« Monsanto and Mendel BioTechnology to Collaborate on Seeds for Biofuel Crops | Main | ZF to Supply Six-Speed Transmission for New Nissan LCV in North America »
Study: Steam Hybrids Using Waste Heat Recovery Could Reduce Fuel Consumption Up To 31.7%
28 April 2008
 |
| Results of the study indicate that a steam hybrid using exhaust waste heat could reduce fuel consumption by up to 31.7%, depending upon drive cycle and vehicle. |
A study by researchers at Loughborough University and the University of Sussex, both in the UK, has concluded that using waste heat from light-duty vehicle engines in a steam power cycle could deliver fuel economy advantages of between 6.3% and 31.7%, depending upon drive cycle, and that high efficiencies can be achieved at practical operating pressures.
The basic concept of the “steam hybrid” system is that energy is recovered from the exhaust in the form of a steam/water mixture. Shaft work is produced as steam is expanded, and is used in one of three ways:
To add torque to the internal combustion engine (ICE) output, thereby reducing fuel consumption and emissions; or
To drive an auxiliary power unit (APU) if the energy is not required by the vehicle (e.g., during braking or idling). Excess energy can be used to generate electricity and charge an electric storage system; or
To provide all the required torque to the drive shaft resulting in zero-emissions driving in inner-city areas.
The study, which is part of a larger investigation of the controllability of energy recovery, modeled a steam hybrid vehicle using two toolboxes: the Quasi-Static Simulation Toolbox (QSS-TB), developed at ETH Zürich, and the Powertrain System Analysis Toolbox (PSAT), developed by Argonne National Laboratory.
For a base vehicle in QSS-TB, the researchers used a VW Golf with a 1.6 liter engine; for PSAT, they used a Honda Civic with a 1.8 liter engine. Both vehicle models were run against the New European Drive Cycle (NEDC); the US FTP-75 Urban Drive Cycle; and the US06 Highway Drive Cycle
Results showed an improvement for both vehicle across all three drive cycles, with the greatest gain in the FTP-75 cycle, and the least with the aggressive US06 cycle.
Subsequent work for the research will include optimized controls for different style of driving, and further work on optimizing the heat exchanger. The design of the heat exchanger will be evaluated in an experimental set-up in which the exhaust gas is generated by a 7.2-liter Caterpillar engine.
In further developing the control architecture, the researchers are using four objectives:
Power/torque. The power or torque demanded from the vehicle driver needs to be met by the ICE, the steam expander, or a combination of the two.
Fuel consumption. Fuel consumption needs to be kept at a minimum.
Steam supply/reserve. The supply of water to the heat exchanger needs to be kept constant to ensure there is a constant steam supply, or at least a reserve of steam for the expander.
Steam quality. The steam supplied to the expander is required to be superheated so that it contains no water droplets which could be potentially damaging to the expander. This will be achieved by raising the temperature of the cold side fluid beyond saturation and ensuring it is superheated at entry to the expander.
The work is supported by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.
BMW and Honda are both investigating the use of waste-heat powered steam systems to enhance fuel economy. BMW’s onboard water/steam-based cogeneration cycle is used to power the vehicle’s accessories, rather than a traction battery pack (earlier post).
Honda is actively exploring the use of a Rankine cycle co-generation unit to improve the overall efficiency of a hybrid vehicle by recapturing waste exhaust heat from the internal combustion engine and converting it to electricity to recharge the battery pack. (Earlier post.)
Canada-based Clean Power Technologies Inc. (CPTI) is developing a waste-heat powered steam hybrid system—CESAR, Clean Energy Storage and Recovery)—that it claims has shown an up to 40% reduction in vehicle fuel consumption in initial test results. The system is under development by a wholly-owned CPTI subsidiary, Clean Power Technologies Ltd. (CPTL), which is located in East Sussex, UK. The Clean Power Technologies system was developed by Fred Bayley, Professor Emeritus of the University of Sussex.
CESAR uses a heat exchanger to capture waste energy, which is then stored in the form of steam in an accumulator, for on-demand use either in the same primary engine, or in a secondary vapor engine. Power can be produced solely by the secondary vapor engine even after the primary combustion engine has shut down.
The test program using the system included a generic model of an accumulator, supplied by Clean Power’s collaborative partner Doosan Babcock (previously Mitsui Babcock). The CESAR system has been running in parallel with a Caterpillar C18 diesel engine within Clean Power’s test facility in Newhaven, East Sussex since mid-October 2007. Clean Power is now re-designing the second generation of the steam accumulator which will be lighter and more efficient.
In March, CPTI contracted with steam technology specialist Dampflokomotiv-und Maschinenfabrik DLM AG (DLM) to act as a consultant for the further development of the CESAR technology. DLM, a specialist in the development of modern steam traction systems, will provide consultancy, design engineering and stress test related services.
CPTI has entered into a first stage collaboration agreement with Safeway Corporation for the purpose of data collection and to undertake preliminary design work for the steam refrigeration units for the grocery trucks. CPTI has also entered into a collaboration agreement with Voith Turbo Gmbh & Co. KG of Germany to jointly develop a reefer engine.
Resources
Sandra Hounsham, Richard Stobart, Adam Cooke and Peter Childs (2008) Energy Recovery Systems for Engines (SAE 2008-01-0309)
M. Kadota and K. Yamamoto (2008) Advanced Transient Simulation on Hybrid Vehicle Using Rankine Cycle System (SAE 2008-01-0310)
April 28, 2008 in Fuel Efficiency, Hybrids, Waste Heat Recovery | Permalink | Comments (43) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22062/28569294
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Study: Steam Hybrids Using Waste Heat Recovery Could Reduce Fuel Consumption Up To 31.7%:
Comments
Why not forget about the ICE and go steam-only?
Posted by: Anne | Apr 28, 2008 10:02:40 AM
If some poeple worry about exploding batteries, how safe is a steam accumulator?
Posted by: Tonychill | Apr 28, 2008 10:12:19 AM
How often would water need to be added to this sort of system to keep it operating?
Posted by: mulad | Apr 28, 2008 10:52:32 AM
This is basically cogeneration. It works well in natural gas power plants where total system efficiency is very high. You would think that with the range of materials and machine tools we have, we could create a low-cost system to recover heat energy and store it as as electricity for PHEVs. Then, instead of a 15% fuel efficiency gain for in pure HEV-mode, we might see a 40-45% gain...which would get even better when plugging in to recharge as needed.
Posted by: Healthy Breaze | Apr 28, 2008 11:00:26 AM
1 litre of water = 1 kg of water = 2.2 pounds ~= 1700 litres of water vapour at atmospheric pressure.
That and if intelligently designed will have a condenser to change the vapour back to a liquid state to reduce the need to keep recharging it.
This isn't a steam engine. It's an energy recovery system that uses water/steam.
Posted by: aym | Apr 28, 2008 11:06:44 AM
This is what I had been taling about years before the turbosteamer announcement. Some day we might be able to use solid state heat to electric elements, but for now it is hard to beat this. BMW claims 15 hp just from an expander.
One of the big hurdles is the condenser. One of the engine companies uses a smaller centrifugal condenser and there are other methods. I think this could be really big in delivery and long haul trucks. Imagine how much waste heat that there is from a large turbo diesel engine.
As far as just using steam, Carnot pretty much has defined the efficiency there. But I have posted a link for a company that has made a brayton/rankine machine that is suppose to get 40% efficiency. Series hybrids can open the way for lots of innovation there.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 28, 2008 11:10:01 AM
Why add new hardware? I think Bruce Crower and his 6 Stroke engine are a good option. This is a low cost, simple and efficient way of capuring waste heat. I think this one has merit. Inject water to make a steam stroke in the same cylinder after the exhaust stroke. This captures the waste heat to create cylinder pressure and gets rid of the radiator at the same time for thermal and aerodynamic gains. Internal combustion engine and waste heat powered steam engine in one package.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam-O-Lene
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060227/FREE/302270007/1023/THISWEEKSISSUE
http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2007-05/invention-awards-six-strokes-genius
Posted by: Andy | Apr 28, 2008 11:34:59 AM
It looks interesting, but the oil water situation is a problem. If the combustion chamber is 400f the exhaust gases are higher, maybe closer to 800f. As we know, the higher the difference between cold and hot side can make for higher efficiencies.
If you look at BMW's thermal images, you see that the exhaust headers and turbo are where the high temperatures are. If you can preheat the fluid with the cooling system, the oil system, the header heat and the turbo heat, you could really get it up there.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 28, 2008 12:35:06 PM
Cyclone Power's WHE is being considered for powering big truck hotel loads. But then again, why not go steam all the way.
http://www.cyclonepower.com
Posted by: s dogood | Apr 28, 2008 12:37:33 PM
For an electric hybrid it might be wiser to combine high z thermocouples to charge the battery and run the electric motor off of the hot exhaust gas from the engine, this might be simpler then trying to fit a rankine cycle into the car and sacrificing the advantages of an electric hybrid (stop-start, braking regeneratio) to make space.
Posted by: Ben | Apr 28, 2008 1:46:07 PM
A neat approach to further increase the overall efficiency of hybrids such as the Prius, specially on long trips, where the Prius efficiency needs to be improved. The Volts could also benefit by with free battery (partial) recharge, specially on highways where it is realy needed.
Large long distance trucks could save a bundle in fuel each day.
Could turbo-prop airplanes use a similar approach (if not already done) to further increase their efficiency and reduce fuel consumption. Extra tons of fuel in the air is very expensive these days.
Posted by: Harvey D | Apr 28, 2008 1:51:22 PM
You could do both turbo alternator and steam turbine on a hybrid and really get some performance and mileage.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 28, 2008 2:44:13 PM
That might sound ridiculous but...
So they used steam engine as a heat recovery...how the piston steam engine work .. well on one approach it used series of extenders, usually up to 2-4 pistons with progressively bigger diameter). The working fluid temperature and pressure decrees so in order to capture most of the energy from presure bigger piston diameter have to be used.
So why not add additional pistol to each cylinder that will act as a expander only.
The exhaust will act as working fluid.
By the way returning to moder steam engine with 35-40% efficiency (Cyclone Power) will not be bad idea at all.
Steam engine toque and power characteristics are much more suitable for modern car then ICE. You probably will get at list 34 time more millage then ICE.
Posted by: mki | Apr 28, 2008 4:35:32 PM
I don't get the ICE/steam hybrid idea. With electric hybrid, you have the advantages of the electric motor and make up for the battery problems with the ICE.
But with steam you have some of those same advantages as electric (high torque, low pollution) but no big expensive battery. Not only can you use a liquid fuel (high energy density, quick re-fill) but you can burn any compatible fuel. So now you have the ultimate flex fuel vehicle that can burn the cheapest liquid fuel available.
We need to seriously consider a 21st century steam engine.
Posted by: Dennis Moore | Apr 28, 2008 7:41:40 PM
@Anne, dogood;
The efficiency of a stand-alone Rankine cycle is poor by comparison to, say, a decent modern diesel engine. This is one of many reasons why steam-only is not a good plan (and why they disappeared from the automotive scene decades ago and have never come back). The maximum theoretical efficiency of a Rankine cycle can be calculated using charts in any common thermodynamics text. Hint; it's rather dismal. (@mki - 35% efficiency of a Rankine cycle is a pipe dream unless multiple stages of expansion, reheat, and feedwater preheat are used - but that's only practical on a utility-power-generation scale.) But if you are using it to do something with heat that you would otherwise be throwing away, that's where the attraction is.
@Tonychill and mulad,
A Rankine cycle of this type would most likely use a boiler with very small and thin-wall pipes with the working fluid inside the pipes (opposite of an old steam locomotive), to keep the "thermal inertia" low, and to maximize surface area for heat transfer relative to the amount of steel used to construct the boiler. An additional benefit is that the amount of fluid contained in the boiler becomes very small - so little that it is scarcely an explosion hazard. Also, note that I have been saying "fluid". Water is not a particularly good choice, in an engine that has to survive use in a below-freezing environment - most likely the working fluid would be something other than water. And that, in turn, means the working cycle (boiler, expander, condenser, feed pump) has to be hermetically sealed - like your average refrigerator. No fluid fill-ups needed.
Posted by: Brian P | Apr 28, 2008 7:41:45 PM
Using a waste heat vapor turbine to drive an alternator to charge batteries and run the motor is a good way to go. The slides I have seen call it electric turbo compounding. Now get a turbo to drive an alternator too and you get more power to drive the motor and charge the batteries in addition to the waste heat vapor turbine. This would allow motor/engine hybrids to get better mileage on the highway as well as around town. The Clean Power people are using waste heat vapor turbines on large trucks, which is where I think the big gains can be made.
http://www.cleanpowertech.co.uk/
Posted by: SJC | Apr 28, 2008 8:38:00 PM
SJC - got a better link?
Posted by: | Apr 28, 2008 11:55:15 PM
I think Brian makes a good point. Of course a diesel could be used in a serial hybrid configuration as well. An advantage of an external combustion engine is that it can run on diesel, gasoline, or any high energy fuel. Kind of went off on a tangent with the steam only discussion. Good to see that companies are focusing on capturing previously untapped energy losses.
Posted by: s dogood | Apr 29, 2008 7:23:09 AM
A better link? That is the link for the company sited here. What are you referring to?
Posted by: SJC | Apr 29, 2008 8:29:12 AM
Brian
The efficiency of a steam engine can be better than your 35% statement using flash steam with super critical water heated above 550C and recovery of wasted heat. I think Cyclone Power Technology has proposed an elegant approach to acheive that. Also as you can get rid of the transmission and gera box you save weight and friction making the overall efficiency better and for an engine that could be extremely clean without requiring a catalyst or after treatment exhaust.
The recovery of waste heat on an ICE is not a good idea, since it will result on a complex and heavy machinery on an already complex engine. On top of this the waste heat on a IC is scattered bewteen exhaust and liquid coolant making recovery difficult and inefficient, last but not least a steam engine need a stable high temperature heat source, the exhaust of an ICE sees strong temperature variation depending on laod then making the whole thing inefficient.
I agree if you think about steam then go steam for the whole thing since there is other way to improve efficiency of ICE, like Atkinson, Diesel Otto, Scuderi cycle, Variable compression engine, HCCI engine etc..
Posted by: treehugger | Apr 29, 2008 8:36:03 AM
There's a limit to how much exhaust waste heat can be used. For one thing, all exhaust gas aftertreatment systems only work above a certain light-off temperature. For another, the waste heat from a secondary steam cycle must be shed through a radiator, possibly creating a major packaging headache.
A better option is to simply apply turbocharging to a large number of engines - with high unit volume, even modest improvements add up to major gains. Variations include turbine gensets such as TIGERS or turbos with integrated motor/generator such as proposed by Honeywell for commercial vehicles.
Note that VTG turbines made from affordable materials can be applied to spark ignition engines if 20-30% low pressure EGR is applied (cp. Ricardo EGR-boost)
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | Apr 29, 2008 8:45:55 AM
You can find more information on Electric Turbo Compounding by going to Google and entering "Electric Turbo Compounding" among the links there you will find:
gate.its.ucdavis.edu/research/documents/papres07/shabashevich07a
It will download a PDF slide set. On slide 8 they refer to it. John Deere has a patent on this issued in 2007.
www.freepatentsonline.com/y2007/0234721.html
Posted by: SJC | Apr 29, 2008 8:53:22 AM
"The recovery of waste heat on an ICE is not a good idea, since it will result on a complex and heavy machinery on an already complex engine."
I do not agree with this assessment when it comes to large trucks. The truck is already very expensive and with $4+ fuel, the cost of operating it is getting higher.
I do not know what mileage 18 wheelers get, but we were talking about city buses and 3 mpg. I big rig with all the weight and lack of aerodynamics might get about that on the open highway at 60 mph. Filling 220 gallon tanks could cost $1000 and be used up in one day on a long haul trip.
So, even a 10% improvement in mileage could save the operator $10,000 to $20,000 per year on fuel. Obviously you go for the lowest cost best return improvements, but when so much goes out as waste heat, it might be worthwhile to recover some of it.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 29, 2008 9:23:36 AM
I remember reading on this site how Mercedes engineers put a little steam engine on one of their test cars that ran on waste heat. It was a closed system so the water never needed to be refilled (as it was recycled.) The improved fuel economy was significant but Mercedes decided not to bring it to market; I can't remember why.
Posted by: Mick | Apr 29, 2008 10:12:46 AM
BMW has the turbosteamer on a 1.8l I4 engine. The cost and complexity is a problem, but with big rig tractors and huge expensive turbo diesel engines, it might be real cost effective.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 29, 2008 10:20:59 AM
This is something new? At the Henry Ford Museum is a hybrid gas/steam electric power plant that was used at the River Rouge factory. Since the efficiency of a gasoline engine in the early 20th century was so low this system doubled the amount of kwh per gallon of fuel.
There was also a prototype steam car in the early 1920s that used a two stroke engine as the burner and to power the electrical system. Not only was waste heat from the 2-stroke used but the exhaust gases were burned in the boiler.
Posted by: tom deplume | Apr 29, 2008 11:54:13 AM
I do not think it is new. What is new is the application viability in view of increasing fuel prices. Just like tar sands, it was not worth doing before. You have to wonder how much energy has been wasted because "it was just not worth doing".
Posted by: SJC | Apr 29, 2008 12:01:15 PM
People are looking at this as a way to put lost energy to work but as it stands it's not the best way. The best way is not to waste it in the first place.
I could see this as a good idea if it was an 'after-market-add-on,' something you could fit to all the IC engines that are already out there, but this looks like something you need to "add-on" at the car's design stage. As such it's just another way for the 'Powers-That-Be' to prolong the status quo.
If you're going to go for efficient use of energy at the design stage you should design an EV not an ICE with even more high tech junk on it.
Posted by: ai_vin | Apr 29, 2008 11:57:32 PM
PS I mean just look at the numbers - a steam hybrid improves your car's efficiency by 40%. That sounds like a lot but an EV is already 300% more efficient.
Posted by: ai_vin | Apr 30, 2008 12:07:10 AM
There is a phrase that goes something like "do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good". The idea is that there are 140 million ICE vehicles out there. HEVs are less than 3% of sales. Even IF that increases to 10% of sales, 9 out of 10 of the new vehicles sold will still be ICE vehicles.
I hear people say that we SHOULD do this and we should do that. Should is a philosophic word that lives in a hypothetical perfect world. There is nothing wrong with keeping the perfect in mind as a goal, but realism plays a part as well and it is not "giving in" to less than what we should achieve. If you wait for the perfect world, then a lot of good does not happen and that is decidedly NOT perfect.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 30, 2008 7:19:52 AM
Nobobody has mentioned the Stirling engine. Can't one of these very simple engines be bolted onto an exhaust manifold. Watever happened to the TIGER system mentioned on this site a few years back?
If this system is at all viable it should be retrofited on diesel locomotives (preferably biodiesel or NG powered) where it would yield the "biggest bang for the and then buck" first before trucks and buses and then autos.
Posted by: ken | Apr 30, 2008 7:44:58 AM
The TIGER system is advancing, there was an announcement just the other day on it here. Stirling engines can be good, but to be efficient they need a large delta T between the hot and cold sides. The manufacturing tolerances are pretty tight because the working gas in high performance models is sometimes helium, but CO2 might work in this case.
I think it is a matter of cost and efficiency. Stirling engines can be used in reverse for cooling as well. Just oscillate them and one side gets cool and the other side hot. They are working on those to replace ACs. Again, they cost more than AC compressors and the AC compressor business makes millions of units.
As the AC compressor comes off the belt and is motor driven, we may see a push to make them Stirling engines. If you think how inefficient an AC compressor is you see why. It runs on the belt most of the time clutched out and you use it a few hours now and then. Just being on the belt free wheeling causes energy loses.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 30, 2008 11:34:09 AM
@SJC
I thought the problem with stirling engines is their low specific power? Also, in order to achieve a large deltaT, a large heat exchanger would have to be used which would have an aerodynamic impact. Same problem with organic rankine cycle I guess.... the only solution I've seen is the centrifugal condenser used by Cyclone Power Tech.
How about this:
Say you have a decent size I4, 1.8L, that is transversely mounted (quite a few of those). The engine block would be made of aluminum and it would be made such that three additional cylinders could be positioned on the firewall side. These would be heat recovery cylinders. An overview would look like this-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
The exhaust manifold would pass over and then through the engine block again on the backside of the three heat recovery pistons so that the overview would look like this-
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
This would allow a great deal of contact between the heat recovery cylinders and the exhaust gases. The heat recovery cylinders would be filled with water and would act as a self contained fully condensing steam engine.
TE might only be on the order of 10%, but it would be cheap and provide more than enough power for accessories and possibly trickle charge the battery of an HEV.
Posted by: GreenPlease | Apr 30, 2008 5:43:50 PM
There are concentrated solar thermal stirlings the size of a break box that turn out 25 kw, but they cost a fortune and take 1000f to operate. They have used them in space probes because the cold side can be space. The condenser for rankine cycle is not much of a problem. It is a matter of how much rejected heat and air flow.
Interesting idea there, I am assuming that the 3 cylinders are stirling cycle?
One interesting aspect of the stirling cycle is that it took them more than 100 years to begin to figure out how it actually works. The whole regenerator apparatus between the sides was a mystery. They understand more and have modeled it, but it remains an example of what works, works.
Posted by: SJC | Apr 30, 2008 7:39:39 PM
@sjc
There are of course losses attributable to A/C compressors, however, the refrigerant loop typically provides for more than unity efficiency.
With a sample scroll-type compressor that is electric motor driven, one can input, for instance, 4kW of electric energy and transfer 6~8kW+ of heat out of the vehicle cabin. (This doesn't break any thermodynamic laws, entropy is always increasing...)
I am ignorant of the efficiency of the Stirling engine as a heat transfer mechanism. Is it above unity?
Posted by: John | May 2, 2008 9:28:37 AM
The combination internal combustion engine and steam engine was called a Still engine and was used in stationary engines and ships. Modern large containerships sometimes use exhaust heat from piston engines to run steam-turbo-generators for electricity. The Kitson-Still, a diesel-steam, locomotive was tested in England for several years and saved much fuel per work done. England had no oil, but if Southern Pacific Railways in the US had made them at the same time they would still be used. The Kitson-Still died in the economic collapse of the 1930s. Steam started both the train and the diesel engine until the diesel put out enough power. A modern version would outperform all diesel electric locomotives in economy and operating costs. No clutch, gear shifting, or starting motors are needed...HG....
Posted by: Henry Gibson | May 3, 2008 1:08:02 AM
Ah yes, the Still engine -
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/POWER/still/still.htm
Posted by: ai_vin | May 3, 2008 9:31:05 AM
I do not think so, but I have not looked that closely. I just noticed that they said that stirling cryos could be used for cooling, but that is mainly for making gases into liquids. It could have just been Powerpoint hype. There is a lot of that out there. BLDC motors driving compressors is fine with me. Just get the stuff off the figgin' belt and save fuel.
Posted by: SJC | May 5, 2008 8:05:40 AM
Here is some info on Stirling heat pumps:
"Heat-pumps are by far the most energy-efficient types of heating systems. Stirling heat-pumps also often have a higher coefficient of performance than conventional heat-pumps."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine#Disadvantages_of_Stirling_engines
This does not address their COP as an AC, but thought I would post it anyway.
Posted by: SJC | May 5, 2008 5:29:42 PM
SJC:
About trying to reach perfection, isn't that what ICE people have been doing, for the last few years, to extend the useful life span of a dying technology or to delay the arrival of the replacement technology, i.e. electrified vehicles.
It is fair game to defend dying species. We still have a few horses, but they are no longer used to lug us around. ICE vehicles will soon be museum pieces. Fortunately, we can recycle most of the 800 to 1000 million units to be retired.
Let's face it, vehicle electrification is the way to go for increased efficency (up to 3x), reduced fossil or agro liquid fuel consumption, reduced noise, reduced maintenance, reduced complexity, less GHG and eventually, reduced cost.
I don't know what we will do with existing IC Engines and automatic transmission factories. Would they qualify to be recycled into highly automated battery and electric motor factories?
Posted by: Harvey D | May 5, 2008 5:47:59 PM
I look at one therm of natural gas. You can use it to make electricity at 30%-60% efficiency, depending on gas turbine to combined cycle plants, so let's as 40%.
Now you take the 40% and transmit it at 4-10% losses so let's say you are now at 35%. Now you put it through a charger and into batteries at another 10% loss, which brings you down to 32%. Now you put it through batteries that have 10% loss round trip, that puts you at 30%. Now you put it through a controller at another 10% loss and a motor at 10% loss, that puts you at 24% pipe to wheels.
Now take that same therm and put it in an NG hybrid. You can get about the same efficiency. I am not sure that electric cars are going to be all that much more efficient. You can put pollution controls on the central plant, but lots of lobbying can take care of that.
Posted by: SJC | May 5, 2008 7:34:09 PM
The theoretical possibility exists that the grid electricity could come from renewable sources, or at least from non-fossil-fuel sources. *THAT* is what we need to be working on, before contemplating mass-market all-electric vehicles, or even plug-in hybrid vehicles!
I can only speak for my own province, but I do know that in summer, our electrical grid and generating stations are already stretched to the max and sometimes beyond, and that's *without* any significant number of all-electric vehicles on the road.
Posted by: Brian P | May 6, 2008 10:05:01 PM
The basic belief is that the cars will be charged at night when demand is low. Somehow, some people have convinced themselves that this is the next best thing to free power. As if the turbines are spinning and not putting out anything anyway, so might as well use it. There are spinning reserves, but we need to get real. The power companies in California have said that they can handle millions of PHEVs during off peak hours. They would love the revenue, but so far have said nothing about any free power.
Posted by: SJC | May 7, 2008 9:54:48 AM
