Probably one of the most important articles I've read - ever.
In short, this guy - one guy - is shifting the automotive energy paradigm to electricity. His backers - the nations Israel & Denmark... and $200 million in venture capital. Extraordinary.
http://www.wired.com/cars/futuretransport/magazine/16-09/ff_agassi?currentPage=0
Amazing Article.
I think his idea is brilliant and is by far the best idea I've heard so far to release the world from its dependancy on oil. I think it really has potential if everybody jumps on board. I'm interested in seeing where this goes and how it develops.
I shall call him Tucker.
cliff notes? i tried to read it but there was too much bs to get through the first page. like i give a make the beast with two backs about his dark hair, light brown eyes, and square jaw [roll]
Quotecliff notes? i tried to read it but there was too much bs to get through the first page. like i give a make the beast with two backs about his dark hair, light brown eyes, and square jaw
Just what I was thinking, great sounding Idea, if alot of big time backers get on board and it's successful we may see something, or 2 things may happen.
1. we never hear of it.
2. he meets with an unfortunate "accident"
Too many powerful people in the world stand to lose alot from going away from oil.
That was a pretty intresting read. I am all for it. If i was bruce wayne, id push millions into a city and promote it.
If there's an Agassi plug-in anywhere near my place of work in the next seven years, I'll give you my Duc.
Amazing. If I had finished school and got my engineering degree, I'd be kicking this dude's door down for a job yesterday. I think he really has a viable solution (if not THE solution) the automotive side of the oil equation.
Quote from: CraigD426 on August 19, 2008, 08:16:54 PM
Too many powerful people in the world stand to lose alot from going away from oil.
My concern as well...
couldnt get past page 1..........
+1 for a synopsis please
some lazy effin' readers on this board....
Quote from: derby on August 19, 2008, 09:36:19 PM
some lazy effin' readers on this board....
hey,...........its late on the right coast ;)
Yeah, what he said...
Quote from: derby on August 19, 2008, 09:36:19 PM
some lazy effin' readers on this board....
More like, when I start reading on some automotive groundbreaking achievement and they start spending more time telling me about the idiot mothermake the beast with two backser than the actual invention, I typically just go into "I don't care mode". Square jaw? Does it improve gas mileage? Seriously, tell us your life-story
after your new thing succeeds.
Quote from: someguy on August 19, 2008, 09:47:51 PM
More like, when I start reading on some automotive groundbreaking achievement and they start spending more time telling me about the idiot mothermake the beast with two backser than the actual invention, I typically just go into "I don't care mode". Square jaw? Does it improve gas mileage? Seriously, tell us your life-story after your new thing succeeds.
too lazy to google the project's wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Better_Place) or website (http://www.betterplace.com/), too, i see...
want me to call you up and read it to ya, too?
Could ya? That would be great. Thanks a bunch...
Quote from: derby on August 19, 2008, 09:51:58 PM
too lazy to google the project's wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Better_Place) or website (http://www.betterplace.com/), too, i see...
want me to call you up and read it to ya, too?
Nah-my phone is on the other side of the room.
And if we whine and do nothing, you typically google it for us.
Also, I still think electric cars are a piss poor solution.
Quote from: aaronb on August 19, 2008, 08:06:41 PM
cliff notes? i tried to read it but there was too much bs to get through the first page. like i give a make the beast with two backs about his dark hair, light brown eyes, and square jaw [roll]
+1
The person writing the article should focus on the facts. Forget about the fluff and tell us what the deal is.
Quote from: someguy on August 19, 2008, 09:56:57 PM
Also, I still think electric cars are a piss poor solution.
and your ideal solution is...
personally, i think electric vehicles are a perfect solution for major population centers.
Quote from: someguy on August 19, 2008, 09:56:57 PM
Also, I still think electric cars are a piss poor solution.
I completely agree. Lets keep wasting dead dinosaurs! [thumbsup]
Quote from: derby on August 19, 2008, 09:59:02 PM
and your ideal solution is...
personally, i think electric vehicles are a perfect solution for major population centers.
Ideal? I don't have one, cuurently, IMO Hydrogen burning internal combustion engine is most feasible.
Quote from: Monstermash on August 19, 2008, 09:59:33 PM
I completely agree. Lets keep wasting dead dinosaurs! [thumbsup]
.....because that's exactly what I said [roll]
Bicycles are the most energy-efficient form of transportation! ;D
[popcorn]
well, i read the wiki. don't have the inclination to read the ten page article right now, so all apologies if it's answered in that.
but...
who's paying for the recharges? is the electricity going to be tax funded? do you swipe the 'ol magic-money card at the "pump?" or has electricity suddenly become free?
*thinks it's a neat enough idea, but has "concerns" *
let me get this straight mr. agassi... you're going to turn the world onto electric cars, backed by the political and financial muscle of israel and denmark? really?
yes, i'm a skeptic...
Quote from: derby on August 19, 2008, 09:59:02 PM
personally, i think electric vehicles are a perfect solution for major population centers.
wouldn't providing the clean electricity be a bit of a flaw in that logic?
although you do have some validity in that point as major metros have a large population of people who travel short distances where a smaller electric vehicle would be feasible
Quote from: Randimus Maximus on August 19, 2008, 10:58:08 PM
wouldn't providing the clean electricity be a bit of a flaw in that logic?
although you do have some validity in that point as major metros have a large population of people who travel short distances where a smaller electric vehicle would be feasible
If only there were some way to ferry multiple people around at once......possibly underground using electrical means.
Quote from: someguy on August 19, 2008, 11:13:32 PM
If only there were some way to ferry multiple people around at once......possibly underground using electrical means.
Battery assisted Rickshaws pulled by mole men? That's just silly!
Quote from: derby on August 19, 2008, 09:59:02 PM
and your ideal solution is...
personally, i think electric vehicles are a perfect solution for major population centers.
I'd agree...
as soon as we start producing electricity by means other than oil.
The fundamental problem with IC engines are their efficiency - energy in vs energy out - it can be as low as a 1%, not much more than 20% at best. In that way, electrical cars would be great.
mitt
Quote from: someguy on August 19, 2008, 11:13:32 PM
If only there were some way to ferry multiple people around at once......possibly underground using electrical means.
something like a train that ran on underground tracks and used only electricity? how could something like this be implemented? it's brilliant...why didn't anyone think of this before?
[cheeky]
Quote from: lethe on August 20, 2008, 01:11:40 AM
Battery assisted Rickshaws pulled by mole men? That's just silly!
of course it's silly. the mighty mole men need no assistance from batteries.
we must conquer them and force them to do our bidding.
So I read all 10 pages.
The issue I see with implementing this in the US is that Americans like individuality. The business model they seem to be working on involves getting a car company to produce a car that works on the infrastructure. This limits the choices of cars to only those produced by that company and only certain models for the time being. This may hurt the take off stage. Auto makers will probably be reluctant to produce multiple models of a system that has yet to be proven. And people won't want to give up their individuality in a "Brave new World" kind of way.
The article addresses this in a way, but I think the issue will be greater in the US. Americans are self-centered and fiercely independent.
Secondly, the US is so much more spread out that other than urban areas this thing is going to be a poor alternative, OR the infrastructure costs are going to be so high to put a station every 40 miles throughout the US that it will be prohibitive. I don't want to have one car that works great for urban commutes and so forth, and a IC car for going on vacation and sunday drives.
Thirdly, are the energy/oil companies going to get in on this? Will Shell and BP start offering Battery replacement centers? At what cost to them? Or is Better Place going to be the only one with these centers? Without enough centers it becomes a serious inconvenience, and enough centers end up being staggeringly expensive.
I think this idea is great and with some other changes it could work. It address the urban/commuting environments well. There just needs to be a solution for other IC vehicle uses.
They should put a solar panel in the roof so that you can park in a lot without a Better Place outlet and still recharge. And extend the drive range of a full charge.
Quote from: DucPete on August 20, 2008, 06:48:23 AM
This limits the choices of cars to only those produced by that company and only certain models for the time being. This may hurt the take off stage. Auto makers will probably be reluctant to produce multiple models of a system that has yet to be proven. And people won't want to give up their individuality in a "Brave new World" kind of way.
Automakers can make whatever models they choose - much the same as phone companies make different models. They can just make those models 'plug and play' compatible with the existing battery packs. Also, battery packs are scalable - there is nothing to stop you putting TWO packs in one 'powerful' vehicle.
Quote from: DucPete on August 20, 2008, 06:48:23 AM
Secondly, the US is so much more spread out that other than urban areas this thing is going to be a poor alternative, OR the infrastructure costs are going to be so high to put a station every 40 miles throughout the US that it will be prohibitive.
I think they'll go for a 250 mile range - that is a bit of a magic number.
Quote from: DucPete on August 20, 2008, 06:48:23 AM
Thirdly, are the energy/oil companies going to get in on this? Will Shell and BP start offering Battery replacement centers? At what cost to them?
I think the most telling part of the article is his private backer IS an oil man. Dubai is currently building a Hydrogen plant. I think oil companies will go where the money is.
Quote from: ducpainter on August 20, 2008, 05:55:39 AM
I'd agree...
as soon as we start producing electricity by means other than oil.
We already do:
Hydroelectric
Wind
Nuclear (especially if someone figures out cold fusion)
Admittedly we should tray to do better though...from Wiki:
in 2005, it was estimated that 40% of the nation's energy came from petroleum, 23% from coal, and 23% from natural gas. The remaining 14% was supplied by nuclear power, hydroelectric dams, and miscellaneous renewable energy sources
Quote from: Statler on August 19, 2008, 08:19:48 PM
If there's an Agassi plug-in anywhere near my place of work in the next seven years, I'll give you my Duc.
Maybe not here in the U.S., but I give it a 50-50 shot of seeing some parked in Tel Aviv or Copenhagen. They've got better cell phones there already anyway. [cheeky]
It could be interesting, though, choosing between Ford, Toyota or Agassi after looking at their coverage maps online to see who's got the best mix of interesting tech and system coverage -- hmmm, Steve Jobs just unveiled that cool iCar with no steering wheel, just a huge touch screen, but unless you hack it it's only on Hyundai and their coverage really blows in my neighborhood...
It might not be THE solution, but I hope that this company starts pushing the industry in that direction.
I'm really interested to see what happens.
...for me?
I'm saving for my Tesla [cheeky]
at current rate, I should have it in about 85 years
Quote from: roy-nexus-6 on August 20, 2008, 07:44:31 AM
Automakers can make whatever models they choose - much the same as phone companies make different models. They can just make those models 'plug and play' compatible with the existing battery packs. Also, battery packs are scalable - there is nothing to stop you putting TWO packs in one 'powerful' vehicle.
I agree. I think I was trying to say that you're not suddenly going to see dozens of options for cars you can buy if they decide to implement this stateside. They'll try it on a couple models, and the lack of choice will be a barrier. If it takes off than the choices of models is going to expand. I don't think the auto makers are going to suddenly invest tons of money into this just because it's a good idea or a bunch of high power people back it. There has to be somewhat of a proven market before you can get multiple convertible, coupe, sedan, light truck, SUV and station wagon options.
And that's a bit of a speed bump.
Quote
I think they'll go for a 250 mile range - that is a bit of a magic number.
On a full charge. 40 miles maybe a bit short in distance. But if you live a ways from a station you better make sure you plan out your trip so you don't end up miles from a station with a dead battery. For instance if they only have the stations in urban areas, I couldn't drive to very many places from here in Charlotte.
Quote
I think the most telling part of the article is his private backer IS an oil man. Dubai is currently building a Hydrogen plant. I think oil companies will go where the money is.
I totally agree. This will have to be a proven system, so that automakers and energy companies know there is a bunch of money to be made. Otherwise there is great risk in a shaky time for the automakers, with no proven return. Just because they build it doesn't mean people are going to buy it. No matter how good of an idea it is.
I think his biggest mistake is his choice of automobile. He shoulda gone with a motorcycle as his flagship vehicle. [cheeky] In all seriousness though some of the Japanese have some good research going in electric motorcycle/ scooter field.
I like the idea but I really don't see it taking off in America. As much as the loud voiced scream for "green" the majority of people are lazy and resistent to change. On top of that, Agassi would have a hard time finding the space for all of his recharge stations. Many places of the most populated spaces just don't have the space for these things new things. Plus I can see most Californians always opting for the free battery switch option instead of taking the time to charge their cars. That's a lot of batteries to be producing and carting around... [roll]
Problems:
Much of the world is cold climate and battery life is greatly reduced in the cold. Israel might not care, but most of North America is not a great candidate for modern battery technology.
We would have to burn a shitload of fossil fuels to charge all the batteries. Electricity doesn't come from a magic plug in the wall! The infrastructure of renewable and clean energy sources must increase before a switch to battery-powered cars will help the environment.
Solar panels are cool, but they make very little power at a very high price. Also, not so great more than 50% of the time. (Lunar panels?) Don't plan on using a car roof size solar panel to recharge your future car battery unless you have a few days and a sunny parking spot.
It takes more energy to produce hydrogen then you get out of it. Let's focus on improving our efficiency, not just cleaning up our tail pipes.
where to start....
The website is science fiction. Unless he is very secretive about his technology, he doesnt have any. There have been battery powered cars for years, but lets see one of these automated battery exchange stations or charge spots.
The first thing on the website that bothers me:
PROSPERITY: As we build the infrastructure to lessen our dependency on oil, we create a carbon-free economy that generates new jobs, levels the global playing field, and creates sustainable and environmentally beneficial growth for future generations
carbon-free - building these stations and infrastructure will not be carbon free. It will probably take as much energy and resources to build one of these "stations" as it does to make a regular old gas station.
levels the global playing field - what the hell does that even mean?
In the last decade, the electrical power needs of laptop computers, mobile phones and power tools have driven advances in the efficiency and lifespan of lithium ion batteries. These advances have already been incorporated in the mass production of electric vehicle batteries.
all of these batteries are made from sustainable and renewable resources like rose petals and dolphin tears right?
Today, rechargeable lithium ion batteries can reliably deliver driving distances of over 100 miles on a single charge and replenish themselves at approximately one minute per minute of drive.
So it will take aproximetly 1hr 40 min to charge every 100 miles if you are on the hwy. Not so great for traveling.
I really dont think his buisness model is all that consumer friendly either. He keeps comparing it to cellphones, but it isn't like cell phones. No one will give a car away in exchange for your contract to buy electricity. If they do give a car away for free, it scares me to think of how much they will charge for that electricity.
• Drivers pay to access a network of charging spots and conveniently located battery exchange stations powered by renewable energy. so you have to be rich to be green?
• Drivers pay for the miles they drive. How is this different than how it is now?
• • Cars are made much more affordableâ€"even free in some marketsâ€"by the business model's financial and environmental incentives to add drivers into the network. Adding more cars on the road? yea.. thats a better idea
• Better Place operates the electric recharge grid that brings it all together. sounds like a monopoly
Quote from: derby on August 19, 2008, 09:59:02 PM
and your ideal solution is...
personally, i think electric vehicles are a perfect solution for major population centers.
(http://www.chinesetime.cn/Portals/2/ContentResources/Images/bicycle___3579.jpg)
The idea is to switch the whole country at once by making it cheaper to buy the electric cars and imposing huge taxes on gasoline cars. Americans won't stand for that.
The example given in the article where the car figures out the woman is going to work, she confirms it, the car calculates energy needed - then tops her car off to 80% charge. Her driving plans change - she goes to another station where her battery is switched out with a fully charged one. This is impractical, too. People top off their gas tanks then drive all week. They aren't going to want to deal with changing batteries or recharging multiple times in a short period of time. Also, it doesn't take into consideration the traffic in certain areas (Bay Area comes to mind). Maybe this would work fine in Israel or Denmark, but it needs a lot of tweaking to work here.
...not to mention the problem of producing the electricity without carbon fuels.
Very intruiging, though.
so how many lithium ion batteries go into an electric car?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeWq6rWzChw
Quote from: aaronb on August 20, 2008, 04:22:53 PM
so how many lithium ion batteries go into an electric car?
how many electrics switches in a "regular" car?
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/08/ford_massive_recall.html
Quote from: Triple J on August 20, 2008, 08:12:29 AM
We already do:
Hydroelectric
Wind
Nuclear (especially if someone figures out cold fusion)
Admittedly we should tray to do better though...from Wiki:
in 2005, it was estimated that 40% of the nation's energy came from petroleum, 23% from coal, and 23% from natural gas. The remaining 14% was supplied by nuclear power, hydroelectric dams, and miscellaneous renewable energy sources
Let me clarify...
It might work when 86% of our electricity comes from the alternative sources you mentioned and 14% from fossil fuels.
So he, and all his supporters realize when you charge a car from the power grid, you're just burning oil right?
I mean, it may be coal, or oil (in fact some plants just burn diesel fuel), or natural gas, but it's still a fossil fuel.
In order for his answer to work we have to reduce the beurocracy associated with building and operating a nuclear plant. Here in Detroit, DTE Energy has been hoping to build an aditional nuke to take dependancy off of fossils (and save people a lot in energy costs in the process), but it's about a 5 year process just get their plan approved by the government, so they can start working on the logistics of their plan. Additionally the permiting/etc. process will cost them $4-6 Billion before they even can break ground.
Even at such steap cost DTE, and other utilities nationwide, are willing to swallow that for the massive benefits of nuclear power. I can tell you environmental concerns are pretty high on their list of priorities too. Even from a buisness sense, the amount of cost involved in cleaning the pollution from fossil fuel plants is exorbitantly high, with even higher fines for not meeting standards. On top of that, these systems break constantly and are a logistical nightmare to keep functional. The real rub is this: right now, many states have energy regulation laws requiring that the energy producers sell that energy to aggragators for discounted rates, allowing for "competition" in the industry. Of course the producers are stuck maintaining the transmission system, meeting all regulations, stuck with clean air fines, liable for injuries in storms (as well as the repair bills), and more recently responsible for negligent death or injury cases of criminals killing themselves trying to steal copper power lines from the live grid. The energy companys are winning these cases, but defense costs are high. These regulation laws make it so a decently large energy producer like DTE has about a 30 year turn around on becoming profitable on the new nuke plant.
If you want to stop the worlds dependancy on fossil fuels, you have to change the real fossil fuel consumers. All making non-solar electric cars does is shift who burns the dead dinosaurs. Sure the utility is a bit more efficiant than any motor that GM or Toyota builds, but that's all we're talking about there, just a few percent of efficiency; and as Yergin said the world is becoming more and more energy hungry. The need for energy will continue to grow, and those few percent of efficiency will be absorbed in more growth.
The only answer I can see, until there's a major breakthrough in solar, is Nuclear.
I must be stupid. I read the article and I just don't get it. There is nothing new about the idea of electric cars. I think the only new idea I see is that Agassi's cars can only be charged at his special charging stations. And why is this a good idea? Why is this better than a car that can be charged at any outlet? And how does the company expect to make money? Will they charge a premium for their electricity? Why wouldn't the consumer just buy an electric car that could be charged at home, paying less for the electric? What am I missing here? Perhaps the idea is that the consumer will need to charge up before they get home, but I would think/hope that by the time this company can attain a large enough infrastructure of charging stations (at least 10 years?) that electric cars will have a much larger range than they do today. The only good idea I see in this article is the ability to swap out batteries quickly. Having the patent on a system to do that would be where the money is. Maybe instead of hoping to give the cars away and making money on the electricity, they should just give away the batteries. Then when you do the battery swap you don't have to worry about anything.
So where is the monumental idea it this article? How is this man going to change the world? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
I'm holding out for the tubes like on Futurama.
http://www.bart.gov/news/barttv/?&cat=27&id=429
Oh, and see if you can spot me in the video, I appear a few times ;D
(hint I am wearing yellow and riding a yellow bike) (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/transport028.gif)
Quote from: msincredible on August 21, 2008, 01:03:15 PM
http://www.bart.gov/news/barttv/?&cat=27&id=429
Oh, and see if you can spot me in the video, I appear a few times ;D
(hint I am wearing yellow and riding a yellow bike) (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/transport028.gif)
Yeah, I assumed you weren't the big fella with the full Amish beard...