s/18 miles/18 miles at highway speeds/

Luke:

http://www.e-ride.ca/Electric_Motorcycles/MotGTh.html

The leading use for the Segway seems to be replacement of mounted police (by mounted I mean on horseback) with Segways. Horses aren't cheap, nor do they fit in small sidewalks real effectively. They still use mounted police from time to time here in Arizona; not sure how common they are elsewhere. The Segway isn't nearly as fast as a horse unfortunately, in fact it's hardly any faster than a fast runner, although it can maintain that speed pretty much indefinitely. They're supposedly nice for some parts of mail delivery too. Still, they have a very limited purpose.

Back on the gasoline burning thread, if you wanted to go even cheaper than the aformentioned Vulcan, the Kawasaki Ninja 250 has a list price of $2999 and will achieve 65 to 75mpg according to most magazines while being capable of well above legal highway speeds. At the cheap end, a Honda Metropolitan runs $1849 and can do city speeds (40-45mph) while getting even better fuel economy than the Ninja 250 thanks to the scooter's 49cc single-cylinder engine and extreme light weight. For a neighborhood runabout, gasoline is still extremely light impact from a GHG and cost perspective.

http://database.path.berkeley.edu/imr/papers/UCD-ITS-RP-03-7.pdf

Thanks for that clarification, Sid. Comparing efficient gas vehicles to the Segway made me think of something else. Battery-powered vehicles are conceivably more sustainable because they run on electricity -- which can in theory be produced sustainably. But when you charge up with electricity that has been produced with fossil fuels, you've gotta remember that you are consuming a lot of those fuels. The loss of energy in production and transmission of electricity is huge... the actual consumption of energy is 2 or 3 times what is measured at the home outlet, if I understand the difference between "primary" and "site" energy correctly.

Recently on my blog I've been looking into residential energy consumption stats from the USA's Dept. of Energy. One reason that houses are consuming more and more energy total despite the increasing availability of more efficient technologies is the increasing use of electricity generated by fossil fuels. In this situation burning fossil fuels directly -- in the home, or in the vehicle -- could be the environmentally superior, if not truly sustainable, choice.

bottleworld.net

Hey Joseph - thanks for that link to the Segway paper. As far as air pollution (i assume you mean other than CO2) goes, you've got a point, it's definitely an issue. But given the fact that electricity is usually generated by fossil fuels, just plain buying and using an electric vehicle doesn't stop you from creating pollution. You'd need sustainably produced electricity.

Of course, Bottleman - there's still pollution with an electric vehicle pulling from the grid. But there are differences between mobile pollution and pollution coming from a large source, usually located away from major population centers (but not always).

Leaving the air pollution issue aside for a moment, I took the time to run numbers on CO2 and fuel efficiency for the Segway versus a 100 MPG gasoline-fueled vehicle.

I used Segway's spec sheet on their batteries as the basis for their efficiency:
http://www.segway.com/segway/lithium_ion.html

Obviously, there's a lot of variability in efficiency based on how it's used, and it's not clear whether the battery capacity numbers are a full-drain scenario, or an "as used" scenario. Also, the Personal Transporters have two battery packs, not one.

So, I'll use conservative numbers and assume that 800 Wh (full capacity of two battery packs) is needed for a 15 mile range (aggressive riding, hilly terrain).

I also use primary fuel numbers for electricity, as you suggested, as opposed to "at the plug"/end-use numbers. This isn't a very accurate comparison, simply because motor gasoline isn't a primary fuel, but rather a processed fuel product. But since it'd be pretty difficult to do a full well-to-wheel comparison, I'll stick with the BTU content of gasoline compared to the BTU content of the primary fuel for the electricity.

End-use electricity is 3,412 BTU/kWh and gasoline is 125,000 BTU/gallon. End use of electricity is 31.3% of the energy content of the primary fuels.

Grid emergy, US average, is 51% coal, 20% nuclear, 16% natural gas, 10% renewables (7/10 of which is hyrdro), and 3% petroleum. Using the emission coefficients here, I calculated that grid power puts out 137.50 lbs CO2 per million BTU, compared to 156.43 for gasoline.

Run all the numbers, and a 100 MPG gasoline-fueled vehicle puts out 2.44 times the CO2 per mile and uses 2.15 times the energy per mile of a Segway. So, if one assumes a longer range and less power consumption for the Segway (24 miles and 400 Wh), then the numbers change to 7.82 for CO2 and 6.87 for energy consumption.

To compare to another electric vehicle, the eGo scooter -- which has a range of 25 miles, can go 24 mph (twice the Segway's top speed), and 816 Wh of battery capacity -- a 100 MPG gasoline-fueled vehicle puts out 3.99 times the CO2 per mile and uses 3.51 times the energy per mile compared to an eGo.

The most efficient gasoline-fueled scooter I'm aware of is the Honda SuperCub 50, which gets 343 MPG in a Japanese test cycle.

http://www.honda.co.jp/motor-lineup/supercub/spec/index.html

Even at that fuel efficiency level, the eGo scooter is still slightly more fuel efficient and puts out less CO2. The conservative estimate for the Segway (800 Wh/15 miles) does worse than the SuperCub.

Joseph,
The comparison is that it costs as much as a $5000 motorcycle, but performs like a $150 bike. I think it's fair to compare two transportation choices of the same cost, as well as two transportation choices of the same utility.

Neil,
The electric scooter looks like it has potential! I'm still trying to find a price. 80km/h isn't quite fast enough for the roads I ride, but it's close enough that I think I could get away with it. Plus, with a 2kW engine, getting up to speed if probably pretty quick! That machine certainly looks like it can be a transportation-tool.

All,
I do regret that my Vulcan doesn't have a catalytic converter, but I figure that at 55mpg, it's a lot better than driving my other vehicles. If anyone knows of an add-on catalytic converter for motorcycles for a reasonable price (< $350) and weight, I'll seriously consider adding it.

Indeed, a bicycle is human-powered, but is has a similar or higher top cruising speed than the Segway (12mph for the segway, anywhere from 8 to 25mph for a bike depending on rider fitness level). There's no reason to compare a bicycle to an airplane because a bicycle goes 8-25mph and an airplane goes 140-600mph depending on what we're talking about.

49cc scooters on the other hand can be easily had for $2000 and achieve 40 to 45mph and very low cost of ownership. Probably the only type of gasoline scooter that's comparable in top speed to the Segway are those motorized skateboard thingies which are around $500 and should likewise do 12mph. When you compare on pricepoint, the Vulcan was an example of how when shopped by pricepoint, you could get a motorcycle that seats two and is capable of low cost of operation and extremely high speeds.

Speaking of motorized skateboards however, does anyone have links to electric ones? One of my neighbors had one for a while. I liked the fact it was nearly silent compared to those noisy gas ones, and I would think those are probably a fraction of the cost of a segway too.

The Segway should be compared to the Vectrix Maxi-Scooter www.vectrixusa.com which comes out in a few months.

Segway
Price: $5,000
Range: 15-24 miles
Max Speed: 12 mph
Battery: lithium-ion

Vectrix:
Price: unknown ($6500-$8000)
Range: 50-68 miles
Max Speed: 62 mph
Battery: Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH)

I bet more segways have replaced people WALKING or biking then cars. So one could argue that they are not enviromentally a good thing. In that sense I am glad they are priced at $5000.

Actually I am not against the segway, it was originally intended to replace the car for short commutes. Its price and just how different it is has made that not happen. It needs to be alot cheaper and a little faster to fill that role.

Probbaly the biggest controversy about the Segway is its use on city sidewalks. I think that is what Segway had in mind, and tries to project the image of being compatible with pedestrians. I haven't followed it up, but its not legal in lots of cities and Segway didn't have much success in getting that changed.

I think it also explains Segways whole business plan, low volume high price: without getting broad acceptance of its use on sidewalks, it would never work with a high volume/low price approach. Not a lot of people are going to feel comfortable riding it on the street with traffic, unlike a scooter or bike. To that extent it is a valid comparison with those vehicles.

Frankly, I was majorly turned off by Segway initially thinking it could be sidewalk compatible. I would not feel comfortable knowing a Segway could be silently coming up behind me on the sidewalk. And it is in that aspect that the Segway has its most negative health/environmental implications: Let the increasingly obese charge down sidewalks at 12mph on their Segways if they can afford the $5K to do so, and let the rest of us shoulder their collective health costs for not walking.