http://ti.org/antiplanner/

Go here to see a current debate on driverless cars.

My own view is that the technology will be launched on truck/bus lanes where the benefits would be high to the users and the technology cost would be covered in the tolls.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

While we wait for some of the technology to be developed, we might as well convert some of our petrol-powered vehicles to CNG.

To keep enough CNG available to last a while, we need to increase our renewable electricity generation and encourage the use of electricity rather than CNG at times when the renewable generation exceeds the demand. We can also invest in H2 production by electrolysis to use more of that off-peak power instead of using CNG to make H2. (Hydrogen is used at both the ammonia-urea plant and the oil refinery.)

Eventually we will be able to use hydrogen to convert pretty much any biomass to CNG and other hydrocarbons.

Electric vehicle will have a place, but it will be a while before most households will have one.

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Jarbury – for most of my life I’ve been a big city dweller and used public transport, but where I live now the public transport options are non-existant. They pulled the railway line up in 1959

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

MUL’s have no value.

I wrote the codes back in the sixties which allowed metropolitan Auckland to become quite a medium density city along with LA.

It worked well through the seventies and eighties and then the ARC won its case to impose an MUL and by the mid nineties prices were beginning to rise much faster than inflation. My report to the Reserve Bank warned of this outcome but governments did not respond but I did become a member of a world wide club which has been warning of MULs and Smart Growth ever since.

Do you really believe that MULs provide benefits which exceed the losses being experienced today because of the collapse of the great Smart Growth property bubble?

There is a big difference between enabling density (as my work did) and forcing it. My work in the sixties showed that the only benefit of providing for higher density was to increase choices available. All other claimed benefits are ephemeral and become even costlier when forced on populations.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

It’s also quite an anti-social and unhealthy way to get around. I like walking to the bus stop and briefly chatting with the bus driver in the morning. I like the social interaction that one gets on a metro in European cities. The Paris metro is fantastic for this, you experience so much more of life than you do stuck in a car.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Owen: I look forward to that technology. A car is a great tool to get from place to place but it is a complete pain that I have to drive it; I’d rather be frogblogging or sleeping or whatever. Or just watching beautiful Canterbury cruise by. I get quite envious every time I watch Demolition Man and Sandra Bullock says “autodrive on”…

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Regarding the brookings article, I’m glad to see you posting reports that encourage higher density living Owen. Have you finally seen the value of urban limits?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Avego seems to be spreading.

Go to http://avego.createsend4.com/t/ViewEmail/r/EF7873E24E886C7D/0B7C540B3195D7970F8C96E86323F7F9

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

A presentation at Houston last year examined some of the new technologies coming on stream and one was the use of electronic guides built into HOT lanes so that the driver could let go of the wheel and the cars would form electronic “trains”. I discussed John Boy’s technology with him and pointed out that the car could be charged up as it went down the same lane.
I believe the two teams are now in contact.
(I helped fund this technology many years ago when I was in the Venture Capital business.) The other great property is that it is safe. The pads or lines are under the seal so there is no risk of electric shock. Transmission losses can be reduced by have series of loops which are triggered by vehicle presence so only the useful loops are powered up.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I see one of the more significant uses of the car recharging pads being at taxi stands, for PHEV taxis. Another application would be bus stops, particularly those at the end of the line.

The traffic light idea sounds good, and might earn enough to pay for itself, but wouldn’t help longer distance commuters, simply because such commutes are usually on roads without many traffic lights, and many of those will be green.

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Too right Owen. I have seen the technology in action. We could also replace the overhead bus wires in Wellington, and put them into the pavement with the next generation from the same lab. They have exported such all over the world to run robotic fork lifts in warehouses. Great stuff.

When I met with the team from UniServices, they thought that putting the pads at the lights of major intersections, where cars stop for a minute or two, would be sufficient. Each car would be charged via it’s onboard smart card, not unlike the snapper card technology or the toll-pucks used overseas.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Two great places to recharge and electric car.
At home in the garage.
And at parking meters and other public parking spaces.
We can use the technology developed here by Prof John Boys which allows power transfer between a plate laid just below the seal surface and a similar plate in the vehicle.
So as long as you are in roughly the right position you can charge your car without plugging it in etc.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I’m with BP on the fact that range is not as important as it is usually claimed to be. If the rule of thumb, that 80% of all travel is within 10 km of home, then lower range EVs, or what are currently called Urban Electric Vehicles UEVs, are more than up to the task. Swapping batteries in the larger EVs or using rapid charging stations like those built in California before they killed off the technology are both viable solutions. Bring em on, I say. Besides, dbuckley’s commute of 61 km is well within the range of most current EV models.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

SOrry. Don’t know what happened to the link.
Possibly Blenheimer’s disease.
Here it is:

Last spring, the Brookings Institution produced a report and study titled “Shrinking the Carbon Footprint of Metropolitan America.”

You can find the press release announcing the study here:

http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/05_carbon_footprint_sarzynski.aspx?p=1

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

We don’t need to change everyone over at the same time. If most journeys are shorter, then most cars could run on electric.

Those with longer journeys might use hybrids.

So range is important – in reality – for a few, but not many.

The range of my car is currently around 20km, mainly because I need to fill it up I don’t demand that it *always* has a 300km range (or whatever)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Icebaby – same author, different paper, though having had a very quick read there is stuff in common betwixt the two. The feasibility paper has more detail.

Range is important – my commute is 61KM each way, which I currently do with a 6.5L/100KM car (it thinks is a 5.5 car but in reality it is a 6.5). Most frequently on my own, but sometimes with two bodies, and today with three. Most of that trip is 100KM/Hr roads, and I need to be able to achieve that speed to prevent my entire day being spent commuting.

Many EVs wont do 61KM on a charge, and unless my employer starts putting socket outlets everywhere I’ll need enough range to get back home too!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2009/01/boondoggles-to-rescue.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Owen – Where’s a link? It is grossly unfair to tease our appetites with details without posting a link to the meat.

( sorry Phil )

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Interesting research paper:

Metro Los Angeles had the second smallest total carbon footprint of the 100 largest US cities. And its carbon emissions from highway transportation were the fifth-lowest in the US, one place better than what I thought was more transit-reliant Philadelphia. My wager: All those cars on the freeways aren’t driving as far as the cars around here are.

By comparison, New York’s total carbon footprint was the 4th smallest (though it took top honors in the transportation category).

The metro area with the smallest total carbon footprint? Honolulu.

The probable reason for LA’s high ranking? In spite of being famous for its sprawl LA has moved more than most cities towards being a medium density multipolar city which means its average trip distances are smaller than in most cities. And its mild climate means lower levels of heating and cooling.
And presumably a higher than normal level of hydro power. (not sure)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I read the article Frog – just didn’t research it this time as I’ve been hearing about ‘peak oil’ panic for 45 years and can’t help but be a little skeptical.
We do not know what we do not know in terms of potential. I don’t hold the evidence proferred as conclusive.
I do know (having worked in the dirty oil biz) that the big Corps themselves do not believe in peak oil privately, whilst bolstering prices with every mechanism they can lever.
But if they were also planning to supply all China’s need’s for the forseeable future – where was this oil going to come from?
Anyway, I’ve been wrong before too – but am ultra-cautious about this one.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)