Maricopa County, AZ (which includes Phoenix) is the home of 28,113 registered golf carts (or “golf cars”, as the dealers like to characterize them). The local newspaper reports that there are over 50 dealers in the greater Phoenix area, and that over a quarter of the carts are bought as secondary transportation for use around the residential communities. Sun City, a retirement community just west of Phoenix probably has a major portion of the county’s vehicles, and most of those are dual purpose. Residents take them grocery shopping and for other errands around the community. Most are street-legal, which requires headlights, taillights, turn signals and windshields. In addition, they must stay on streets that have speed limits of 35 mph or less.
While many of the carts are electric, qualifying them for federal tax breaks of up to 10%, most in Sun City are gasoline-powered with an auto-starter system that shuts the engine off when it comes to a stop, and starts it again when the accelerator is pushed. Mileage on these carts is in the range of 50 plus mpg.A family with three children, profiled in the news article, puts around 2,000 miles per year on their cart, running the kids to school and activities. They recently upgraded from a four-seater to a six-seater. Meanwhile, several dealers offer customized bodies that look like Hummers, Beemers or VW beetles, among other styles. Such options as stereo systems appeal to high-end customers.
The popularity of these vehicles seems to put the lie to the US auto manufacturers’ claims that Americans won’t buy any car that isn’t a large, powerful gas hog SUV. In their present configurations, they are obviously not suitable for more than residential community use. However, it doesn’t require much imagination to envision them outfitted for in-city fleet use as delivery vehicles (think florists) or local taxis. Add a few safety features, just a bit more power and these vehicles could replace thousands of conventional automobiles and save millions of barrels of imported oil every year. And they wouldn’t require ground-breaking technological advances. Of course these small vehicles wouldn’t be a solution to our energy problems, just one factor in alleviating them.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 16
Most people in urban areas could make 90% of their trips in a car with a 100 mile range. The final version of the EV-1 had a 150 mile range as I recall. Think of all the drivers in urban areas around the country; if a lot of them were driving cars like that...and recharging them at night...it would go a long way toward solving our energy problems. And the economic and political problems associated with our dependence on foreign oil.
I wrote an article on the subject of electric cars a few months ago, and I hope you do not mind if a post a link here.
LINK
What about "battery stations" instead of gas stations? You drive into a station, swap your depleted battery for a freshly charged one & away you go. Over the next few hours, the station operator recharges the one you left, then restocks it for another customer. Of course the station owner/operator has a lot of money tied up in batteries and rechargers, but gas storage tanks & pumps aren't cheap.
But there are a lot of people who see the hydrogen fuel cell car as the vehicle of the future. Maybe. Some day. A long, long time in the future.
Hydrogen is not a fuel. It is an energy carrier, just like electricity. What I mean is, you don't go out and mine hydrogen. You have to extract it from either a hydrocarbon like coal, natural gas or oil or by electrolysis of water. It takes a lot of energy to do that, but the energy does not have to come from burning fossil fuels. Some of it, at least can come from renewable sources like solar, geothermal, wind or biomass. There are ways to extract it from fossil fuels that do not pollute the environment. Read my article on electric vs hydrogen-powered cars. The link is in an earlier comment in this thread. It spells this out in detail.
Now about 400 VDC: Anything over 50 VDC is potentially lethal, given suffient current, but the danger of electrocution in an accident is a Helluva lot less than the danger of a gasoline fire in a gas-powered car. I don't think that's a concern. Also, there is no need to run the accessories in an electric car from 400 volts. They could run off a lower voltage. The main drive motors are the only thing that have to run at the full 400 VDC, and that's to keep the current level manageable. The higher the current the more power loss in wiring and cabling...and in the motors themselves.
As a rule of thumb, 1 HP output from an electric motor requires 1 KW of input power. So a 100 HP motor would require 100 KW. At 400 VDC, that's 250 amps.
One last point: The early EV-1's used lead-acid batteries as you say, but the final version used Lithium cells with much greater range and durability, and lower weight. They are used in all hybrid cars currently on the market, including the Toyota Prius, and I believe I have read that Toyota guarantees them for eight years. Battery techhology has come a long way since the early EV-1's.
The whole conspiracy theory thing is just idiotic, the major manufacturers have been working better mileage and alternative fuels for years, and the govt has placed regulations to try and speed this up, ie. carb, cafe, etc. But that was a heck of an idea- bring all the troops home, disband the armed services and subsidise electric cars, that way when we get invaded the terrorists will all have eco-friendly cars to drive.
Using electricity directly in a battery-powered car is a lot more efficient than using it to electrolyze water to obtain hydrogen, and then burning it in an internal combustion engine. The Otto cycle is is about 25% efficient at best. A battery-powered car with 100-150 mile range would be perfectly adequate for most urban commuters. Just think how much oil that could save...if the electricity that charges all those batteries is not generated in oil-powered generators. But even if it is, a big generation plant can have elaborate and expensive emission control equipment, even CO2 sequestering equipment. So the net result should be a lot less atmospheric pollution and greenhouse gas emission.
The problem is to convince the American public of these facts...and to make the cars affordable. I think the economic, environmental and national security advantages of this are so important that it would justify a federal subsidy to encourage people to make the transition. But I really do think there is pressure from the oil industry. I wouldn't call it a conspiracy...just political pressure to advance their business interests...which are to prolong the consumption of large quantities of oil as long as possible.
It ain't gonna happen, but that's what I think SHOULD happen.
Convincing the public to use small cars was the point of theoriginal post: the public in Maricopa County is convincing itself. They are using golf carts as 2nd cars. They're fun and relatively cheap to drive AS A 2nd CAR. The key is to not try to convince people that they can replace the old reliable family car for trips to Grandma's. Once peple see the benefit for running errands, they'll be accepted for more & more tasks. Baby steps.