To convert the Entire US Motor Vehicle transportation system to electricity would not only require lithium batteries BUT a massive increase in electrical generation capacity, over a very short time period. Long term, (and by that term I mean 20-50 years) such an increase in Capacity is possible, but NOT short term.
The majority of this energy is derived from fossil fuels: in 2005, it was estimated that 40% of the nation's energy came from petroleum, 23% from coal, and 23% from natural gas. Nuclear power supplied 8.4% and renewable energy supplied 7.3%, which was mainly from hydroelectric dams although other renewable are included such as wind power, geothermal and solar energy.http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec1_3.pdfhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_StatesHistorical Energy use in the US:
While renewable can increase over the next 10-20 years, if you include Hydroelectric production with renewable (As does the above paragraph) it is be quite small. Nuclear is also expected to increase but just to doable it to meet expected traditional electric use increase will be almost impossible to achieve within the next 10-20 years (It takes about 20 years to go from the time it is decided that more electrical generation is requires, through the decision to go Nuclear, through plant selection and acquisition AND actually building the plant). In 2005 and today no such decision has been made in the US since the 1980s.
Now, while some oil generation electrical plants still exist, they are rare being outlawed in the 1970s so to provide more oil for the transportation industry. Thus today most electrical generation is provided by Coal, Natural Gas, Nuclear and Hydroelectrically plants (With Solar and wind producing less then 2% of total needs). Right now Natural gas out produces Nuclear when it comes to electricity, and with the Marcellus Shell boom expected to last a long while, but it is also used to hear homes, businesses etc. In the 1970s when we had a Natural Gas shortage in addition to an Oil Shortage, non-essential uses of Natural gas was abolished (For example many homes still had outside Natural gas lamps that ran all night, for such lamps provided more light at cheaper prices then electrical lamps of the time period even if left on 24 hours a day).
Now the 40% of energy provided by oil, includes trains, tractor trailers (And other big trucks), Farm tractors (and other agricultural equipment), Bulldozers (and other Construction equipment, including trucks used to maintain the highways), emergency equipment (Ambulances, Paramedics Vehicles, Police Cars and trucks and Fire engines) Ships and barges and off road all terrain vehicles. Another big use is heating in those areas without access to Natural Gas (New England and most of Rural America). Notice almost NO Oil is used to generate electricity at the present time (Some does, but very minimal).
The problem with electrical cars is how do we convert the above use of oil to electricity AND produce the electricity. The big problem is the later, i.e. generating the electrical power. If this is to be done by renewable we are NOT looking at a ten time increase, not a 20 times increase, but a 40 times increase. If this is to be provided by Nuclear we are looking at a five times increase. Coal can do so at a mere double of production, Natural gas just a triple. A double increase in production is pushing the possibility of achievement within the next 20 years, A three times or five times is even more remote. It is impossible to have a 40 times increase.
Now, you may say, what about a combination of the above? While that makes the needed increase in electrical generation easier, it is still almost impossible to achieve.
Now, you may say, what about the fact the US is still the third largest oil producer in the world? That will help, for it will make the down ward use of oil within the US easier and slower, but the drop when it comes will be more abrupt then any increase in the above production capacities.
You may also point out that Home Heating oil is part of the 40% oil that needs to be replaced. And I will agree, but like any other source of oil, the price will be set by the people who will pay the highest price for the oil before they quit using it. Many a home heating oil customer will opt for the thousands of Dollars to install a Natural Gas line to their home as the price of oil increase, making oil more and more a transportation only fuel. Such a line is one of the few ways a user of oil can opt for another form of energy.
Once you eliminate home oil use, almost every other use of oil is in transportation (Including being the base for artificial rubber in tires, which can switch to natural rubber as an alternative).
Another down side of electricity is the energy loss during generation. Roughly 3/4 of energy used to produce electric is lost in that production. i.e. the 40 times I mentioned above may be 160 times if non-hydroelectrically renewable is how we generate the needed electrical power. Now, lithium batteries seem to be able to have a discharge level of 90% (thus the main problem with lead-acid batteries, i.e. for every four watt you put into the battery, you get one watt out) is no longer a problem (This killed research on Hydrogen Fuel Cells, with a 50% efficiency, and Fly Wheels with their 90% efficiency). While 90% is quoted for lithium batteries, I have NOT seen a first hand test showing that result, just stories on the net. Thus with Lead acid the 160 became 640 times, but fear of the need for 640 times increase in electrical generation JUST TO REPLACE OIL is no longer valid (Thus 160 times if non-hydroelectrically renewable are how the additional power is to be generated).
Please note, the above IGNORES the expected raise is electricity usage do to "traditional" electrical uses, i.e. air conditioning and computers for examples. Computers are expected to get more energy efficient but as more and more people have them and use them, the saving in efficiency id off set by the increase in usage. Thus we will have to increase electrical generation over and above the above numbers just to maintain expected electrical growth INDEPENDENT of any increase is use to charge cars for driving.
One last comment, people have pointed out that it is possible to charge cars at night, or other times when conventional electrical usage is at its minimum. This will smooth out the production wave by increase the wave at its production minimum (Roughly 2:00 am). To a degree this will help, but no to any significant degree when you look at the huge number of cars that will have to be recharged (I could see 2:00 am becoming the new peak as more and more people start to charge their cars at night, thus outdoing all the benefit of charging at night).
My disagreement with NNadir had to do with HOW rapidly we could produce the needed additional electrical generation capacity within the next 20 years. I do NOT see it being done within the next 20 years. If we should decide now to build the needed plants then in about 20 years they will come on line and have access to the power. The problem is in about 20-30 years coal is expected to peak production and go into decline (Based on the increase in coal production over the last 50-100 years AND where coal is known to exist). Thus at about the time the needed Nuclear or renewable plants come on to line, they will be needed to replace coal and Natural Gas and that will require a similar increase in energy production.
Now, unlike Natural Gas, Coal and Oil, Uranium (and other sources of Nuclear power) are elements NOT compounds made by plants in ancient history and over time transformed into Carbon based energy sources. What this means is Uranium (and other fuels for Nuclear power) can exist almost anywhere in the world, even in the deep ocean. Thus we do not and can not know where all the Nuclear fuel is. On the other hand Carbon base energy sources are derived from plants and as such had to exist some place on the surface of the earth and then covered up till found by man. While the millions of years can put such energy forms thousand of feet below ground, they must be connected in some way with the continents. Thus the deep ocean is out of the picture for such fuels. Coals is tried in with ancient swamps (Thus is almost always on land, through some coal is under the sea but mostly just off the coast). Oil tends to be in areas which in ancient times were away from the coasts, but NOT in deep ocean. Thus oil in the US is primarily in the lower Mississippi area which was a shadow sea at one time (and you have a lot of off shore oil fields for this reason). Natural gas is where when oil and coal were formed the algae that makes up oil was mixed with swamp matter OR for some reason the Oil was pushed below 20,000 feet and do to the heat of the earth converted to Natural Gas.
Notice ALL of the fossil fuel is tied in with the coasts that exist today or in ancient times (For example the coal fields of Pennsylvania, tied in with very old swamps from the Permian age, the Lower Mississippi oil is tied in with much younger ancient inland seas during the time of the Dinosaurs). Thus all fossil fuels are tied in with land and where land and ocean meet or have meet in the past. Thus we have a very good idea where almost all the Coal, Oil and Natural gas is located. On the other hand we can NOT say that about Uranium and other Nuclear sources of energy.
Long term, we are looking at Hydro-electrical, Solar, Wind and Nuclear sources of energy for electrical power. Short term (i.e. less then 20 years) all four are wanting, worse after 20 years all four will NOT only have to replace oil, but Natural Gas and Coal as sources of energy. Thus it may take 50 to 100 years to convert to the post-fossil fuel age. The problem is fossil fuel will start a steep decline in production while before Solar, Wind and Nuclear are capable of replacing them. Thus the best solution will NOT be electric cars, but NOT using cars at all. Conserving energy NOT converting to another form of energy. In my opinion the bicycle has a much better chance of replacing the Gasoline engine then an electric car. People will revert to living close to their work to minimize travel time while walking. Stores will move to be closer to their customers, once the stores realize their customers will NO longer drive their cars to their stores. Schools will follow the same pattern, through having access to tax dollars will be slower. Thus we will return to a living arrangement much like it was in 1920 America, Cars for those purposes that nothing really does better, every one else walking, biking or taking electrical driven transport.
Rural America will have a rougher time, how do you replace the automobile in a low population area? In the 1920s most car makers looked for most of their growth in Rural America (And among the upper middle class only in the cities) NOT in the urban areas. This reflected that the low population had a hard time supporting alternatives to the Car, i.e. Buses, Trains and Trolleys. Some sort of outreach to Rural America will have to occur, probably on the lines of electric buses (using overhead wires back up with lithium batteries) on roads between the towns and the nearest urban area (With people walking, biking and even taking their cars to such towns just to catch a ride). I suspect more and more transport will revert to such wire/battery power. Wire on the Interstates and other main highways, use of lithium battery off such highways but only for a limited time period (I am taking of heavy loads, i.e. tractor trailers, buses, etc NOT individual cars).
Notice even Rural America will have to use Electrical Powered Vehicles, but the key will be how to get the power to them (In the former Warsaw Pact Nations, it was common to see trucks using the same overhead power lines as local streetcars, thus transport is a factor). The problem is NOT that we can replace oil based vehicles with electrical vehicles but can we produce the electricity needed by such a Transformation. Maybe in 50 years but not 20 unless we also reduce HOW we get around and that requires people accepting the fact that commuting to their jobs must be by foot or bike NOT by car. If we transform America then Electrical cars can replace the oil based car, but it has to be one to 10, i.e. every ten cars of today will have to be replaced by one electrical car. In the 1920s the ownership rates of cars was one out of every 15 Americans (And the 1920 census was the First Census with more people living in Urban Areas then Rural Areas, thus even in the 1920s just less then 1/2 the population lived in rural areas, thus in urban areas it was more like one car for every 30 urban dwellers). We do NOT have to drop to the levels of the 1920s, but we have to do more then the mouth service we have been doing since the 1970s on addressing the oil situation.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
