, and the vehicle’s lifetime guarantee, the total cost of ownership for the customer will be significantly lower than that of a fuel-based car over the life cycle of the vehicle.”

Better Place expects the first mass market EV models to be available in Australia by the 2012 model year, a year after its mass market launch in Israel and Denmark.

The scaleable model adopted in Israel and Denmark will be used to build the EV network in Australia. Macquarie will assist in business development and help raise $1 billion to build the network.

It is early days and details of the fund-raising should be known in about six to nine months, says David Roseman, head of Macquarie Capital Group’s Infrastructure and Utilities Advisory-Australasia.

The offer is likely to be pitched at professional and sophisticated investors and would suit superannuation funds with their long time horizons, he says. The investment vehicle is likely to be unlisted. Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane will see the initial infrastructure roll out.

Victorian Premier John Brumby says: “The Victorian Government supports any initiative that will have positive outcomes in reducing emissions in the transport sector and welcomes this innovative approach to help make broad adoption of EVs in Australia possible.”

Shai Agassi, chief executive and founder of Better Place, said Australia is the world’s sixth-largest country and building the network in Australia will demonstrate that the business model works in all countries, regardless of size.

The plan will help Australia take a generational leap forward toward oil independence, said Agassi. “With our commitment to build infrastructure and the federal government’s $500 million Green Car Innovation Fund, there is a compelling case for automobile manufacturers to jump in and build clean, safe, affordable electric cars for Australasia and South-East Asia.”

AGL’s group general manager, Jeff Dimery, says the initiative will accelerate the shift toward renewables that is already under way. “AGL is committed to increasing its renewable energy generation and believes it is important to collaborate and implement cross-industry initiatives to counter climate change. Because EVs charge primarily at night, they can maximise the potential of intermittent renewable energy such as wind.”

Roseman says: “The Better Place business model is game-changing and represents an exciting opportunity for Australian consumers, the environment, domestic automakers, the renewable energy sector, local industry and workers to move to the forefront of the energy revolution.

“Electric vehicles represent a more affordable alternative to the conventional combustion-powered vehicle. We believe the combination of a competitively priced vehicle, being driven by cheaper and cleaner fuel is a compelling business case.”

Better Place was launched in 2007 with $200 million of venture funding. Investors include: Acorns to Oaks II, Esarbee Investments Canada, GC Investments LLC, Israel Cleantech Ventures, Israel Corp, Maniv Energy Capital, Morgan Stanley, Musea Ventures, Ofer Group, VantagePoint Venture Partners, Vayikra Partners and Wolfensohn & Co.

Better Place plans to activate its electric car networks on a country-by-country basis beginning in 2010.

Control box 99% finished

2008-11-09T01:28:00.001-08:00

I'm only waiting on a 500Amp fuse and the control box will be finished.

Here's a quick demo video so you can see how it all hangs together.

First Dutch Public Electric Vehicle Recharging Station Opens

2008-11-05T19:38:00.000-08:00

It won't be long before every cinema, restaurant and train station has one of these...

http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=19590

As of today, electrical vehicles can be charged at the Wilhelminakade in Rotterdam. Electricity is an environment friendly form of fuel and is substantially cheaper than gasoline. The NRGSPOT, the charge spot where people can charge the battery of their electrical scooter, car or bicycle, is an initiative of Eneco in cooperation with RCI (Rotterdam Climate Initiative) and TNT.

Starting today, Rotterdam will become a bit cleaner. That is because electricity fuelled transportation is both environment friendly and cheap. Eneco has, with financial support from TNT and RCI, introduced the first NRGSPOT. An NRGSPOT is a public charge spot where electrical vehicles can be charged 24 hours a day. Eneco ensures that the charge point will exclusively supply Ecostroom, Eneco's brand of green electricity. Electrical cars, scooters and bicycles are connected to the charger, while the owner can in the mean time go to work, go shopping or out for diner. People are therefore not solely dependent on their own charge spot at home.

Low costs and environment friendly
The use of an electrical vehicle saves costs and is environment friendly. One hundred city kilometres on a two-stroke engine scooter can cost 7 euros worth of gasoline. Fuelling at an NRGSPOT for that same distance costs 1.5 euros and those who charge their electrical scooter at homespend less than 50 cents. When used for business, money is earned back even faster as a result of deductions for environmental investments. Additional advantages of an electrical vehicle are the lack of noise pollution, reduction of CO2 emissions (because green power is used for charging) and the lack of emission of other fine particles.

Not only scooters and bicycles can be fuelled by electricity, but also various other vehicles such as mobility scooters, segways and passenger cars. This NRGSPOT is the first charge spot of the demonstration project in Rotterdam.

Rust removal - the pics

2008-10-31T23:05:00.001-07:00

The photos run from the last to first - sorry about the order, it's just the way the blogger wizard only allows 4 pics at a time, and then wacks the new pics in at the top instead of where the cursor is >:(

The passenger door still needs some body filler, so it will have to wait until next weekend.

But for an accountant who has zero experience with cars, it's not a bad effort. I'm pretty impressed with my handiwork, and saved quite a bit of money, too.

Bits and pieces

2008-10-27T17:05:00.000-07:00

I've done lots of work in the last few days, but nothing major as I'm still saving up the last few dollars for the vacuum pump and ceramic heater.

Mainly I've been concentrating on two projects: the instrumentation and the rust in the door pillars.

The instruments are finished, all I need to do is label the gauges and wire the box in. I'll post up some pics shortly. This will tell the driver how "full" the battery "fuel tank" is, and how fast they are consuming the energy while driving. If I keep the batteries above 50% and try to draw less than 450 Amps while accellerating, I think we can optimise the range and best of all - keep it simple.

I've also learned a lot of things about rust, and the main thing I've learned is: I HATE SANDING. It's only surface rust, but it's starting to show under the paint and unless I get it out now, it will only get worse. So the process goes something like this:

Sand off the paint near the rust patches

Apply wax & grease remover

Apply rust converter to the area, allow to cure for 20 minutes

Wipe over with a damp rag, then a metho rag, then a clean rag

Cover all areas you don't want pain on with newspaper and masking tape

Spray with primer, let it dry properly, then wait another 5 minutes just to be safe

Finish up with a couple of coats of matt black

All in all, I'm pretty impressed with my handiwork, and the new paint looks GOOD. But the rest of the doors are original paint and faded, scratched and worn - there is a REAL contrast between the new & old sections. So I've resigned myself to repainting the whole window frame section of the doors.

I think I mentioned in an earlier post that I have the heater core now, so when the ceramic heater arrives I can get stuck into that little project before Christmas.

Please donate. I still need the motor and controller, so I'd be more than happy to advertise your business on this site and on the car, and it's really starting to generate interest. I'm getting almost 300 hits a month on this blog alone.

Good news for recharging locally

2008-10-22T16:58:00.000-07:00

Looks like PBP has taken an interest in Australia in the nick of time. Hopefully by the time I finish my conversion, there will be some recharge points in Brisbane. Here's a list of some places that would be CRAZY not to offer EV recharging:

- Cinemas

- Restaurants

- Shopping centres

- Dinner cruise departures

- Motels/Hotels

Basically, anywhere you want people to stick around for a couple of hours consuming your product.

Here's a link to the news article:

Electric car venture in Australia seeks $700 mln

23/10/2008 9:30:08 AM

LONDON, Oct 23 (Reuters) - California-based electric car operator Better Place joined with Macquarie Capital Group on Thursday aiming to raise $1 billion Australian dollars ($676.1 million) to install electric charge points across Australia.

Australian utility AGL Energy committed to supply renewable energy to fulfil the "green" low carbon emitting credentials of the plan, the company said in a statement.

Automakers are in a technology and production race to develop oil alternatives, whether biofuels or electric cars, to address problems of energy security and climate change.

"We're interested in Australia to demonstrate scale," said Shai Agassi, Better Place chief executive and founder.

The Better Place concept is to install electric car charge spots at designated parking lots in residential areas and workplaces. In addition, to allow longer drives, the company would roll out electric filling stations.

The $200 million venture-backed company is still in a very early stage, testing charge spots in Israel with plans to follow in Denmark, and is working with Renaultand Nissan <7201.t> to develop electric car infrastructure.

The company's aim is for pure electric cars to leapfrog mass production gasoline-electric hybrids such as the Toyota Prius.

Hybrids achieve range by combining an electric motor with a gasoline engine, while pure electric cars need an electric charging infrastructure. Electric batteries can manage a range of only about 250 kilometres on their own at present.

One problem for Better Place may be to gain traction in an autos industry reporting plummeting sales as consumer spending slides in response to tight credit and looming recession.

In addition, infrastructure projects will require debt finance, at a time credit markets are locked or expensive.

"Debt is a four-letter word now in most parts of the world," said Agassi. "Most of it (the present fund-raising) would be equity. We'll raise a significant chunk of equity now. We'll plan the debt component as the market evolves."

Thursday's proposal would entail developing charge spots in four urban areas, in Victoria, New South Wales, Brisbane and Canberra, and then link those with electric filling stations.

The infrastructure necessary to get the first 1 million electric cars on the road would cost 1-2 billion Australian dollars, Agassi estimated. (Reporting by Gerard Wynn; Editing by David Gregorio)

Cheaper, better battery for hybrids

2008-10-16T21:50:00.000-07:00

The news just keeps getting better and better...

October 16, 2008 04:00am
Article from: AAP
Font size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
AUSTRALIAN researchers have found a way to produce cheaper and more powerful batteries to run hybrid-electric cars.
CSIRO researchers based in Melbourne have developed a new type of lead-acid battery to replace the nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries environmentally-friendly hybrid cars such as the Toyota Prius use.

Lead-acid batteries are cheap and can store large amounts of energy.
But if they are repeatedly and rapidly charged and discharged - as happens when used in a hybrid car - the battery plate becomes coated with chemical deposits.

The problem means the batteries wear out faster than NiMH batteries.
But the UltraBattery, developed by Dr Lan Trieu Lam and his CSIRO team, combines a lead-acid battery with a supercapacitor.

The combination stores as much energy as a standard lead-acid battery, but without the messy deposits on the plate.
"By acting as a buffer during charging and discharging, the capacitor boosts the battery's life to match that of NiMH batteries," Dr Lam said.

During lab tests the UltraBattery lasted four times as long as the best lead-acid batteries, while producing 50 per cent more power.

A test vehicle running until the UltraBattery fails has so far covered 185,000km, while being recharged as needed.
The cost of the battery is also expected to be a third to a quarter of NiMH batteries and a sixth of the lithium-ion batteries used in some high-performance electric cars.

Independent testing is yet to be carried out.
Japanese firm Furukawa Battery Company has started modifying a plant to to make the UltraBattery by the middle of next year.

In the US, battery manufacturer East Penn in Pennsylvania will manufacture the device.

Perspective

2008-10-15T20:16:00.000-07:00

I've got the donor heater core out and I'm just waiting for it to dry before I buy the ceramic unit. I'll post pics when there's something interesting to show.

In the meantime, here's a chart of the entire Dow Jones from it's inception, including the recent "crisis".

Doesn't seem so bad, when you put it in perspective, hey?

Douglas Adams was right: "Don't Panic"

Sydney 2008 Motor Show

2008-10-14T17:38:00.000-07:00

My mum and dad went to the Motor Show and took some pictures of the EVs.

All in all, they weren't too impressed with what was displayed - mostly existing stock and few concept/soon-to-be-released stuff. I always wonder why they can't take a perfectly good production car and just convert it like I'm doing with the Pulsar...

Finished the vacuum reservoir

2008-09-22T05:14:00.000-07:00

When you take out the petrol engine, you lose the vacuum that makes the brakes work. So EV conversions need to install a separate vacuum pump. Many trucks have these installed anyway, and it's a fairly easy process to make it work.

The vacuum pump itself is quite noisy and even though it doesn't chew a lot of power, there's no need for it to be running all the time. What you do is make a reservoir so the brakes can access the vacuum when you need it, and then the pump only has to run to top it up.

I asked Gav at KiwiEV about his reservoir (which you can see here) and he said it was about 2 litres, and if he was doing it again he would make it 5 litres, just so he can show off the stopping and acceleration power of his EV. So I decided to stand on the shoulders of giants and make mine 5 litres.

Hmmm - problem...How do you calculate the volume of a cylinder? Was I digging out my old maths textbooks? No way - I just did a google search for "volume of a cylinder" to get the formula, then divided by 5,000 to get my dimensions:

Volume = (Radius x Pi) squared x length. So (2.5cm x 3.142)^2 x 80cm = 4.9 Litres

So, for about $20 at my local Bunnings Hardware I got 1 metre of 50mm PVC tube, two end caps, 4 washers, 2 brass hose nipples and 2 brass locks for the inside. 3m of vacuum hose cost me $12 at the local auto parts store. I cut the tube down to 80cm, as this will give me about 5 litres of vacuum.

Then when I got home I learned that the thread on the brass nipples is about 1/2 inch - a lot larger than the largest drill bit in my kit. Back to Bunnings for a drill bit and I also picked up some silicone sealant and a gun. I drilled a hole in the end caps, fitted the washers and nipples to the locks and sealed all around them, then left it to cure overnight. Pushing the vacuum hose onto the nipple was a bit of work, but then tightening up the hose clamps was the easiest part of the job.

So: here's my finished setup. I've checked that it will fit in the car in front of the radiator, using cable ties to secure it to the body.

Now all I've got to do is afford the vacuum pump from ZEVA. Please donate! If you own a business, ask me about sponsorship/advertising.

My hero

2008-09-14T20:24:00.001-07:00

This will be me in a couple of months...

No gas? No problem: Electric car sets example for future
By Sara Kennedy
9/8/2008 6:27:42 PM
Molokai News : Environment

View Comments

Post Comment

Driver concerned about gas prices and the environment

Have you seen a car that looks like no other driving around Molokai?

You might mistake it for a fancy golf cart or even a space-age vehicle from The Jetsons.

In fact, it is not an ordinary car, it’s an electric car and it’s the only one on Molokai.

Owned by Kala‘e resident John Wordin, the Dynasty Sedan, shipped from British Columbia, “generates a

lot of interest.”

To feed the curious minds, he actually does plug the car into a regular wall outlet. Every

night, he plugs the car in, and when he wakes up, it’s charged. According to Wordin,

the car takes four hours to fully charge, equaling one kilowatt-hour, and will run for

approximately 30 miles at 25 mph. The vehicle uses a lot of energy uphill, but with a full

charge, he makes it around town just fine.

Wordin paid $14,500 for the car, and combined with shipping costs, the total price was

around $20,000.

At his Kala‘e home, 40 solar panels charge his vehicle and run the house. His water heater

and outdoor power equipment are solar as well.

The car, if charged twice a day, costs Wordin an extra dollar on his electric bill and gives him

approximately 30 miles. In comparison with gas prices, Wordin can travel 150 miles on five

dollars, the cost for approximately one gallon of gas.

Besides helping his wallet, the car helps the environment. The average new vehicle has a

smog/pollution index of 0.53 percent, while the electric car emits no pollution into the air.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, for every gallon of gas burned,

20 pounds of pollution and carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere.

Wordin’s concern about the environment has been growing since 1998. He read books and

articles on the subject of America’s fuel dependency and has been preparing himself for the

necessary changes.

“My interest in this has evolved over a period of time,” he said.

Wordin is trying to provide an example for the community. He has seen gas prices continue

to rise, the economy fall and the environment suffer.

“People are still buying SUVs; something is definitely wrong,” he said. “They just don’t get it,

oil is running out. The world is changing and I see examples everyday.”

Wordin’s dream is to see the whole island driving electric cars.

“Sure, it’s possible,“ he said. “People just have to realize there are profound changes in the

economy, as well as the environment.”

Peter Rosegg of Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) said the time is not too distant when

electric cars will cost less and be more readily available on the market. HECO is looking at the

situation, “closely and optimistically.” Sometime in the near future the company will be changing

its meters to an advanced system that will let customers charge electric cars overnight for a cheaper

rate.

Studies done by the Natural Resources and Defense Council and the Electric Power Research Institute

have shown that, electric cars are cheaper than driving cars running on fuel.

eVehicles in Honolulu specializes in electric vehicles and can be reached at 589-2347

I just shake my head...

2008-09-14T16:40:00.000-07:00

Darwin awards, anyone?

Pot calling the kettle "black"

2008-09-04T15:54:00.000-07:00

Pot calls the kettle "black"...

And Mr Cheyney, why can't the Lithium-Ion battery industry have a billion dollars to help get electric cars on the road faster? Then we won't need the oil pipeline in Georgia that's causing most of these problems...The Saudis and Iranians will go broke, the USA can retreat to the isolationist stance you had during the first half of WW2 and the environment will thank you as well.

Oh wait...Halliburton doesn't make batteries, it repairs war zones...how silly of me...

Cheney criticises Russia on Georgia visit

September 5, 2008 - 7:48AM

US Vice President Dick Cheney accused Russia Thursday of an "illegitimate" invasion to redraw the map of Georgia and cast doubt on whether Russia could be trusted as an international partner.

Standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, Cheney pledged US help beyond a one billion dollar (690 million euro) aid package announced Wednesday.

Meanwhile Moscow, which says its military intervention was justified because Georgia had attacked Russian citizens in breakaway South Ossetia, received the backing of foreign ministers from six ex-Soviet countries.

They stopped short of following Russia into recognizing the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, a second separatist region also at the centre of last month's brief war.

"Russia's actions have cast grave doubt on Russia's intentions and on its reliability as an international partner, not just in Georgia but across this region and indeed across the international system," Cheney said.

"After your nation won its freedom in the Rose Revolution, America came to the aid of this courageous young democracy," he said, referring to the 2003 uprising that brought Saakashvili to power.

"We are doing so again as you work to overcome an invasion of your sovereign territory and an illegitimate, unilateral attempt to change your country's borders by force that has been universally condemned by the free world."

Later Thursday the OSCE said it had sent military observers in a buffer zone between Russian and Georgian troops for the first time since the conflict.

The European security body said its officers were patrolling the road between the villages of Karaleti and Megrevekisi, four kilometres (2.5 miles) from the bombed-out South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali.

Georgia Russia has said it will only pull troops out of the buffer zone once international controls including military observers and police are in place in the area and once Georgia signs a non-aggression pact.

Cheney, who became the highest-ranking American official to visit Tbilisi since last month's conflict, watched boxes of aid being unloaded to highlight the one-billion-dollar US package.

Saakashvili, for his part, said the "number one priority" was the rebuilding of Georgia, parts of which were left devastated by Russia's fighter planes and advancing troops.

Russia sent its forces into Georgia on August 8, one day after Georgia had tried to take back control of the rebel region of South Ossetia from Moscow-backed separatists.

US-Russia relations have nosedived since the US led angry Western criticism of Moscow's military action, its recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and the continued presence of its troops in Georgia.

On Thursday, the parliaments of Russia and Abkhazia signed a cooperation agreement aimed at harmonising the laws of the two countries, RIA Novosti news agency reported.

"The parties will begin harmonising the legislation of the Russian Federation with the legislation of the Republic of Abkhazia," the report quoted the text as saying.

Cheney is pointedly not visiting Russia on a tour that has already taken him to Azerbaijan, where he stressed that the security of the energy-rich region was a top concern for Washington.

His trip has also been aimed at expanding the transit of oil and gas exports to the West through pipelines across Georgia and Azerbaijan, avoiding Russia which Washington views with increasing distrust.

Cheney also strongly backed Georgia's bid to join NATO, a move that has been vehemently opposed by Russia, saying Washington was "fully committed" to its eventual membership.

"As the current members of NATO declared at a summit in Bucharest, Georgia will be in our alliance," he said, referring to an April meeting of the Western military bloc.

NATO's chief, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, plans to visit Georgia later this month for further aid talks.

After his talks with Saakashvili, Cheney headed to Ukraine where President Viktor Yushchenko has plunged the country into fresh political turmoil by pulling his Our Ukraine party out of the ruling pro-Western coalition.

Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega became the first foreign leader to follow Russia's lead and recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, newspaper reports there said Wednesday.

Grid Will Handle Rechargeable Cars

2008-09-04T04:55:00.000-07:00

Grid Will Handle Rechargeable Cars

Source

SAN JOSE, CA (AP) - Which draws more juice from the electric grid, a big-screen plasma television or recharging a plug-in hybrid car?

The answer - a plasma television - is what is easing the minds of utility company executives across the United States as they plan for what is likely to be a conversion of much of the country’s vehicle fleet from gasoline to electricity in the coming years.

Plasma TVs, industry officials say, consume about four times the electricity as recharging a plug-in hybrid. Yet utilities have managed to cope with the increased loads as thousands of new televisions came on line.

So as long as the changeover from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles is somewhat gradual, they should be able to handle it in the same way, Mark Duvall, program manager for electric transportation, power delivery and distribution for the Electric Power Research Institute, said.

“ We’ve already added to the grid the equivalent of several years’ production of plug-in hybrids,” Duvall said at a conference on electric vehicles in San Jose. “The utilities, they stuck with it. They said, ‘All right, that’s what’s happening. This is where the loads are going, and we’re going to do this.’”

Automakers, such as General Motors Corp. and Toyota Motor Corp., are planning to bring rechargeable vehicles to the market as early as 2010. But speakers at the Plug-in 2008 conference say it will take much longer for them to arrive in mass numbers, due in part to a current lack of large-battery manufacturing capacity. Auto and battery companies still are working on the lithium-ion battery technology needed for the cars, and on how to link the battery packs to the vehicles.

“ We see the vehicle penetration levels coming at a rate that’s manageable,” said Efrain Ornelas, environmental technical supervisor with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. in San Francisco. “It’s not like tomorrow the flood gates are going to open and 100,000 vehicles are going to come into San Francisco or something like that.”

Instead, the vehicles will show up by the thousands throughout Northern California, he predicted. PG&E will be able to track their charging patterns and plan accordingly for the future, he said.

Utility officials say they already are coping with increased demand, especially during peak-use periods in the afternoon and early evening. But the rest of the day, most utilities have excess generating capacity that could be used to recharge cars.

But the preparation doesn’t mean electric vehicles will be accommodated without problems and good planning, the officials said.

Since most electric cars will likely be charged during off-peak electric use times, utilities should have no problem generating enough electricity. But since people with the means to buy electric cars likely will live in the same areas, utilities worry about stress on their distribution systems, Ornelas said.

That means consumers will face a lot of choices about when and where they charge up their cars and how much they want to pay for the electricity.

The choice for consumers will come because utilities likely will raise rates to charge cars during peak use times, generally from around noon to 8 p.m., and lower them for charging during low-use hours, industry officials say.

In California, utilities already are installing meters that track use by time of day. PG&E charges 30 cents per kilowatt hour to charge an electric vehicle during peak hours, he said, but charges only 5 cents from midnight to 7 a.m.

Duvall said utilities still have to be wary that high gasoline prices could push sales of rechargeable electric vehicles well into the millions by 2020, because that could stress the system. Other possible problems include electric vehicles getting larger and requiring far more electricity for recharging, and demands from people that their vehicles be recharged quickly, drawing more electricity during peak times.

Also, companies such as the Campbell-based Coulomb Technologies, are starting to develop recharging stations for sale to parking lot operators, office buildings and cities, which will draw more electricity.

There’s also talk of the cars storing electricity and sending it back to the power companies during peak times, but officials say that’s a long way off.

Industry officials say they can manage the fleet changeover as the cars and the utilities each have computers in place to manage when the cars are recharged.

“ From our perspective, I think it’s something that’s really manageable,” said Ornelas.

More details on the ignition system

2008-08-23T04:26:00.000-07:00

I've made a quick demo video of how the contactor works.

Electronics arrived today!

2008-08-20T02:29:00.000-07:00

Can you imagine how excited I am?

Today my parcel from ZEVA arrived containing more goodies than Santa on happy pills.

I now have my 400A 12v contactor, a 250A 160V Circuit Breaker, a 200V Voltmeter and a 1000A Ammeter.

Safety switch that can be tripped from inside the car to secure the main battery pack and prevent electrocution if we have a collision. At least there's no fuel to spill and ignite/inhale with an EV.

Voltmeter, Ammeter and the shunt to tell each of them how much power the motor is drawing, and how much is left in the batteries.

And the contactor: The ignition connects to the two little tabs on the shaft, and the main battery cable connects to the bolts on the right. When you turn the key in the ignition, the contactor snaps together and allows the current to flow to the motor controller.

So far I've hooked up the contactor to the test battery on my work bench and activated it - makes quite a reassuring THWACK sound which is good. I'll wire up a proper example circuit later in the week and upload another video.

Heater sorted!

2008-08-17T00:15:00.001-07:00

On the advice of another converter, I've downloaded the service manual for the N13. Looking at the heater section, I was puzzled by the description of the heater, since it lacked any information about the heater core.

After I'd packed away this morning's tools I went back and took off the glovebox and had a look behind it. Sure enough, the fan unit is next to the door above the passenger footwell. Next to it is the box I'd assumed was the heater core but on closer inspection has no fluid cables protruding through the firewall.

So, I unscrewed the 3 points, detached the electric plug and the unit fell out in my hand. Turns out my version of the N13 has an electric heater after all - absolutely no modification required!!!

What a relief!

Here's the final product:

Exploring behind the dashboard

2008-08-16T19:26:00.000-07:00

Over the past few weekends, I've been gradually pulling apart the dashboard and console to see how it fits together without breaking anything. I'm resigned to taking the whole thing apart eventually to get the heater core out - any other solution for the demister is just too much hassle.

So last week it was the centre console. I also rigged up a secondary cigarette lighter port to run the 240v AC inverter (for the mobile phone/laptop charger) at the same time as the GPS and MP3 players are running.

This week it was the dashboard and information panel.

The filth was thick and almost beyond description. Someone had dropped a sesame cracker into the steering column (sometime during the Clone Wars, from the look of it) and the constant baking/cooling cycle of Queensland weather had turned it into a squashed square of I-don't-know-what.

More filth inside the air ducts

You've no idea how difficult it is to get ANYTHING done with a 3-year old insisting that she knows how to do it better and taking all the tools away... She's totally adorable at the same time, chatting on her mobile phone and making me talk to her friends on it as well...

No sign of the parts I ordered last week...hopefully they will arrive in the next few days.

Nozzle Rage

2008-08-13T03:59:00.000-07:00

http://www.nozzlerage.com/

I haven't posted for a week or so because my wife has been in hospital with pregnancy complications. Nothing life threatening, and she is home now and resting, but still a reminder about what's truly important in life, I guess.

The funds and donations keep rolling in though, and I have ordered the main contactor, circuit breaker and dash gauges from ZEVA. Thank you again to the people who have sent me money. I hope you can see I'm putting it to good use!

Now that I've got the ignition sorted and the other control parts ordered, the main things that remain are the adapter plate and the battery racks. I've been tinkering with plans for the battery racks and measured the back seat of the car, to see if the plans I've got will fit. I think they will. For the rear rack I plan to drill holes in the metal under the seat cushion and sandwich that metal between the battery rack underneath and another metal plate on top. These two metal strips will have 4 10mm grade 8.8 bolts in them to share the weight of the batteries and prevent metal fatigue in the existing car body.

I haven't planned anything to do with the front racks yet - I will have to wait until the engine is out.

Finally, I measured the swing set height and compared it with the height of the car and engine to see if I can use it as a super-cheap hoist. It will be close but I think I can do it with about 10cm to spare. Here's a pic of me and Jazmin practising her abseiling on it...

If all else fails however, there is a guy on my way to work advertising a hoist & crane for rent, so I might pop in on the weekend and have a chat with him.

Ignition system sorted out

2008-08-01T23:59:00.000-07:00

I went to the wreckers today for 2 parts: the ignition barrel and the heater core. I spent 2 hours in the blazing spring sun taking apart the dash and console only to find that it's the wrong heater core - it's got air conditioning and is the wrong size, shape and has too many pipes. I was bummed!

Still, I got the ignition parts I wanted so after coming home and having a coke, I just got stuck in. I've rigged up a little bench to my little 12v lawnmower motor so I can test various bits and pieces, so see how they will work in the EV. After stripping a little of each cable and using some solder, I've got a VERY rough demonstration of how the ignition will work. Don't laugh because it's only a demo.

I've incorporated a kill switch into the circuit. That's not only because I'm paranoid about safety - it's also a good idea for when it comes time to be inspected. The inspectors really like fuses and safety switches...

The way it works is the battery connects to the red wire, the white wire powers the electrics like headlights and radio and the black/white wire provides power to the motor via the kill switch.

Nice and simple, nice and safe.

I'll have to figure out another way to modify the heater. I'm in no hurry to destroy the Pulsar's dashboard.

Throttle arrived today!

2008-07-26T21:26:00.000-07:00

Less than 48 hours after ordering my pot box, there was a knock at the door and a courier delivered my Curtis PB 6 from Bylong Industries in Sydney (650 miles away). I was very impressed at the speedy service... Thank you to all those people who have donated via PayPal - Even after buying the Pot Box I still have $460 towards the motor & controller.

I also visited the local wrecker on a whim - dreading the possibility of public ridicule for my project, but instead the opposite happened. Not only does he have an N13, not only is he happy to knock $10 off the price of the parts I need, he'll also let me take them off myself, giving me some invaluable experience when it comes to the actual conversion! I am stoked!!

At the moment, I'm only after a heater core and ignition barrel so I can start the modifications and then just slot them into the conversion once the motor comes out. If I have time, I may even swap over the heater coil and wire it up so it's operational before I convert the motor - one less thing to worry about on C-Day (or should that be E-Day??)

I also picked up a missile switch and some wire connectors at Dick Smith Electronics. I asked about industrial battery chargers but they only have toy ones. I'll need to go to someone like Leaver Industries for anything suitable for my EV.

My daughter wants to play on the swings, so I'll post another update shortly!

Ignition switch

2008-07-22T19:21:00.000-07:00

I'm drawing up some scenarios as to how I can use the ignition switch to start the motor. Without a starter motor, the final turn of the key is not necessary so I need to figure out a way that is simple, cheap and safe to operate the electrics and motor.

Here's a pic of what it looks like at the moment, and I'll update this post with a few ideas later.

"Give us the tools, and we will finish the job"

2008-07-21T04:24:00.000-07:00

Well, the job at hand isn't quite as large as the one Churchill was talking about, but I feel a lot better about it now. We went grocery shopping tonight and Aldi still had a couple of their power tool specials available, so I snapped one up.

Many of the converters on the DIY Forum advise using cheap power tools for cutting and grinding since they are so cheap and I'm unlikely to need them again (not being a hands-on kinda guy).

So, for $80 I picked up another cordless drill, a jigsaw, sander and torch. I'll be using the sander to remove the rust from the car body, the jigsaw for cutting out the adapter plate and the drill for all those bolt holes I need to drill...

Made me a very happy shopper!

In other news, I'm adding a panel to the right-side of this blog to keep a running track of fuel prices. Today I made a bargain and got 26 litres for $40 - $1.519 a litre... Let's see how quickly we can get to $2/l - I'm guessing before Christmas.

No luck at Jaycar

2008-07-20T19:50:00.000-07:00

Today at lunchtime I ducked up the road to our local Jaycar. Now that my tax refund has arrived I'm trying to track down a few outstanding components. Here's a short list with guess-prices based on KiwiEV's costings. Hopefully with the dive of the $US against the $AUS they should be a little cheaper now:

Turbo Timer: $12.50
200v DC Digital Voltmeter: $20
160v 500A DC Ammeter + Shunt: $60
200v 10A DC Solid State Relays x 2: $120
160V 250A DC Circuit Breaker: $140
SW200 Main Contactor: $110
Inertia Cutoff Switch: $90
All up about $500.00

I had a long chat with the friendly and expert staff, but they just don't carry this kind of gear. "Compared to what you're doing, all our stuff is for toys" they joked ruefully, pointing me in the direction of a minor competitor.

So now I have to troop all the way up to Archerfield just to get a price list...

On a brighter note, I've spent a whole weekend preparing the car for the conversion. I've removed the dying tint from the most dangerous windows, cleaned the console and dash and started planning the rust removal from the door pillars.

When fuel hits $10/gallon...

2008-07-15T20:55:00.000-07:00

What's the big deal? It's already the equivalent of $8.72 per gallon in New Zealand ($2.18 per litre) and heading the same way here in Australia.

So, I couldn't resist tossing this one in: Check out the lane divisions on the new roads :)

In terms of the conversion, it's been a slow week. I've lodged my tax return but won't be getting much of a refund (and certainly not enough to buy the motor - grrrr). The window tinting has started to bubble such that it's creating a hazard so it had to go. At lunchtime I took a small stanley knife out to the carpark and liberated the back window.

The whole process was surprisingly easy - just had to take care not to nick the demister...

So when I get home I'll use ammonia and soapy water to remove the glue and have a nice shiny rear window instead of a poxy laminated cancerous x-ray film...

Almost got enough money saved to buy the pot box, that will be my tax refund present to myself.

Battery information

2008-07-12T20:27:00.000-07:00

I took Friday off work and did a spot of shopping with my wife. At the shopping centre there was a new-ish shop called "Battery World" to which I was drawn like a moth to flame...

We had a good look around and had a long chat with the sales rep. The batteries I'm after for the EV is something like an Ultimate UL-120. Here's the specs:

Capacity (100Ah): 141
Size: 409(L) x 177(W) x 225(H)
Weight: 36.4kg (OOOF)
CCA: 963 at 20c
Thread size: 8mm
Reserve Capacity after 1 hour: 75A
Cost: About $400 each (OUCH) (bulk discount negotiable)

Next time I'll ask about Optima Yellow Tops and see how they compare...

We also spotted a solar lighting kit of $305 which includes a solar panel, battery, controller and 2 12v energy-saver lights. We're thinking we can set up the panel outside and run most of our night-time lighting requirements off it.

I've also been looking around for a Killawatt device to measure the energy drain that our appliances take. That way we can compare the energy stored in the batteries with the appliances we want to run at night. Hopefully we can run a couple of lights and the computer off the solar setup initially, and then increase the number of batteries/panels as required.

New Developments

2008-06-27T02:16:00.000-07:00

More new developments than Frank Sartor's backyard! That's just a little joke about the ugly and crowded place I used to live, before moving to paradise...

The battery lawnmower has finally died. It was fine during the drought but now that we've had a lot of rain, the grass simply launched a frontal assault and overwhelmed the poor battery. Oh well, that's what you get for buying "Made in China". So we're back to borrowing a incredibly polluting 4-stroke when the grass needs cutting.

It has, however, given me a veritable shower of spare parts to play with. Ev-conversion in minature, if you like.

The motor itself is about double the size of a coke can. That's the green cylinder with the wires sticking out. It has no markings at all so I can't find the power ratings. The black part near the shaft is the adapter plate. I've flipped it out so you can see how my larger electric motor will fit to the transmission.

I've also salvaged a small battery charger, a switch and some wires. There was some left over copper water pipe from renovations at work, and my boss said I could have it if I wanted. Shwing!!! - hammered it out and now I have my bus bar as well. All up, not a bad week!

I've also got a quote for the pot box from Bylong industries. It will be $130 including postage and tax, so I've almost got enough saved up for that... Should be able to get it and the motor at the same time using my tax refund...

Pizza night

2008-06-24T08:10:00.000-07:00

Once again, I can't sleep due to having eaten pizza for dinner. There's definitely a pattern emerging....

As fuel prices rise, the debate about EVs consumes more and more space in the news. Inevitably, the blogs are containing commonly-held but unsubstantiated opinions (mostly in the negative). For instance:

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/letters/index.php/theaustralian/comments/middle_class_fad_no_reason_to_cut_taxes_for_hybrid_cars/

"ELECTRIC cars are not “zero emissions vehicles”, Stewart Prins. They simply transfer the point of emissions from the tailpipe of the vehicle to the smokestack of the electricity generating plant. In Australia, where most of the electric power is generated by burning dirty coal, that means they put just as much CO2 into the atmosphere as if running on petrol. Electric vehicles are only green if the generating network is nuclear or hydro power. "
Gordon Drennan
Burton, SA

This is a common one, and for once I don't have to provide a response: another citizen has done it for me:

"Though it is true that the emission levels of an electric vehicle depend largely on the source of the electricity, it is dead wrong to claim that electric vehicles produce as much emissions as a regular vehicle.
Fully electric vehicles have an fuel efficiency equivalent of 1.5L/100km, as compared to regular petrol and diesel fueled cars which use between 5-15L/100km-largely due to the greater efficiency of a cyclical motor over a reciprocating engine(about 80% compared to 20%). To put it another way, an electric car consumes about 0.1 to 0.3kw-h/km traveled, wheras the average petrol driven vehicle uses the equivalent of about 1.3kw-h/km.
In short, what this amounts to is a minimum CO2 reduction of 55% compared to regular vehicles, even if the source of power is “dirty coal”. If natural gas, biomass gas or some form of renewable energy is the source, then the reduction in CO2 emissions can run as high as 99%. However, of greater importance is that electric and hybrid electric vehicles also significantly reduce, or totally eliminate, the emission of benzene (a carcinogen), particulate emissions (a cause of lung disease and asthma), MMT (a cumulative neurotoxin), carbon monoxide (a poison) and nitrogen dioxide (a corrosive agent which produces photochemical smog)-plus they reduce your yearly fuel and vehicle maintenance bills.
Surely these are reasons enough for us to encourage a wider distribution of hybrid and fully electric vehicles for both individual and public transportation."

I'm currently in the middle of drawing up plans for the adapter plate and battery racks while I save up for components. I'll post them up here once I'm finished. Also, Gavin from kiwiev.com has kindly advertised my efforts on his website - hopefully some donations will be forthcoming.

The future of oil: electricity

2008-06-19T20:07:00.000-07:00

Here's Richard Heinberg on The 7:30 Report last night talking about oil. The price isn't going to come down significantly ever, and the future is electricity, because that's what all our renewable energy sources create. Simple logic, huh?

mms://media3.abc.net.au/winlibrary/730report/200806/20080619-730-heinberglong_16_9_bband.wmv

Chinese Tea and the Electric Car

2008-06-17T22:06:00.000-07:00

Amazing parallels between the development of steam boats and Electric Cars.

Breaking up is so hard on the bowser...

2008-06-17T03:00:00.000-07:00

http://www.diyelectriccar.com/blogs/2008/05/oil-its-not-you-its-me.html

Ahh Oil, we’ve had plenty of good times together haven’t we?
Remember me learning to drive… buying my first car… our first road trip together. We’ve made some pretty good memories… you and I.
But if I’m honest I think we should start seeing other fuels. The last thing I want to do is hurt you but I think we are just drifting apart, heading in separate directions. You are having such a fantastic career, you’ve really found your niche and that more expensive demographic really suits you.
I know your parents in the Middle East are really proud; $100 a barrel, wow, you’ve really made it. But you know I’m not that kind of guy, it’s just not my world. It was great when your career was just starting to grow and we could afford to spend a lot of time together, we could just hop in the car and go for a drive, just because we felt like it. Our relationship used to be about freedom, the open road, but now that you’re moving on with you life I feel like I’m being left behind, playing catch up.
It’s taking big sacrifices in other areas of my life to keep this relationship alive, it seems like every week I’m have to put in more and more but you just stay the same. I’m starting to question whether or not its worth all the effort.
Let’s face it you’re a bit high maintenance, making all these demands about your needs for us to stay together. First it was just lubricant, but now you want me to get coolant and filters. It’s all too much.

Actually, Oil, I have a confession to make… I haven’t been entirely faithful.
It started out on the internet; it was just a bit of innocent fun. You were asking more and more of me and I just needed an escape. It started off just looking, only at fuels that were way out of my reach, I thought nothing would ever happen, it was just a silly fantasy.
I mean, can you imagine me with a solar car, or even a fuel cell? I wasn’t being realistic.
But when I went back to you it just didn’t feel the same. The spark that we had wasn’t there anymore; our relationship seemed dry and lifeless.
But then I met somebody that made me feel alive again. Sure it wasn’t what I expected; you and her are just so different. Well, yes you do know her actually, remember my childhood sweetheart? Yeah - batteries…
No, no she’s not like that anymore, she does way more than just toys now. She’s really turning her life around, she’s got work in laptops and cameras and she’s lost a lot of weight too, she’s looking really slim. She’s improved so much as a fuel source since we last saw each other.
She’s been working on her coal addiction too, going to renewable energy meetings. She’s learnt how to deal with her needs constructively, getting her energy from healthy sources like solar and wind. It’s really refreshing to see someone who is so independent and grounded.
She doesn’t need to go to exotic places around the world to recharge, she’s happy to just stay at home.
I’m actually thinking I’ll probably move out with her soon, we’re thinking we’ll just get a little car together on our own; we’ll build it ourselves to start with.
Maybe one day we’ll get one built by a proper car maker, but until then we’re happy to make things work in our own home built car. As long as we are together that’s all that matters. sorry it has to end, honestly there is no hard feelings.
And you’ll bounce back from this, you still have your friends. I’m sure there is a rich, handsome sports car owner that will really appreciate you and give you everything you need, even as your career gets less and less mainstream. But I just can’t get batteries out of my head; I think we’re going to make a long and happy life together.

Quick update

2008-06-15T16:27:00.000-07:00

This one's just a quick update: The distance the transaxle cable travels is 3cm, zero to full. That's the distance I'll need to replicate with the pot box.

On the issue of public charging, I've already mentioned that our local mega-shopping-centre (Logan Hyperdome) has no charging facilities. I'm thinking of asking them nicely to put in some power points, using these lovely centres as an example:

Blacktown
Westpoint shopping centre Enter via the Woolworths entrance (red level - lowest). When coming down the main entrance ramp, turn hard left and look for the powerpoints on the pillar on the corner and EV signage - park in the dedicated EV parking spots.
Dural
Woolworths - Round Corner, 494/500 Old Northern Road Underground car-park; look for signage and the dedicated EV parking spots on the far left-corner.
Hornsby
Westfield Hornsby - Cnr of Florence and Hunter Power points are located around the walls on most levels. Best to park early to be sure to find a spot near a power point.

This list is from SydneyAEVA (http://sydneyaeva.googlepages.com/index.html)

Modifying the throttle

2008-06-11T21:59:00.000-07:00

I've got a pretty good idea what needs to be done to make the Pot Box throttle keep the transmission happy, while making it rev higher, longer (to suit the electric motor). It's all been flowing around in my head and it's finally come out on paper.

Firstly, there's a photo of the throttle in a previous post. It pivots when the accelerator cable (top) is pulled (by pressing down on the pedal) and this pulls the transmission cable (bottom) out to tell the transmission "I'm revving hard, keep it as low as you can for as long as you can".

I want to keep this information flowing, even increase it (to suit the higher - revving electric motor) while using the electric motor and pot box instead of the petrol engine.

So: I need to find out some specs. Here are two diagrams of the throttle assembly, showing it at "closed" and "open". As you can see from the red arrow, the top bit is pulled to the right by the accelerator pedal cable.

In the second pic, I need to find out the distance described by the red arrow. This will tell me the information I need to "maintain" when replacing the throttle. If "pull transmission cable out 3cm" = "Keep it in for an extra 1,000 RPM" that's the distance I need to replicate when linking the accelerator pedal cable to the Pot Box. Since the Pot Box has a shorter arm (and therefore travel distance), I'll need to modify/extend a lower arm to keep the transmission happy.

I'll be seeing my wife's grandfather (retired engineer) at a party tomorrow night, and I'll put it to him as an engineering challenge. I'm sure he won't be able to resist.

Donations and injuries

2008-06-10T04:10:00.000-07:00

I cut my hand at work. It's not bad - a little more than a paper cut but it's right in the centre of my left palm so lifting or holding anything in that hand is impossible. Looks like the car will have to stay un-measured and un-cleaned for a few days while I heal up.

In better news, I've had a few donations over the past few days which have really perked me up! It's so good to see people taking an interest in this project and - best of all - helping me fund it. Thanks again - you know who you are.

Cracked the transmission riddle

2008-06-06T03:45:00.001-07:00

Good news. The governor will automotically sense the transmission speed and shift naturally, even with the electric motor attached. The key is to modify the throttle input so the governor thinks the revs are climbing slower than they actually are. This will delay the shift a little and make life easier for the motor and the transmission.

Here's a shot of the throttle linkage:

The top cable pulls the throttle open when the pedal is pressed. This in turn PULLS the lower cable and tells the governor that the car is accellerating. If the pedal is "to the metal", the governor will tell the transmission not to shift yet, and keep it in lower gear a bit longer.

By lengthening the link arm and changing the angle, I can tell trick the governor into thinking the car is ALWAYS "pedal to the metal" and keep it in lower gear until it suits the electric motor.

In other news: I've emailed Queensland Transport (our motoring authority) for information/requirements for EV conversion. After a week and a half - nothing except an automated reply saying "we are committed to great customer service and will get back to you within 7 days."

I'm not in the least surprised, and I was never holding my breath. I'll give them another week and then use the phone.

I also sent an email to our local monster shopping centre - the Logan Hyperdome. This has one of the largest carparks in Qld but absolutely no facility for recharging EVs. I wonder if I can apply some gentle pressure and get them to install a power point or two.

RL3F01A Governor

2008-05-22T08:38:00.000-07:00

That's the technical name for my transmission.
I've found a new pic of the governor - it does look different to the earlier one so I'm putting it up here for you to see.

The issue remains the same. I need it to delay the shift to a time more suitable to the Electric motor. I've asked for information on the Nissan forums and I'll go down to the local Auto Transmission specialist on the weekend. to see what he thinks.

Transmission Tinkering

2008-05-21T16:40:00.000-07:00

Now we're getting somewhere!

The auto transaxle/gearbox in my Pulsar is a hydraulic gearbox, not an electronic one. Some engines have a computer sensor in the engine that tells the gearbox how fast it's going. The gearbox uses this information to select the correct gear, and to know when to change. Mine isn't that complicated, but it's still quite clever.

It has a governor. This is a funny looking stick with a cog at the bottom and two hinged arms at the top. The engine spins the cog, and centrifugal force pulls the hinged arms apart, just like a figure skater spinning on the spot. As the arms open, oil is pushed into the gearbox to make the gear changes. If the governor is spinning too fast for second gear, it won't downshift and blow the motor.

Here's a picture of the governor on a diesel locomotive engine. It's not exactly the same, but you get the idea.

Now the rub: the electric motor has a different torque curve to an Internal Combustion Engine. While an ICE takes a few seconds to really provide power, an electric motor supplies all the power immediately. If I hook up the WarP9 directly to the transmission, it would probably shift right into top gear as soon as I give it some throttle: clunk, clunk, clunk, clunk. Not optimal!

So what I need to do is figure out a way to modify the governor and delay the shift. I haven't found an EV out there that has solved this problem, so we might be in uncharted territory... That's exciting, even for this accountant!

Here are a couple of ideas I've had so far:

Use an oil pump and a computer sensor/controller. This would probably work, but it's expensive and complicated.
Shave some weight off the governor arms. This might work, but a uniform reduction isn't really what I'm after. I need something that will align a straight torque curve (WarP9) to the curved torque curve of the ICE.
Add springs to the arms to slow the expansion of the arms. This is what I'm leaning towards at the moment. There may be a formula somewhere to tell me what kind of spring to use, but trial and error may be my last resort.

So, to quote Sherlock Holmes: "The game's afoot!"

Nissan says moving into higher gear on electric cars

2008-05-20T15:28:00.000-07:00

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJcHdgOG4PfF3HP373aecGiOrQqg

Nissan says moving into higher gear on electric cars
1 day ago
TOKYO (AFP) — Nissan Motor Co., playing catch-up in fuel-efficient motoring, said Monday that it and NEC Corp. will invest 115 million dollars to mass produce new batteries for electric, hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles.
The push into advanced lithium-ion batteries comes as Japanese automakers invest in an array of new environmentally friendly car technologies amid soaring prices at the pump.
Nissan has been slower than rivals Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. to embrace petrol-electric hybrids, but it aims to become the industry leader in electric vehicles.
"Our vision for a more sustainable future is clear," said Nissan's executive vice president Carlos Tavares. "Nissan firmly believes the ultimate solution for sustainable mobility lies in zero emission."
"Electric vehicles will be a key product breakthrough our industry can deliver," he told reporters, adding that Nissan was ready to supply the batteries to any company interested in the technology.
The venture, Automotive Energy Supply Corp. (AESC), which was set up last year, plans to build its first battery production line at a Nissan facility in Kanagawa Prefecture southwest of Tokyo.
Owned 51 percent by Nissan and 49 percent by the NEC group, it will invest 12 billion yen (115 million dollars) over three years in the aim of producing 65,000 lithium-ion batteries per year by 2009.
NEC Tokin will invest an additional 11 billion yen to build a new assembly line at one of NEC's facilities in Kanagawa Prefecture to produce components for the batteries, which will be installed next year in forklifts in Japan.
Nissan also aims to use the batteries in an electric vehicle to be launched in the United States and Japan in 2010, along with the first hybrid using its own technology.
It aims to mass-market electric vehicles to consumers globally in 2012.
The dream of an electric car, which has been around since the time of Thomas Edison, has so far failed to break into the mainstream because of limited battery life that makes such vehicles impractical for most purposes.
Lithium-ion batteries are smaller and lighter than the nickel-metal hydride batteries now used in hybrid and electric cars.
But automakers have been cautious about their use following problems with lithium-ion batteries for laptop computers catching fire.
"Because this is for automotive applications, safety is imperative," said AESC president Masahiko Otsuka.
"We have a lot of tests regarding safety. We have cleared all of them," he said.
NEC executive vice president Konosuke Kashima said his company -- which has been researching next-generation lithium-ion batteries since the early 1990s for mobile telephones -- sees good growth prospects for the technology.
"Due to emissions control and rising oil prices, the market (for the batteries) is expected to increase to one million units in 2010 and three million in 2020," he said.
Nissan also said that it would conduct a feasibility study with Kanagawa authorities on an electric vehicle project in the prefecture from 2010 that could include an electricity-charging network and tax incentives for users.
================================
I really object to this journalist's statement that "The dream of an electric car, which has been around since the time of Thomas Edison, has so far failed to break into the mainstream because of limited battery life that makes such vehicles impractical for most purposes." Claptrap. All of the research from the USA, europe and Australia shows that a large amount of our driving is less than 100km (commuting) and usually at speeds less than 90km/h.

The challenge is the remaining 10% of times when we want to take the same car and drive to Vegas/The Snow/Byron wherever... Unfortunately, the gullible public has swallowed this line, proclaimed with evangelical zeal by the oil and motor car companies - to the point where journalists can put it in an article as fact without bothering to check it's validity.

There's two solutions that are readily available now: a plug-in hybrid, so you can use the Internal Combustion Engine (might be an advantage to convert it to LPG) for distances beyond the charge of your batteries (just like the diesel submarines) or use the EV as a second car.

Our family has chosen the second option, because we have two ICE cars and are planning to conver them both. The Crysler Neon will be put onto LPG using a professional LPG convertion shop, and I'll be doing the Pulsar conversion to batteries myself.

At the moment I've been doing some general maintenance on the car: Fixing a broken boot-lid clip and cleaning out the footwells. On the weekend I'll give it a good wash and have a closer look at the rust in the driver's door pillar.

Study links air pollution, blood clots in veins

2008-05-15T18:48:00.000-07:00

The reasons in favour of this conversion just keep stacking up...

http://www.reuters.com/article/email/idUSN12282206

CHICAGO, May 12 (Reuters) - Air pollution heavy in small particles may cause blood clots in the legs, the same condition air travelers call "economy class syndrome" from immobility during flight, researchers said on Monday.
Dr. Andrea Baccarelli of the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues said they found the link after looking at 870 people in Italy who had developed deep vein thrombosis between 1995 and 2005. When compared with 1,210 others living in the same region who did not have the problem, they found that for every increase in particulate matter of 10 micrograms per square meter the previous year, the risk of deep vein thrombosis increased by 70 percent.
On top of that, the blood of those with higher levels of exposure to particulate matter was quicker to clot when tested at a clinic, they reported in the Archives of Internal Medicine.
Air pollution from automobiles and industry can contain tiny particles of carbon, nitrates, metals and other materials that have been linked over the years to a variety of health problems. While lung diseases were an initial concern, later research has indicated it may cause heart disease and stroke, possibly because it increases the rate at which blood can coagulate, Baccarelli and colleagues said.
Until now particulate pollution had not been linked to blood clots in the veins. The mechanism that causes problems for some air travelers is related not to the blood itself but to impaired circulation when sitting in one place without exercise for long periods of time. The findings introduce a new and common risk for deep vein thrombosis, the researchers said and "give further substance to the call for tighter standards and continued efforts aimed at reducing the impact of urban air pollutants on human health."
In a commentary, Dr. Robert Brook of the of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor said if the findings are proven by additional research it may turn out that "the actual totality of the health burden posed by air pollution, already known to be tremendous, may be even greater than ever anticipated."
(Reporting by Michael Conlon; editing by Maggie Fox and David Wiessler)

Also, I've had correspondence from ZEVA in Sydney. I'll post more details soon.

Further developments

2008-05-13T19:30:00.000-07:00

I haven't had a lot of time recently to devote to the conversion. Our rental inspection is approaching and there is a lot of yard work to be done. Recently I've been having problems with our battery lawn mower due to it's low power. It was fine while we were in drought conditions and the grass was very dry, but with waist-high jungle it just wasn't up to the task.

Fortunately, my Aunt loaned me her 4-stroke mower which finished off in 2 hours a task that the battery-mower hadn't done in 2 weeks! I will be buying a 4-stroke mower in the next few months...

However, the demise of the battery-mower has led to an unexpected supply of parts. A windfall, you might say... Having dismantled the components in an attempt to fix it, I find myself in posession of a small electric motor (which unfortunately is devoid of markings, particularly a power rating), a 12v 12Ah battery, some wiring and a rudimentary battery charger. I am planning to use these parts in a new project, one that will give me useful experience in working with electronics.

I had planned to attach it to my mountain bike as a hill-boost-assist but I don't think the motor is powerful enough to make much of a difference.

Maybe a boat or small barbie-go-kart style vehicle for my daughter?

I was given the idea for a boat during a visit to my in-laws. My brother-in-law Murray has a radio-controlled boat which is fairly small (about 18 inches long) an runs on 6 x 1.5v AA batteries. I'm thinking of taking the motor and 12v battery into the hobby shop and buying a boat kit that will handle the weight... Maybe a 1/18th size Titanic or Graf Spee? We shall see...

In the meantime, please donate a few dollars to this ev conversion. Clicking a few ads in the google ad panel will also generate some cash, although this takes a long time. I've added an "amount outstanding" line which I hope will tick down steadily until I can afford the new motor.

Wish me luck!

Found: local vendor

2008-05-01T19:38:00.001-07:00

Well, isn't this a stroke of luck? I've been putting together a list of requirements and costs based on other EV projects (mainly Kiwi EV) and enjoying the exchange rate between the US dollar and the $AUD - thinking I will have to import most of the parts from the USA.

No more! I've found an Australian company that does all the hard work for me. And you'll never guess how I found them...

As you can see, I've placed a Google Adsense ad in the blog to try to generate some cash to fund this incrementally-planet-saving project. Lo and behold - the first ad to be displayed was ZEVA - Zero Emission Vehicles Australia. My saviours! I haven't had time to really look through their online dogalogue, but a quick browse told me that they have most of what I need:

Electric Motor

Pot box & controller

Cable, wire & accessories

Digital displays & advice

So: I'm very excited as being able to deal with an Australian company makes things A LOT simpler for me, not to mention cheaper.

I am stoked.

I had one of those jaw-dropping moments while reading Dilbert this morning. It appears that the message may be finally getting through to some Americans that there are alternatives and the world isn't going to survive very long on cheap oil: Have a read of the post (it's quite entertaining) but also the replies.

http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2008/05/israel-defeats.html

There's an unusually low ration of nay-sayers to proponents and this gives me a little hope that maybe, just maybe we are getting somewhere and the message is sinking in...

As for me, I'm not waiting around for a perfect alternative. As General Patton once said "A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow"...

The Overall Plan

2008-04-29T19:42:00.000-07:00

Here's a thumbnail sketch of how I intend to convert the Pulsar to electrons. Some of these items are obviously simplified and not in the strictest order, but you get the idea.

Submit plans to Queensland Transport and get approval for the conversion
Remove exhaust, fuel tank, fuel lines & engine
Measure transmission bell housing
Design & fabricate connection plate and coupling for the torque converter
Design & fabricate a bracket to hold the motor in place and install it
Install the electric motor in the bracket and connect it to the torque converter via the plate and coupling
Design and fabricate a bracket to hold the alternator and vacuum pump
Install alternator and vacuum pump (for the brakes)
Design and fabricate battery racks: 1 in the engine bay, 1 in the fuel tank space and a backup in the boot
Install controller, pot box and battery cables
Design and fabricate charging system
Purchase and install voltmeter and display on dashboard
Tow the finished EV to the inspection depot, get insurance and rego finished, then drive it away!

I have a fair idea how most of it fits together, and I know the hard bits will be:

Fooling the transmission into knowing when to change gear
Design and installation of the brackets to hold the engine and alternator
Modifying the demister/hot air blower to comply with safety standards
Affording the batteries to get the range I want (50km)

Over the next few posts I'll put some technical specs together and a costing guess. I'm looking for an electric motor in Australia, but I may have to import it from the USA. Both KiwiEv and Electric Echo had to use US motors, so I may have to follow suit.

As you can imagine, this kind of project isn't cheap, and with a family to feed, house and clothe, it all adds up. Time may be money in some cases but here, it's definitely a case of the more money I can bank, the faster this project will go!

I'm working two jobs at the moment but if you can spare a few dollars (or a few hundred), you can be assured it is going to a very worthy cause and helping to do a little planet-saving. Please use the "Donate" button to deposit funds into my PayPal account.

It's simple economics, but the economics aren't simple

2008-04-29T19:40:00.002-07:00

Supply and demand.

Lots of demand for oil combined with failing supplies leads to rocketing prices. Get set for a new Moore's law in oil prices!

So looking at an idea like the EV-1 or the new plug-in Hybrids - why aren't the governments pushing this new oil-free transport technology? Economics!

The other day, Insight on ABC ran a program about how Australian are wedded to their cars and high oil prices won't make us catch public transport. It's true - the country is just too big for a viable public transport system to work. We're just too spread out compared with London, Tokyo or Singapore (the examples held up as good public transport systems).

So if we NEED our cars to get around, get tradesmen to work and mums to the shops - the EV or plug-in Hybrisd seems to be the answer: Fast, cheap to run and best of all - not lining the Saudi's bank accounts. So why aren't governments behind it?

Well, the USA elected a Texas Oilman for president. No further explanation necessary.

In Australia, the automakers and oil companies are big political donors and have incredible power. It's a conflict of interest for public servants to make laws that will harm their ultimate paymasters. No big conspiracy theory - it's just economics.

Besides, governments have never been leaders of innovation. I've said it many times - none of the major inventions of the 18th, 19th or 20th centuries were promoted, encouraged or assisted by the governments. Governments follow, and if we want to turn this toil thing around, it's up to the average person to take matters into their own hands. People like Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison, Wilbur and Orville Wright - ordinary people who tinkered on their own. Once we get enough momentum, the governments will have to get involved in order to work out how to tax it - again: simple economics.

So my theory is this: The oil companies know all about peak oil. They know the writing is on the wall. They've tested electric cars and they know the technology works beautifully, but the time isn't right yet. They were making billions when oil was $80 a barrel. Imagine how much they will make in between now and when the oil stops flowing?

Use the rising profits to buy the next source of power - power stations. Why the hell do you think Morris Iemma is being "encouraged" to sell the power supply of NSW? Somebody is prepared to pay for it becuase they know what the demand for electricity is going to be in the next 10, 20, 50 years. Their motto is "hold oil shares, buy electricity shares" - using the doomed profits from your oil to fund the acquisition of the next energy producers.

And then, when they've fleeced ever last possible cent out of selling petrol - unveil the electric car and raise the price of electricity to match what we've been paying for petrol!

So here's the end of my rant - I'm going to shift my focus now from WHY to HOW.

Original posts from Live Space

2008-04-29T19:40:00.001-07:00

Here's the dilemma I'm considering:

With oil over $120 per barrel, and $1.50/l here in Brisbane - my question is: why aren't they producing more oil? With the price so high, it's worth spending twice as much money prospecting because you'll still make the same profit. The general theory is that there is no more oil - certainly not as readily available as it used to be. Combine this with the thirst of China & India and presto - supply & demand give us high prices.

Reducing demand is a good option. I've been seeing Soon-To-Be-Ex-President Bush promoting Hydrogen as the "fuel of the future - available in 5 years or so..."

Wait a minute: how do you make Hydrogen?

Well, you start with water, and apply electricity to it. Electrolosis creates Hydrogen and oxygen which can then be stored, taxed and put in your fuel cell and used to power your internal combustion engine... I find it sad that electric cars like the EV1 have been available for 15 years now, and you just put the electricity straight into your batteries. Skip the electrolosis part. Combine that with safe nuclear power and use a small rocket system to deliver the nuclear waste into the sun and you've got a great way to keep mobile, save money and reduce emissions. Not not mention saving a huge amount on spare parts for your engine. And paying no nmore money to oil barons who use it for all the wrong ends...

There's a growing group of people who are saying things like "the gonvernment should do something about high fuel prices" and "Why aren't there incentives for alternative energy, solar panels etc"? Wake up people. No useful invention has ever been funded or encouraged by the gonvernment. The steam engine, light bulb, telephone, radio, nuclear energy - even the original motor cars were built by everyday people in their garages or labs. Once the idea was proven, the governments figured out a way to tax it, and only then do they promote it. This is the stage Electric Vehicles are at right now.

I'm planning to convert my 1989 Nissan Pulsar. I'll post the progress here.

Genesis

2008-04-29T19:37:00.000-07:00

I tried using my Windows Live Space for this blog, but Microsoft in the spirit of competition are blocking Google Analytics and the PayPayl Donate button. So I'm picking up my bat and ball and moving over to Blogspot...