Electric vehicles have many advantages, such as little maintenance, gear changes, noise and fumes, and - of course - no emissions, if powered with electricity from clean sources.
Batteries can be expensive and a lot of R&D goes into making them cheaper, lighter and longer lasting. While the lithium-ion battery is the preferred choice for electric cars, Zebra is used in a number of larger and heavyweight electric vehicles.
Swiss company MES-DEA produces Sodium/Nickel chloride cell batteries, also known as Zebra (Zero Emission Battery Research Activities). The technology originated in the mid 70's in South Africa and was further developed in the UK.
On April 24, 2007, at the Commercial Vehicle Show in Birmingham, England-based Smith Electric Vehicles unveiled its Edison van. The 3.5t van is housed in a Ford Transit shell and has a payload of up to 1338kg. It is powered by Zebra sodium nickel chloride batteries, has a top speed of 50mph and a range of up to 150 miles on one battery charge.
Smith also offers the larger 9t (over 24,000lbs) Newton truck. It is powered by a 120 kilowatt electric motor and four Zebra sodium nickel chloride battery packs. Smith provides an option of up to six of the 278-volt suitcase-sized batteries for buyers who need maximum payload and range. It has a payload of up to 3,000kg, a top speed of 50mph and a range of up to 130 miles on one charge.
Starting next spring, Smith will have a U.S.-version of its Newton model, a 12.5-ton, van-bodied truck, to be built for the North American market at a factory in Fresno, California. It will travel up to 150 miles at 50 miles an hour on an overnight charge, and can haul a payload of up to 15,800 pounds. At a $150,000 starting price, this truck isn't cheap, but operating costs are 75 percent less than a comparably-sized diesel (11 cents a mile versus 45 cents).
Meanwhile, in Australia, the Adalaide City Council has introduced an electric bus. Its eleven Zebra sodium/nickel battery modules give it an operational range of 200 kilometres between charges under typical urban conditions. The air-conditioned solar electric bus has 25 standard seats, two wheelchair spaces, and room for 15 standing passengers, adding up to a total of 42 passengers. It will be part of Adelaide's free bus service which links major facilities in North Adelaide and the City, such as hospitals, universities, schools, community services and shopping precincts. The bus will be powered by the solar PV panels at the new Adelaide Central Bus Station, which will generate almost 70,000 kilowatt hours of electricity per year.
References:
Smith Electric Vehicles
http://www.smithelectricvehicles.com
World's Largest Electric Truck Coming to U.S.
http://blogs.edmunds.com/.eea100f
Smith Electric Truck - AutoBlogGreen
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/12/11/evs23-the-green-machine-smith-electric-truck-comes-to-america/
Tindo electric bus in Adelaide
http://www.adelaidecitycouncil.com/tindo
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 26 ( 1 removed by Sam Carana )
There was a 12 v battery invented in the 60s that used aluminium plates and water. Guess what it never got off the ground. Suddenly you never heard it mentioned.
I used to have the plans (form the 60s) to build an electric car (two models) one had a B&G engine in it with a generator. You got like 200 miles to the gallon because all it did was keep the batteries charged. Never ran out of electricity.
No George, I have a system, I cannot get worked on, because the engineers I have talked to, are all afraid of the big three. They actually have had more pull in stopping the development of Alternet technology vehicles than the oil companies have applied.
This technology does indeed work better in flat, urban areas, but that's no reason to dismiss it. It seems especially effective for delivery vans, removal trucks, buses and vans operating as taxis in flat urban areas. It's interesting to look at this as an alternative to urban rail systems. With deregulation of taxi services, this could be a better alternative. I'd prefer to let market mechanisms decide what works best where, but given the way government has distorted the energy markets and given the urgency to act on global warming, government should subsidize clean electricity supply in order to get such technologies off the ground.
Review Mannheim Steamroller Christmas Songs
I'm anxiously awaiting a non-petroleum vehicle to hit the open market....at an affordable price. I'll be one of the first in line.
Thanks, Sam, for spreading the word.
Electric cars require little maintenance, as there are very few moving parts; you don't need to change engine oil, filters, gaskets, hoses, plugs, belts, there's no catalytic converter or exhaust pipe to replace.
Paul M. "Doesn't seem like they've existed long enough in widespread use to make claims like that."
Actually, the electric car dates back to between 1832 and 1839 (the exact year is uncertain), when Robert Anderson of Scotland invented the first crude electric carriage. Between 1899 and 1900, electric cars outsold all other types of cars in America. Why? Because they did not have the vibration, smell and noise of gasoline cars and required neither gear changes nor much manual effort to start (as with the hand crank on gasoline cars). The only good roads in those days were in town, so most travel was local, which was perfect for electric vehicles with their limited range.
Why hasn't anyone come up with this before? Well, General Motors did introduce an electric car back in the 1990s, but killed it off. Why? Have a look at the following two links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
http://earthissues.multiply.com/video/item/16/
Anyway, it's time to reinvent the electric car, for its convenience and for the positive contribution it can make in terms of the environment and global warming. To extend the range, one could add extra battery modules. Over time, these batteries will become lighter, cheaper and better in performance. Alternatively, one could consider adding hydrogen tanks and a fuel cell.
Compare that to the maintenance required if these vehicles had internal combustion engines, with tanks holding fossil fuel, exhausts and pipes, gear boxes, start motors, altenators, catalytic converters, conventional batteries, while many parts require frequent changes, such as oils, lubes, spark plugs, filters, gaskets, hoses, belts and fans.
According to the Consumer Expenditure Survey, 2004, of the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics, cars constitute the second biggest share of average annual expenditure in the U.S., after housing.
As shown on the above graph, we spend more on vehicles (17%) than on food (13.2%), education (2.1%), reading (0.3%), public transport (1%) and medical supplies (0.3%) combined.
How much we spend on our vehicles is shown on the graph below.
Of this 17% expenditure on vehicles, purchase cost and finance charges make up 8.5%, while insurance, rental, leases, licenses and other charges add up to 3.2%.
The remaining 5.2% consists of gasoline and motor oil (3.7) and maintenance and repairs (1.5%). Note that the graphs are based on the Consumer Expenditure Survey, 2004, of the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics; the cost of gasoline, motor oil, maintenance and repairs is likely to have gone up since that time.
"How do you really know electric vehicles require less maintenance?"
These vehicles do not employ internal combustion engines which means they have about half as many moving parts as traditional delivery trucks. That on it's own leads to less maintenance. I posted an article on these vehicles just prior to this one being posted, available at, http://nuclearenergy.gather.com/
The manufacturer claims an operation cost of around 11 cents a mile compared to the traditional delivery truck operational cost of 45 cents a mile. A big incentive for businesses to save money in the longrun. close comment
Paul,
"How do you really know electric vehicles require less maintenance?"
These vehicles do not employ internal combustion engines which means they have about half as many moving . . . expand comment
Dan E., Dec 17, 2007, 8:44pm EST
All-electric vehicles will become the dominant means of travel and transport in flat, urban areas.
As the above graph shows, most trips are short, so batteries alone will suffice to power electric motors in vehicles making such trips. The above graph doesn't specifically relate to delivery vans and buses, but most of them stay in urban areas, so they could return to base for a battery swap.
I'm anxious to find out whether a battery swap will turn out to be more economic than hydrogen. I discussed the announcement of an electric car that also comes with a battery exchange service in my article Cheap Electric Cars. I suggest to let market mechanisms decide.
For long-distance travel, I believe that electric cars carrying hydrogen does seem the best alternative, and the same goes for intercity coaches and for long-distance transport by trucks. Hydrogen could be produced at service stations along highways, using on-site electrolyzers and electricity from on-site solar/wind facilities, complemented by off-peak grid electricity.
Many passenger cars will also incorporate hydrogen tanks and fuel cells, much like Honda's Clarity, which Honda announced on 14 November at the Los Angeles Auto Show. Honda is ready for production of this new fuel cell car:
http://world.honda.com/news/2007/4071114All-New-FCX
Honda also announced a new and more compact Home Home Energy Station, which connects to a home's existing natural gas supply for production of hydrogen, while also providing heat and electricity to an average-size home.
http://world.honda.com/FuelCell/HomeEnergyStation
As you know, Honda already had a station that produced hydrogen from solar power back in 2001.
http://world.honda.com/news/2001/c010710.html
Finally, I see a great future for personal aircraft, powered by electric motors and hydrogen, as described in my article Wild Green Yonder
~ A prayer is said for you and yours~
~May your New Year have much in stored~
~May all good Health surround you too~
~May all God's Blessing pour down on you!~
~AMEN~
BLESSED be all soldiers who stand at the front doors of injustice,
Who lay down their lives for freedoms never questioning the judgments!
For the Lord is with them as they uphold the Laws, in God's mighty kingdom their lives are not lost!
I think that the looming battle is between the plug in battery electric vehicle and the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. My guess is that the plug in wins that fight if they can create a practical battery, because the home electric grid already exists but the network of many thousands of hydrogen fueling stations does not exist. How many billions of dollars would it cost to build that network?
does that make sense to you?
Note that it's not a clear black and white race. You may buy an all-electric car, but - given the car has the space - you may decide to add hydrogen tanks & a fuel cell later. Alternatively, you may have bought a fuel cell car, in the expectation of traveling a lot, but it may turn out that you'll never use the hydrogen, as you will be able to freely recharge the battery from the solar panels where you work during the day. In the latter case, you are effectively using your fuel cell car like an all-electric car.
Anyway, the future is electric cars! If all 220 million US cars and light trucks magically turned electric overnight, 84% of them could be powered by the idle capacity that is already present in the existing electric power system, according to a study for the Department of Energy. Moreover, the batteries in these cars could store more than what they needed to drive the national average commute - about 33 miles round trip a day. More than a decade ago, a study at the University of Delaware already calculated that the U.S. passenger-vehicle fleet had a massive potential to deliver electricity during peak times, a potential estimated at ten times more than all the conventional electricity-generating equipment combined. The study therefore concluded that it made sense for battery-powered vehicles to be charged at night with more power than they needed during the day, in order to feed electricity from their batteries back into the grid at times of peak demand.
On paper, it should be equally cheap to recharge car batteries and to produce hydrogen using off-peak electricity. For long-distance travel and transport, though, hydrogen is more efficient, since the extra hydrogen & fuel cell weigh less than the extra extra battery module that needed to be taken on board to cover the same extra distance.
For gas stations, offering hydrogen means investing in hydrogen filling stations, compressed hydrogen storage facilities and electrolyzers. They should be able produce cheap hydrogen at night, using on-site electrolyzers and off-peak grid electricity that came from idle capacity. This off-peak capacity is expected to grow with a growing surplus capacity from wind farms at night. So, I believe gas stations will do their sums and gas stations along highways will be the first to start offering hydrogen at cheap prices. As more cars turn electric, gas station will want to make up for the reduced sales and one way to do this is by offering hydrogen.
The dark horse in the race is a battery swap service, as described in my article Cheap Electric Cars
Quite interesting, thanks! They are making progress and may well get to where electricity is viable for hauling freight. We're looking at trucks with ratings there of 56,000 lbs and up to do that, so it will be a while. I suspicion they will go to motors on multiple wheels to do that as well.