Fuel Savings from Roadbed Electrification Pays for the Power

[Bret Cahill]

Chump change these days. But that's not the issue; it is the profit
model that relies on proprietary design. Anyone can make wheelmotors
that will fit on any platform. Anyone can write control software.

-tg

   Really?  Then show us the ones you sell, and the source code for the
control software you wrote.

Not up on the concept of metaphor?  By 'anyone', I mean that people
who make electric motors can make electric motors to meet generic
specifications/standards, just like 'anyone' can make graphic cards
for computers even if they don't make motherboards or assembled
machines.

Think about the price of computers and their capabilities over the
last couple of decades, and apply the same model to autos. The problem
of battery cost goes away pretty quickly eh.

There's nothing like Moore's law in energy, or rather, we have the
inverse of Moore's Law.

Economics is the happy science.

Thermo is the dismal science.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

You could probably do something with induction coils.

Um, what? Do you have any clue what many-km-long
induction coils would cost? Or what you'd have to do
in order to get any useful amount of power into the
vehicle? Or what the loss to the coils would be?

We already know the efficiency of resonance induction: 75% (to
recharge a bus).

In your dreams.

If you are going to try to pretend you know something about technology
it would behoove you to at least google the terms before you post.

Some people get their education from sources other than Google.

Apparently your elementary school education didn't include the
efficiency of resonant induction.

This was covered in engineering classes over 30 years ago.

Then why didn't you cover the efficiency above?

There is no magic to resonant induction.

But there is an efficiency.

And you were too ignorant to know what it was.

The implementation costs would be astronomical,

Again, where does "astronomical" appear in a spreadsheet?

the losses are still
high,

Even 30% efficiency is cost competitive with batteries.

and the NIMBY's would be all over it.

Not everyone is ignorant of the safety of inductive power transfer


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

Why does the weight have to be unsprung?

Some want wheels to be as light as possible to improve performance
[reduce momentum and angular momentum], "mag" wheels, etc.

And what kind of roads are we
talking about?

In Germany you can cycle over a repaired pothole with 1" tires and not
feel a thing.

That's how VW could build that high tech clown car that gets 300 mpg.

People tend to raise this objection with no follow-through; if you are
a suspension engineer please elaborate.

Force = mass X acceleration

If you want the forces to be small and you have no control over the
acceleration then your only option is to reduce mass.

It is not my expertise but I
am pretty sure this is not a deal-breaker---

I agree. I only give a rat's behind about wheel weight when I'm
cycling. I have 2 tubular tire wheels that weigh a total of 3 lbs.

you can certainly decouple
some of the mass. And I thought we were over the fantasy of needing an
SUV to go 'off-road' into the mall parking lot?

The mall parking lot has potholes.

A few weeks ago Repugs were making it sound like filling potholes with
publicly funded "shovel ready" projects was communism.

The looneytarian mentality, along with the RRR has appeared only in
the past few decades, since the civil rights movement. Racists don't
want blacks to benefit equally with white.

Before the civil rights movement white America was much more
"collective" as blacks wouldn't get any public benefits anyway.


Bret Cahill

 

[krw]

On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 02:32:27 -0700 (PDT), tgdenning@earthlink.net
wrote:

On Jun 1, 8:22 pm, krw <k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 13:32:15 -0700 (PDT), tgdenn...@earthlink.net
wrote:



On Jun 1, 3:38 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
If the cost of a power plant is $4/watt then the cost of the power
plant/mile is $8 million.

In other words, the fuel savings from electrification would pay for
the capital cost of the power plants in 2 1/2 years.

What is the cost to run power conductors in the roads, and to re-work
all cars to be electric? I'm not saying it is a bad idea; had we gone
with electric cars from the beginning, this would be an excellent idea.
But it sounds like a lot of re-work and the analysis isn't complete.

It might work in a small community. Zermatt in Switzerland banned
internal combustion engine vehicles (except for some special vehicles
like fire engines) about 20 years ago, both to reduce air pollution
(important in this tourist town) and because of the very narrow streets.
Almost all vehicle trffic is electric, running off batteries. It would
be much greener to have no batteries at all and run everything directly
off the grid.

I once considered an electric car conversion, because electricity is
cheaper than gasoline. The batteries are the killer. Cost of batteries
per mile is about the same as gasoline per mile. That pushed the
advantage to the gasoline powered car.

If you could dispose of the batteries, it would be no contest: electric
cars would be the way to go.

I usually chime in on Bret's ramblings on this issue but why not try
with some new blood... If you build a car using wheelmotors, the
lifetime cost would probably be cheaper, including batteries.

There's a minor issue about sprung weight but in general, all the
significant waste of energy has been eliminated.

Tweaking 3% here and 2% there won't save the day when oil is going up
100% a year.

Sooner or later transportation will power off the grid, either with
some kind of energy storage or directly.

For some
reason, there is a fixation on the traditional drivetrain,

Retooling an auto line costs billions.

Chump change these days. But that's not the issue; it is the profit
model that relies on proprietary design. Anyone can make wheelmotors
that will fit on any platform. Anyone can write control software.

See: "unsprung weight"

Why does the weight have to be unsprung? And what kind of roads are we
talking about?

"Anyone can make _wheelmotors_" (emphasis on wheelmotors mine)

Wheel motors are, by their nature, unsprung weight.

People tend to raise this objection with no follow-through; if you are
a suspension engineer please elaborate. It is not my expertise but I
am pretty sure this is not a deal-breaker---you can certainly decouple
some of the mass. And I thought we were over the fantasy of needing an
SUV to go 'off-road' into the mall parking lot?

 

[krw]

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 20:15:06 GMT, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

In sci.physics Bret Cahill <BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

If you aren't in the public record, you haven't done anything.

Since your only public record appears to be lots of Internet babble,
I guess you haven't done anything.

Nah, he'll now show you that he's a legal assistant with a court case
under his belt. His "public record" crap is his MO. Ignore Cahill.
Everyone else, including his mommy, does.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

krw wrote:

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 20:15:06 GMT, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

In sci.physics Bret Cahill <BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

If you aren't in the public record, you haven't done anything.

Since your only public record appears to be lots of Internet babble,
I guess you haven't done anything.

Nah, he'll now show you that he's a legal assistant with a court case
under his belt. His "public record" crap is his MO. Ignore Cahill.
Everyone else, including his mommy, does.

He's the new 'Rodney Dangerfield'.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

 

In sci.physics Bret Cahill <BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

Using batteries is 3X more expensive than motoring directly off the
grid.

Unless you electrify every highway, road, alley, and driveway all
the way up to the parking spot, you need something other than the
"grid".

Don't be a "magic bullet" fundy.

Babble.

I was stating a very simple and very obvious fact.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

tgdenning@earthlink.net wrote:

On Jun 2, 2:34 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net
wrote:
tgdenn...@earthlink.net wrote:

On Jun 2, 12:23 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net
wrote:
tgdenn...@earthlink.net wrote:

Chump change these days. But that's not the issue; it is the profit
model that relies on proprietary design. Anyone can make wheelmotors
that will fit on any platform. Anyone can write control software.

-tg

Really? Then show us the ones you sell, and the source code for the
control software you wrote.

Not up on the concept of metaphor? By 'anyone', I mean that people
who make electric motors can make electric motors to meet generic
specifications/standards, just like 'anyone' can make graphic cards
for computers even if they don't make motherboards or assembled
machines.

Think about the price of computers and their capabilities over the
last couple of decades, and apply the same model to autos. The problem
of battery cost goes away pretty quickly eh.

In other words you don't know anything, but want people to think that
you do.


I know that people who know things aren't afraid to have concrete
technical discussions, and don't resort to personal insults. If you
or the other guy have something to contribute to the actual topic, why
don't you explain what is wrong with what I am saying.

YOU AREN'T SAYING ANYTHING! You are just claiming it can be done by
'ANYBODY" but you don't have a clue. If you want a real discussion post
links to the designs you want to discus, but that have to have real
numbers, not something you pull out of bret's ass. I know you can't do
this, so you'll continue with more ignorant hand waving, like that
inbred little idiot, cahil.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

 

[Bret Cahill]

Using batteries is 3X more expensive than motoring directly off the
grid.

Unless you electrify every highway, road, alley, and driveway all
the way up to the parking spot, you need something other than the
"grid".

Don't be a "magic bullet" fundy.

The goal isn't to eliminate 100% of all liquid fuel.

The goal isn't to eliminate all battery use.

The goal is to reduce battery cycling as much as possible and to
_drastically reduce_ consumption of liquid fuel.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

It's astounding -- and funny -- how often our dunces will shoot each
other in the foot:

If you aren't in the public record, you haven't done anything.

Since your only public record appears to be lots of Internet babble,
I guess you haven't done anything.

Nah, he'll now show you that he's a legal assistant with a court case
under his belt. �His "public record" crap is his MO. �Ignore Cahill.
Everyone else, including his mommy, does.

� �He's the new 'Rodney Dangerfield'.

Dangerfield is

1. in the public record.

2. wealthy.

Neither is true for our sci.electronics.basics dunce Terrel.

You can't have a sense of humor,

Speaking of humor, hows that defamation suit coming along?

You know . . . the one where I said your "computer repair" business
was as worthless as Al Gore in a dust devil and you got your panties
all wet.

if you have no sense!

You certainly have no sense if you keep coming back for more ridicule.

Everyone is laughing at you.


Bret Cahill

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

tgdenning@earthlink.net wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

YOU AREN'T SAYING ANYTHING! You are just claiming it can be done by
'ANYBODY" but you don't have a clue. If you want a real discussion post
links to the designs you want to discus,

'Design' of what?

Sigh. Do you always start arguments without any clues?

I have no clue what you are disagreeing with. Is it that there are
more manufacturers of electric motors than of automotive internal
combustion engines, and lower entry costs for getting into the
business? Is it that electric motors and controls are far more
interchangeable than ICE and transmissions?

really? They why are their thousands of different electric motors,
and only dozens of different types of internal combustion engine. You
can't just grab any electric motor and any controller and make it work.

I'm talking about a business model for the entire industry, not some
specific vehicle.

How can you do that without solid business model, which requires hard
numbers?

I know that one company has claimed to retrofit a Mini with wheelmotors,
and to have a viable control system, but the point is that there is no
magic in the technology; all the components are there already.

You've heard, but have no details? Big deal. I've heard that there
are honest politicians, but I'm not holding my breath till I find one.


If all the components are there, why isn't someone becoming filthy
rich building your wet dream on wheels?

Have you not heard of all-wheel-drive and fly-by-wire airplanes?

What do either have to do with idiot cahil's fantasy to electrify the
roadways? All wheel drive has nothing to do with electric powered
vehicles, and unless you plan to put wings on an electric car, fly by
wire has absolutely no connection to reality.


Aren't you late for your 'Tesla is god' fan club meeting?


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

tgdenning@earthlink.net wrote:

It isn't about Moore's Law. Imagine that we still had multiple
companies making proprietary computers with proprietary hardware and
operating systems. The arc of history would have been quite different.

So, you have no clue about how proprietary laptops, and and Sony
Vaio, shuttle and several other computers are, or the numerous operating
systems that Intel or AMD processors will run. No surprise, though.



--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

 

On Jun 2, 11:17 pm, krw <k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 02:32:27 -0700 (PDT), tgdenn...@earthlink.net
wrote:



On Jun 1, 8:22 pm, krw <k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 13:32:15 -0700 (PDT), tgdenn...@earthlink.net
wrote:

On Jun 1, 3:38 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
If the cost of a power plant is $4/watt then the cost of the power
plant/mile is $8 million.

In other words, the fuel savings from electrification would pay for
the capital cost of the power plants in 2 1/2 years.

What is the cost to run power conductors in the roads, and to re-work
all cars to be electric? I'm not saying it is a bad idea; had we gone
with electric cars from the beginning, this would be an excellent idea.
But it sounds like a lot of re-work and the analysis isn't complete.

It might work in a small community. Zermatt in Switzerland banned
internal combustion engine vehicles (except for some special vehicles
like fire engines) about 20 years ago, both to reduce air pollution
(important in this tourist town) and because of the very narrow streets.
Almost all vehicle trffic is electric, running off batteries. It would
be much greener to have no batteries at all and run everything directly
off the grid.

I once considered an electric car conversion, because electricity is
cheaper than gasoline. The batteries are the killer. Cost of batteries
per mile is about the same as gasoline per mile. That pushed the
advantage to the gasoline powered car.

If you could dispose of the batteries, it would be no contest: electric
cars would be the way to go.

I usually chime in on Bret's ramblings on this issue but why not try
with some new blood... If you build a car using wheelmotors, the
lifetime cost would probably be cheaper, including batteries.

There's a minor issue about sprung weight but in general, all the
significant waste of energy has been eliminated.

Tweaking 3% here and 2% there won't save the day when oil is going up
100% a year.

Sooner or later transportation will power off the grid, either with
some kind of energy storage or directly.

For some
reason, there is a fixation on the traditional drivetrain,

Retooling an auto line costs billions.

Chump change these days. But that's not the issue; it is the profit
model that relies on proprietary design. Anyone can make wheelmotors
that will fit on any platform. Anyone can write control software.

See: "unsprung weight"

Why does the weight have to be unsprung? And what kind of roads are we
talking about?

  "Anyone can make _wheelmotors_" (emphasis on wheelmotors mine)

Wheel motors are, by their nature, unsprung weight.

No. Four wheels driven by four independent motors. The coupling
between the motor and the wheel is not necessarily fixed and rigid,
and so the entire mass of the assembly is not necessarily unsprung.

-tg

People tend to raise this objection with no follow-through; if you are
a suspension engineer please elaborate. It is not my expertise but I
am pretty sure this is not a deal-breaker---you can certainly decouple
some of the mass. And I thought we were over the fantasy of needing an
SUV to go 'off-road' into the mall parking lot?

 

On Jun 3, 12:47 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

tgdenn...@earthlink.net wrote:

On Jun 2, 2:34 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net
wrote:
tgdenn...@earthlink.net wrote:

On Jun 2, 12:23 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net
wrote:
tgdenn...@earthlink.net wrote:

Chump change these days. But that's not the issue; it is the profit
model that relies on proprietary design. Anyone can make wheelmotors
that will fit on any platform. Anyone can write control software.

-tg

   Really?  Then show us the ones you sell, and the source code for the
control software you wrote.

Not up on the concept of metaphor?  By 'anyone', I mean that people
who make electric motors can make electric motors to meet generic
specifications/standards, just like 'anyone' can make graphic cards
for computers even if they don't make motherboards or assembled
machines.

Think about the price of computers and their capabilities over the
last couple of decades, and apply the same model to autos. The problem
of battery cost goes away pretty quickly eh.

   In other words you don't know anything, but want people to think that
you do.

I know that people who know things aren't afraid to have concrete
technical discussions, and don't resort to personal insults.  If you
or the other guy have something to contribute to the actual topic, why
don't you explain what is wrong with what I am saying.

   YOU AREN'T SAYING ANYTHING!  You are just claiming it can be done by
'ANYBODY" but you don't have a clue.  If you want a real discussion post
links to the designs you want to discus,

'Design' of what?

I have no clue what you are disagreeing with. Is it that there are
more manufacturers of electric motors than of automotive internal
combustion engines, and lower entry costs for getting into the
business? Is it that electric motors and controls are far more
interchangeable than ICE and transmissions?

I'm talking about a business model for the entire industry, not some
specific vehicle. I know that one company has claimed to retrofit a
Mini with wheelmotors, and to have a viable control system, but the
point is that there is no magic in the technology; all the components
are there already. Have you not heard of all-wheel-drive and fly-by-
wire airplanes?

-tg

but that  have to have real
numbers, not something you pull out of bret's ass.  I know you can't do
this, so you'll continue with more ignorant hand waving, like that
inbred little idiot, cahil.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

 

On Jun 2, 4:56 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:

Chump change these days. But that's not the issue; it is the profit
model that relies on proprietary design. Anyone can make wheelmotors
that will fit on any platform. Anyone can write control software.

-tg

   Really?  Then show us the ones you sell, and the source code for the
control software you wrote.

Not up on the concept of metaphor?  By 'anyone', I mean that people
who make electric motors can make electric motors to meet generic
specifications/standards, just like 'anyone' can make graphic cards
for computers even if they don't make motherboards or assembled
machines.

Think about the price of computers and their capabilities over the
last couple of decades, and apply the same model to autos. The problem
of battery cost goes away pretty quickly eh.

There's nothing like Moore's law in energy, or rather, we have the
inverse of Moore's Law.

It isn't about Moore's Law. Imagine that we still had multiple
companies making proprietary computers with proprietary hardware and
operating systems. The arc of history would have been quite different.

-tg

Economics is the happy science.

Thermo is the dismal science.

Bret Cahill

 

On Jun 3, 7:01 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

tgdenn...@earthlink.net wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

   YOU AREN'T SAYING ANYTHING!  You are just claiming it can be done by
'ANYBODY" but you don't have a clue.  If you want a real discussion post
links to the designs you want to discus,

'Design' of what?

   Sigh.  Do you always start arguments without any clues?

 I have no clue what you are disagreeing with. Is it that there are
more manufacturers of electric motors than of automotive internal
combustion engines, and lower entry costs for getting into the
business?  Is it that electric motors and controls are far more
interchangeable than ICE and transmissions?

   really?  They why are their thousands of different electric motors,
and only dozens of different types of internal combustion engine.  You
can't just grab any electric motor and any controller and make it work.

I'm talking about a business model for the entire industry, not some
specific vehicle.

   How can you do that without solid business model, which requires hard
numbers?

I know that one company has claimed to retrofit a Mini with wheelmotors,
and to have a viable control system, but the point is that there is no
magic in the technology; all the components are there already.

   You've heard, but have no details?  Big deal.  I've heard that there
are honest politicians, but I'm not holding my breath till I find one.

   If all the components are there, why isn't someone becoming filthy
rich building your wet dream on wheels?

Because gas is still cheap? Because it isn't in the economic interest
of existing car companies to become commodity manufacturers? What a
silly question.

Have you not heard of all-wheel-drive and fly-by-wire airplanes?

   What do either have to do with idiot cahil's fantasy to electrify the
roadways?  All wheel drive has nothing to do with electric powered
vehicles,

Ah, I see why you avoid specifics as long as possible---you don't know
what you are talking about. All wheel drive has everything to do with
electric vehicles, since it is one of the major advantages of the
wheelmotor configuration.

and unless you plan to put wings on an electric car, fly by
wire has absolutely no connection to reality.

Yes, I think maybe Bret is right that you don't have sufficient
background to discuss these things---you apparently don't know what
fly-by-wire means either.

-tg

   Aren't you late for your 'Tesla is god' fan club meeting?

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

 

In sci.physics Bret Cahill <BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

Using batteries is 3X more expensive than motoring directly
off the
grid.

Unless you electrify every highway, road, alley, and driveway all
the way up to the parking spot, you need something other than the
"grid".

Don't be a "magic bullet" fundy.

Babble.

I was stating a very simple and very obvious fact.

What makes you think I was talking to you?

By the headers and the threading; do you not know how to use a news
reader?

<snip rambling nonsense>


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

 

In sci.physics Bret Cahill <BretCahill@peoplepc.com> wrote:

You could probably do something with induction coils.

Um, what? Do you have any clue what many-km-long
induction coils would cost? Or what you'd have to do
in order to get any useful amount of power into the
vehicle? Or what the loss to the coils would be?

We already know the efficiency of resonance induction: 75% (to
recharge a bus).

75% at less than a 100 W load

A 100 W bus?

Do you even think about what you are typing?

Yes, the conditions under which your "We already know" refernce achieved
75% efficiency.

a few feet away

Four _inches_ away.

Nope, Intel got a couple of feet.

with non-moving coils.

Can you think of any problems designing a moving version? You think
the coils would have to move?

If you mount a coil on a vehicle and the vehicle moves, the coil moves.

That should be obvious.

<snip long-winded, rambling nonsense>

Read about a real inductivly powered project here:

http://www.path.berkeley.edu/PATH/Publications/PDF/PRR/94/PRR-94-07.pdf


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

 

[Bret Cahill]

Using batteries is 3X more expensive than motoring directly
off the
grid.

Unless you electrify every highway, road, alley, and driveway all
the way up to the parking spot, you need something other than the
"grid".

Don't be a "magic bullet" fundy.

Babble.

I was stating a very simple and very obvious fact.

What makes you think I was talking to you?

No one will deny that one technology will often dominate or completely
eliminate everything else in an application or field, as ICE has land
sea and air transportation. If nothing else can compete then nothing
else can compete and unless you just want gratuitous technology
there's no reason to promote a "mix" -- the word DoE uses for the
growing diversity of energy solutions.

But no one will deny there are far too many people waiting for a super
battery or a super algae breakthrough.

Too many want to replace oil BTU for BTU.

Energy _solutions_ generaly aren't going to work like that.

The average farm -- what am I saying? -- the typical household is run
with more sophistication than that.

All the problems with roadbed electrification are so mundane-
pedestrian that no brilliant engineering breakthroughs are necessary.

The solutions may be clever but they will not appear in _Nature
Physics_.

When someone appears at the construction site he'll ask, "what's that
thing for?" and the answer will be something like, "well this was
grandfathered in in Phoenix and they didn't need blah blah or they
wanted to compromise with the European version so both systems could
be compatible blah blah blah, and once the pickup coil technology was
developed is was cheaper to change the Ways and Means Chairman felt
like he needed to run I-40 through every congressional district in
Texas . . ."


Bret Cahill


"Those who have am implicit faith in transportation solutions and
sausages should not watch them being made."

-- Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

� �YOU AREN'T SAYING ANYTHING! �You are just claiming it can be done by
'ANYBODY" but you don't have a clue. �If you want a real discussion post
links to the designs you want to discus,

'Design' of what?

� �Sigh. �Do you always start arguments without any clues?

�I have no clue what you are disagreeing with. Is it that there are
more manufacturers of electric motors than of automotive internal
combustion engines, and lower entry costs for getting into the
business? �Is it that electric motors and controls are far more
interchangeable than ICE and transmissions?

� �really? �They why are their thousands of different electric motors,
and only dozens of different types of internal combustion engine. �You
can't just grab any electric motor and any controller and make it work.

I'm talking about a business model for the entire industry, not some
specific vehicle.

� �How can you do that without solid business model, which requires hard
numbers?

I know that one company has claimed to retrofit a Mini with wheelmotors,
and to have a viable control system, but the point is that there is no
magic in the technology; all the components are there already.

� �You've heard, but have no details? �Big deal.. �I've heard that there
are honest politicians, but I'm not holding my breath till I find one.

� �If all the components are there, why isn't someone becoming filthy
rich building your wet dream on wheels?

Because gas is still cheap? ďż˝

No, because batteries are still expensive.

TN Val Auth will sell locals 6 GW for 70 cents/gal equivalent if they
charge up at night.

Replacing the battery will, however, costs 3X more than the
electricity so you'll be paying $2.70/gal equiv.

That's the _big_ cost. The battery.

It cannot be eliminated but we can reduce it greatly with
electrification.

Because it isn't in the economic interest
of existing car companies to become commodity manufacturers? ďż˝

Because there is no infrastructure to cheaply provide electricity to
the motor.

Any street mohead can drop an electric motor into a conventional drive
train chasis and drive for 70 cents/gal equiv in the TVA area _if_ he
could get grid electricity to the wheels.

People generally prefer tippy toe changes. Look at the Model T body.
It really does look like a horse drawn carriage. There was no reason
to make it look like a horse drawn carriage other than Ford was
focused on getting something out the door. Ford got the first thing
he could find with wheels on it and put a motor in it.

Many want to replace gas stations with battery charging stations.
Instead of fueling up you swap out the battery. No one needs to
drastically change his habits or thinking.

It's a tippy toe change.

Sometimes the tippy toe change ain't the way to go.

Taking off in a plane for example. You aren't going to tippy toe off
the runway.

What a
silly question.

Have you not heard of all-wheel-drive and fly-by-wire airplanes?

� �What do either have to do with idiot cahil's fantasy to electrify the
roadways? �All wheel drive has nothing to do with electric powered
vehicles,

Ah, I see why you avoid specifics as long as possible---you don't know
what you are talking about. ďż˝

He has nothing to contribute and feels left out.

All wheel drive has everything to do with
electric vehicles, since it is one of the major advantages of the
wheelmotor configuration.

The real problem is getting grid electricity to the four motors or two
motors or one motor.

Having four electric motors in the wheels or tires will still cost 70
cents/gal equiv.

and unless you plan to put wings on an electric car, fly by
wire has absolutely no connection to reality.

Yes, I think maybe Bret is right that you don't have sufficient
background to discuss these things---you apparently don't know what
fly-by-wire means either.

Any engineer or physicist can ask him a few questions where the answer
requires some actual numbers or equations or insights and he's lost.

That's how anyone can tell he ain't no EE.


Bret Cahill