skip to main |
skip to sidebar
This post is a continuation of a previous post concerning the true energy crisis that will affect our modern society within the next few decades, the depletion of worldwide crude oil. About two weeks ago, I saw a Tesla electric sports car in downtown Austin. It was a beautiful ride! It costs over $100,000 making it out of the reach of average Joe and Jane. The car can go from 0 to 60 in 3.9 seconds and goes up to 244 miles per day. It may be unfair to judge the future of electric cars by this one extreme example. The technology that would go into a mass produced electric car (i.e. the Chevy Volt) would be similar, but cost restrictions would create many drawbacks. The lack of capability is sourced from the vehicle's energy storage.
We are going to first talk about where electric cars currently stand. I have a friend, Brian, who converted a 2002 Saturn from gas to electric power over a period of about a year. AustinEV is a nonprofit organization which aided my friend during the conversion. The amount of work required to complete the task was significant. All components that had use with the gasoline power were removed from the car. This included the gasoline engine, gas tank, alternator, radiator, air conditioner (needs mechanical power), old 12 V battery, power steering and other gas engine dependent systems that I am leaving out. In simple terms, the Saturn was gutted. New DC powered components were then installed in the Saturn. These included an electric engine, 1000 pounds of lead acid batteries, new controller, 1 F capacitors, air conditioning, and all the actuators were made DC compatible. Once assembled, it was quite a novelty. The car that plugs in and drives. It keeps up with city traffic and actually has significant acceleration. Our converted Saturn performs just like any gasoline powered vehicle until the batteries are drained after traveling 50 miles.
Converting the Saturn required about $28,000 in capital. The main expenses were purchasing the Saturn, the electrical components and the batteries. Labor was minimal in cost. This price tag is a little high for what the average driver is willing to pay for a automobile. If an electric car was mass produced in the future, the cost would be reduced through reduction in labor and purchasing of parts in large quantities. Technological improvements would also reduce cost. It is safe to say that an electric car would resemble this Saturn. The only main variation would be batteries with a higher energy storage density would be found on commercial cars, such as NiCad or Li ion cells.
This brings us to issue one with the electric car, lack of energy storage. The Saturn goes about 50 miles per charge carrying not much more than two passengers. 50 mile range would get an average person around an area of a medium sized city such as Austin for transportation purposes exclusively. Brian uses the Saturn to commute and do tasks like buy groceries or to go visit friends, events and etc. In Austin, this is fine. Someone living in a highly urbanized place like Southern California or Washington DC would barely have enough charge for a commute (maybe, commutes in many areas are longer than a 50 miles round trip). That's it! If any emergencies arise or desires to travel further within a day overwhelm an electric car owner, tough luck. The way around this is to use more advanced batteries with higher energy density. Production costs would soar as these are not cheap. This is why the Tesla is so expensive, Li ion batteries. Consumers are going to stick with the gasoline automobile if the gas car is significantly cheaper. The first new development electric cars require for a commercially competitive vehicle are inexpensive batteries capable of dense energy storage.
The lack of energy storage could be overcome with repeated charging. Charge the car at work, the local store or at a communal charging station. This sounds good, but it takes 6-8 hours to fully charge the batteries. This may be possible at work (no trips to the local Chinese restaurant), but it is not possible during brief stops. Driving down the road and stopping for a charge is not like gassing your current car. Long road trips are out. Many consumers would find this unacceptable. This is a larger technological hurdle than increased battery storage density since it affects all current battery technology and may limit the electric car's potential.
This post was to evaluate the electric automobile as a potential candidate replacing all current gasoline powered vehicles. Using the two obvious issues raised with energy storage in electric cars, here what I believe the future of electric cars will become.
The electric automobile will NOT:
1. Replace heavy transportation such as 18-wheeler trucks
2. Be used as interstate transportation
3. Used as a work vehicle, i.e. dump truck
The electric car will BE:
1. Practical automobile for local, light transportation
2. Drag racer (yes)
The reality of the electric car hinges on development of a cheap, high energy density battery. Until this occurs, the technology fights an uphill battle. This is why I believe the future fuel replacing crude oil derivatives will be in a liquid form. It will fulfill all of the practical uses gasoline vehicles currently do.
It is that time of year to do the holiday thing with family and friends. I will not be posting anything for over a week. Plenty of time is going to elapse at my parent's in NM, thus, ideas and posts will incubate. Happy holidays!
-Shawn
As a fellow Longhorn, I know word on the street says Austin, TX has a low crime rate for a city its size of about 1 million people. This website has the highest theft rates of various neighborhoods throughout the US according to statistics. Before living in Austin, I use to reside in Albuquerque, NM and the Duke City is thought to have a high crime rate for its 1/2 million residents. It turns out that none of the neighborhoods in Albuquerque made the list while Austin's West Campus west of the University of Texas was #6 on the list with the odds of being a property crime victim being 1 in 2! Digging further into statistics, this website compiles FBI statistics and the two cities rank the same overall for property and violent crime. This is the way statistics work. Changing the bounds or limits of the included numbers within the calculations results in varying results. If these kinds of numbers put into manipulative hands, anything could be supported or not leading to what the population at large believes. What is more important though is public perception. I was told in Albuquerque that it was a really dangerous city and the opposite in Austin. This distorted my view of reality. As Mark Twain made famous, there are "lies, damn lies and statistics."
With the new Barack Obama administration and the Democrats winning majority in the US Congress a little over a year ago, there has been a significant amounts of talk and money thrown at green technologies or environmentally friendly alternatives to current technologies. The main philosophical basis of the push comes from the concept that current energy and industrialization are damaging to the planet's ecosystem. Personally, many of the overarching ideas in the environmental movement are good: less pollution in the air and water, preservation of remaining natural areas and making the planet a livable place for our children and grandchildren are all good directives. The issues I have are with the environmental orthodoxy and their view of the world. We need to have open debates and discussion about these sensitive issues within all varieties of communities. It is not happening though. This blog is not about politics or religion, thus, I am going to talk about one of the environmental issues that is going to survive beyond the current zeitgeist due to necessity. The replacement of oil for transportation needs is a vital issue facing our modern industrialized society over the next couple of decades.
The rest of this post is going to discuss energy sources. Over the last few decades and especially within the last couple of years as commodity prices have risen, the call for fossil fuel replacements have grown. Fossil fuels are limited resources and one exhausted, they are gone forever. Our industrialized society is dependent upon fossil fuels for energy. In order of dirtiest to cleanest fuels: coal, oil and natural gas. We are going to look into the relative economic and societal value of each fuel.
Coal is an ancient fuel source used in the modern production of electricity. It is incinerated in a furnace. The generated heat converts water into high pressure steam. High pressure steam is then used to turn generators creating electricity. The down side to this process is creation of air pollution in the form of fly ash, soot, sulfur (creates acid rain) and various other radioactive contaminants into the air. When I was young living in Arizona, I lived next to a coal fired power plant (Navajo Generation Station) and yes it causes air pollution. Majority of these pollutants can be removed through emission controls known as scrubbers. Excessive amounts of carbon in the form of carbon dioxide will still be emitted though. (Carbon dioxide is often blamed for global warming. I take issue with this though thinking that the true cause of global warming is the urban heat island effect.) Second, the mining of coal also tends to pollute natural water sources. Ignoring this, the take home message here is the US has ~250 year supply of the black stuff in the ground. Using appropriate scrubber technology, the US could go centuries without the use of alternative electrical sources (solar or wind generation) while still having adequate electricity sources. The US does NOT have to develop solar or wind energy for the next two centuries. I am not a fan of the coal solution due to the pollution issues, but it does exist.
Natural gas is based upon smaller chained hydrocarbons in gaseous form. The main uses of natural gas are electricity production, heating and miscellaneous purposes such as cooking. Natural gas can also be used as a fuel for engines in cars or various transportation. Natural gas seems like the ideal fix. One problem exists though, the majority of natural gas reserves are not within the US with the US being ranked #5 in the world according to the CIA. The other top ten countries (Russia, Iran and etc) are or have the potential to be politically hostile to the US or unstable. Our reserves alone would last just a few years if this became our primary energy source. This does not bode well for natural gas. The uses also could easily be substituted with oil or natural gas.
Finally, we come to the most common fossil fuel, crude oil. Crude oil is found in various grades within the ground. Highest quality oil is light sweet crude or crude with low sulfur content and the hydrocarbons have smaller chains (light). Both of these oil characteristics are desirable for the simple fact they allow easy refining or processing into final products in comparison to lower quality heavy sour crude. The other factor that makes some oil more desirable is accessibility. If the oil is found within large pockets easily reachable with traditional drilling technology, extraction is simpler and cheaper. Oil that is found in inaccessible places like in deep ocean waters or in small pockets makes extraction significantly more expensive. Oil has several uses in our modern world, transportation is the main use with residential heating as a secondary use.
What makes oil such a valuable commodity for the US in comparison to natural gas and coal has to due with the fact our transportation system is fully dependent upon oil. Automobiles, trains, aircraft and watercraft all use fuels obtained from crude oil. Without our daily fix of oil, our cars and delivery trucks will stop running. The alternatives of trains, aircraft and watercraft would face the same fate. Commerce would cease. Basic needs like food would not get to the grocery store. Employees would not get to work. Everyday functions in our society would come to a grinding halt.
The amount of accessible oil reserves left in the world are limited. An unpleasant fact is the US oil reserves are mostly depleted. Exact amounts of oil reserves worldwide is another topic of hot debate. Pessimists argue the majority of oil is already exhausted and production will decline over the next couple of decades. The best description of this effect is peak oil. Optimists argue there are several decades of oil exist before we even need to worry about this effect as often touted by the US Energy Information Administration. In either case, both sides agree on the fact that we are quickly consuming all worldwide available light sweet crude sources that are easily available. Lower quality crude oil will not make up the energy difference over a long period of time. The fact is once oil reserves are consumed, we have have no infrastructure in place as an alternative to our current transportation. Serious societal disruptions will occur. This is the true energy crisis.
Future posts will cover potential alternative fuels to crude oil based technology.
It is always good to see someone attempt to fix an environmental problem with a creative, technologically advanced solution. Mass amounts of sewage is an issue in large cities and this Marin county, California based company, Humanure, is trying to update an ancient technology for modern urban use. It is simply put, composting human waste. Yes, your sewer system will be replaced with a waterless holding tank that allows your recycled meals to decompose. The decomposed waste ends up eventually as fertilizer on some organic farmer's field.
For more than a decade, 57-year-old roofer and writer Joseph Jenkins has been advocating that we flush our toilets down the drain and put a bucket in the bathroom instead. When a bucket in one of his five bathrooms is full, he empties it in the compost pile in his backyard in rural Pennsylvania. Eventually he takes the resulting soil and spreads it over his vegetable garden as fertilizer.
I get a kick out of the name for this version in California (yes I have Irish roots).
Meanwhile, over in California, the Marin Composting Portable Odorless Outhouse Project, a.k.a. MCPOOP, is doing Klehm one better. The goal of MCPOOP (which is pronounced the Irish way as opposed to the rap-star way) is to get the government into the night-soil business and put humanure toilets in county parks and town squares. The group is less than a month old but already has the support of the local environmental establishment and Marin County supervisor Steve Kinsey. "The whole thing is like a good acid flashback," says Kinsey. "We approved several experimental permits like this in the '70s." He estimates that a small-scale municipal demonstration project could be under way in less than a year.
Those selling the idea claim it does not smell. In my experience with compost, if done well it does not smell that much. Odor will still be present though.
Personally, I think the idea works on a small scale and in certain situations. Portable toilets and rural type outhouses that require pumping the holds out would be excellent use of the simple technology. Serious problems arise if we replaced all sewers and toilets using this crappy technology (pun intended). Think of the amount of oil burnt to remove the compost. The inconvenience to households as workers invade your house to clean the can about once a month. Conventional toilets systems are still the best deal on large scales.
Often, you will find really smart, successful people who tend to be unhappy even with all of their achievements. When I refer to happy in this post, I mean general contentment in life. Everyone has good and bad days, but when I mean unhappy it is someone who spends a significant amount of time in a gloom. Not all intellectuals are unhappy, but intellectuals tend to be be less happy than the general population. Of the professors whom I met in my 10 years of college, I can only name 3 or 4 who were happy as the typical populace. One famous instance is Nobel winning writer Earnest Hemingway having a tumultuous life with several wives who he deserted. Hemingway finally took his own life. I believe there are two main factors behind this trend, socialization and the acceptance of issues in life.
I am going to talk about what makes individuals happy as an argument point. I have browsed over many studies to happiness and they seem to come to many conclusions, but three seem to stick out. First, happiness has some roots in genetics. People are born with a certain amount of happiness or lack thereof. It is pick of the genetics draw, thus this is not relevant to making intellectuals less happy than the general populace. Second, having strong interpersonal relationships helps. Good supportive family and friends to talk with and depend upon in times of trouble and need. Finally, one factor that leads to happiness is being religious. I do not think it is the religiousness that makes one happy, it creates an explanation of the universe. It creates a coping mechanism for unpleasant items such as injustice and inequality. Everyone has religious beliefs, but following an organized set of ideals allows greater coping skills or acceptance of the thorny issues found in life.
Intellectuals are not known to be the most social group. They often tend to spend many hours in their cubicles working on ideas. They are valued for their ideas not their brawn or teamwork. Is the lack of socializing part of their personalities? Is it the quest for bringing new ideas? Is it conquering the next challenge? I do not know. What does take a toll are relationships: family and friends. This makes it difficult to have trusted people within a social circle. It makes happiness less plausible.
Pondering this great thing called life brings about a great deal of questions. The vast universe has many wonders to explore. It also has a dark side of discrimination, injustice, inequality and finally death. Bad things happen to good people. The average person knows these things exist, he/she is typically not pleased with the darkness, but also does not dwell on them. The intellectual tends to dwell on these dark concepts wanting to make the world's wrongs all right. Logical ideas like if this person does this action or behavior, the problem will be solved. The wish to tell the multitude they are wrong! This dwelling on unobtainable change is lack of acceptance. Standing up to a fight without any possibility of winning. It breeds discontent out of unnecessary frustration.
Lack of acceptance also appears in the inability to enjoy life's simple things. Having a complex, curious mind leads to the desire for more knowledge. Teach me more, I want to know! However, this prevents an individual from deriving more than just fleeting pleasure from life's simple things like sunsets, flowers and etc. The result is boredom. If someone is bored, this prevents the appreciation of good things in an individual's life. It eventually leads to a lack of acceptance for what is and not what should be. I want a better job, car, house and etc because what I have makes me bored. In a bad situation (poverty or other extreme adverse situations), this can be good leading to an improvement in one's life. There is a point where one has to accept the good things in life to ever have happiness. I believe intellectuals struggle with this out of boredom.
