Get The “Three Brass Tacks of Renewable Energy: Driving Profits Now!” (FREE)
|
Click here to instantly receive “Part One” of The Three Brass Tacks of Renewable Energy (FREE) “Part 2” and “Part 3” of The Three Brass Tacks will each be emailed to you within the next 10 days, along with the 2GreenEnergy Alert eNewsletter – all for free. [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADQpUzijlA4&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0 width=”280″ height=”210″] |
Be sure to leave your comments below about the THREE BRASS TACKS OF RENEWABLE ENERGY: Driving Profits Now.
Thanks.
Oscar
After I filled out this form I was taken to a questionnaire page..
before I looked at it, I decided to go back an view the Youtube, thank worked fine… but I NEVER could get to the questionnaire AGAIN. The only transportation to it seems to be the SUBMIT and it knows I alreeady submitted!
Thanks, Judy. I emailed you the link. – Craig
Dear Sirs: I have an idea HOW TO MAKE VEHICLES TO BE MOVED BY EOLIC ENERGY. In Brazil no authority pay attention to this. I can pass the idea to you. It is for humanity benefit.
Best Regards
Ernane Trindade
Thanks, Ernane. Looking forward to hearing your idea. Please go to “Contact Craig.” Thanks.
The quickest, reasonable route to the EV transition is a significant, predictable gas tax that’s phased in gradually to allow both consumers & manufacturers time to adjust. I suggest an additional $2 per gallon, phased in at the rate of .10 per quarter over 5 years. The tax code can be adjusted to make this acceptable. We can lower payroll taxes, have credits for the trucking industry, etc. This approach has the added advantage of channeling dollars into our treasury instead of those of oil producers whose policies & activities may not be in our best interests. Some of the tax dollars raised can even be routed to research on battery, super-capacitor, and on-the-fly hydrogen technologies.
Exactly what I had hoped for. Now is a great time to be involved in this advancing industry. Never before has the market place been so ripe for the picking. Well Done!
Dear Craig,
Being an electronics technician, and an English to Spanish translator, I am interested in completing a fully independent, battery backed solar energy system. I already have two panels working to operate my home´s lighting, and a computer (used for translation). This is intended as a “progressive” system, adding panels as I can buy them. However, my aim is to build/convert/buy an electric car, and lower my lightbill enough to operate the car on the utility as my only payable power consumption.
On the other hand, I wish to do solar power installations for customers and make money out of it. Can you recommend where to buy solar PV panels, at 2 dollars per watt or under?
I have always been a fan of building my own stuff, so controllers and other circuitry is built by myself, but solar panels are something else!
Thanks!
Salvador.
Salvador: See my message to your email account, coming up soon.
Excellent report, Craig. I’m looking forward to seeing the next two.
Dear Sirs,
I am a retired electronic engineer 62 years old and I like to keep uptodate.
well done.
Thanks and Best Regards.
Manuel Gama
So, we keep looking to ‘investments’ in things because we expect expansion of our investments.
What happens when the dollar becomes worthless (as the system of systems is working to do right now)?
How do you get people to stop thinking in terms of ‘profit’ and start thinking in terms of survival? How will energy be used when it cannot be transported, when the roads are not fixed anymore, and when people are killing each other in the streets over a potato skin to eat?
Why are we looking for more ways to send value out of the community for things we don’t need (electricity is a luxury) at the profit of ‘investors’?
My interest is in the technologies and how they can be used locally WITHOUT thinking in terms of money. For example; “What level of usefulness to the farm/family/soil is each technology, and what alternatives are there for the things we are trying to do with electricity instead of the labors of people (who currently are wondering why they don’t have jobs)?”
When you think in terms of money and profits, you’ve already lost the battle with nature as a species.
Dan: Thanks for writing. See my email to you.
Good start, but we need to look at more details. These broad generalization are of little use. For ex. EVs and plug in draw there energy from the grid which is still largely supplied by coal. And the environmental cost to keep building new things ( cars, homes, buildings, etc.). All this needs to be looked at to determine the best choices.
Possilby something along the lines discussed in the book “natural capitalism”. That is to move away from the build, consume, throw away, cycle over and over. We need to look at the total life cyce and product/ action impacts. The solution will have to be a massive shift away from consumption, not marginally better “green” products.
Brad: You make some excellent points; thanks for writing. I’m sure you’re aware of the fact that we could plug in as many as 90 million EVs this evening and not require a single additional power plant to be built, as EVs are generally charged with off-peak power. Thus the migration to EVs is a clear winner, even with our existing assortment of power gen technologies; I suppose I should have covered that in the piece itself. Having said that, it will be wonderful when we get the world–especially Asia–off of coal. The other two “brass tacks” start to get at this. Again, thanks.
Correct me if I’m wrong , but I;ve never seen an article on Hi-Pa Drive propulsion from England .This platform employs round electric wheel wells with tremendous horsepower and torque .A 2006 Mini cooper and a Ford 150 pick up have been retrofitted with this system with extaordinary results .Combined with an ICE , range and power and speed can all be achieved with present technology . So , why no publicity ?
Rick: You’re right; there is precious little info on this. Do you want to author a blog post on the 2GreenEnergy Blog as a first start?
i believe the most promising green alternative fuel is bio-diesel, made from algae. it can produce 1800+gal per acre and can be produced in area where we consider unusable. desserts, swamps even sea water algae and places like the local sewer plant. it does better in hot climates and palm oil is probably next at 600 gpa soy beans produce apx. 44 gal per acre. their are over 300 plants and trees that can produce bio-diesel. africa has over 200 plants and trees that can produce bio-diesel. the point being is that bio-diesel is as clean as natural gas as well as the bio-degradable waste. the best part is that it doesn’t take from our food crops or the land they are raised on. i recently built a car that runs on 100% bio-diesel along with a lawn mower manufacture. can see at dixiehybrid.com and you can pull up a wealth of information on algae bio-diesel by simply tying in algae for bio-diesel. it will bring up several web sites and lead to more.
Glen: Thanks. I have friends who are into that as well. Personally, I think the ideal situation is one that doesn’t involve burning organic molecules. As I’ve written elsewhere, I happen to favor solar thermal.
I strongly believe in increasing energy efficiency and changing over to renewable energy. However, I probably will never buy either an electric or hybrid car.
Currently, I am 71 years old and, although my Mazda 3 is 5 years old, I have driven it only 14,000 miles. Since I drive it so little, it would make no sense to replace it with something more efficient. Also, I beat the EPA mileage with it since I have a manual transmission and know how to use it to maximize efficiency, something which is not accurately taught in popular publications. In fact, some of the recommendations to drive more efficiently are overly simplistic and just plain wrong!! Whenever it is possible, I use one of my motorcycles instead of the car. With my Suzuki SV 650, I average > 50 mpg, and with my Honda VFR 800, I average about 44 mpg. However, too little effort has gone into making motorcycles more efficient.
In addition to transitioning to hybrid cars (a transition technology) and full electric cars, we need more economical ways to make our homes more energy efficient. When I had my new house built, I wanted to use insulated concrete forms, but found the cost way beyond what could be justified. I would have used the chilled ceiling method of air conditioning because it is more efficient, but there were no local contractors who had experience with it.
More work should be done to make efficient methods of construction and more efficient air conditioning less expensive. Also, efficient construction should be reflected in the resale value of homes, but it probably isn’t now. We also need urban development to occur in such a way that public transportation is more practical and encourage the use of public transportation.
Build nuclear reactors to generate electricity.
Government (or some billionaire) buys Chrysler and sells it to Tesla Motors for $1 and has them build electric cars for less than $20K.
Government rebate: trade in your gas or diesel vehicle and get up to 1/2 off an electric vehicle, depending on the trade in vehicle.
Stop producing internal combustion engines.
Stop drilling for oil, stop importing oil, stop using oil for transportation purposes. Kick the habit! Use the electric patch to wean us off our oil addiction.
Build a 1500-mile long new shipping canal along the border with Mexico, called the Brownsville-Tijuana Canal. Put people to work on both sides of the border, create a barrier to illegal crossings, create jobs, and stimulate economies of both countries. Shipping going West travel through new canal. Shipping going East travel through the improved Panama Canal.
Build underground cities where possible to conserve energy, protect against some natural disasters, and allow the environment to return to its natural state.
Hydroponic gardening in each city. Regulated hunting for food animals above ground. If containers of any kind for anything cannot be recycled, reused, or are not biodegradeable, it cannot be made.
Build strategic defense initiative collaboratively with other countries so that all countries can have the technology, and then eliminate all nuclear weapons and prevent new ones from being built.
Dig up your lawns and plant a vegetable garden!
I believe we are in a period of revolutionary change to renewable power and electric vehicles. I look forward to reading your reports.
Like a breath of fresh air….I like that you have teamed up with Bill Moore. The alternate energy business is coming alive, thank you for helping to make it happen. My baby-doll are FLYWHEELS. The theory states if enough weight is turned at enough speed, the kinetic energy accumulation will match a tank of gasoline or diesel.
My son, Manric (Mario Henry), arquitect, is passionate about methane, like yourself.
I am passionate about the promise of flywheels, after an intense career with electric machines including wind and hydro. I have patented and am developing a stationary and mobil set of 3D, 6 double cone high speed rotors to turn over 60,000 all day for 5kWh/30 HP for many years in a UPS or emergency power banks, or 40,000 RPM, 1.5 kWh/30 KW in road vehicles (a pair stores 3 kWh/60 KW). Estimate 30% regenerate braking net fuel recovery from 60 MPH to Stop to 60 MPH in a HEV.
Yes, I need help from smart, rich, visionaries. Best regards, Mario
Mario,
Many years ago I read an article in Scientific American about such fly-wheels cars (most probably here in 1999’s http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=waiting-for-the-supercar).
I wish you all the best on that interesting journey.
Martin
(Belgium)
Nice article and on the money observations. I have been an EV supporter since the 70s when I was awarded a patent on an EV.
You are right! Mainstream manufacturing will have to be dragged, kicking and screaming into the EV world. However upscale offerings like Tesla are not going away and as costs come down and reliability goes up they will be forced to bite the bullet.
Right now serious offerings are for all intents and purposes “California Cars.” A lot of us have no choice but to drive in “real” winter weather. This is where present day EVs don’t do well unless you have an auxiliary fuel to address the heating needs of motorists. Fortunately, electricity works better in the cold but unfortunately, batteries don’t. Evs have made a lot of progress but we still have a long way to go. By the way my invention is a means to regenerate some of the expended energy.
Thx.
Excellent job of clarifying the bumpy road ahead. As an alternative energy dealer I have been looking at electric trucks for 3 years and have seen nothing that meets my needs. Keep it rolling.
Thanks for the good work, and wishes for future success.
Sounds like an interesting approach to get information on. Look forward to it!
R.L. Cochran, Ph.D.
Hi Craig, I just read the first installment and would say it’s brief but generally I would agree with your analysis. Being that LiFeBATT is one of the increasing number of start-up companies in the advanced Lithium-ion battery field, we of course already know a lot about this subject, but for others who are just getting interested I would say your series of reports will be a good primer for them to read.
Best,
Don Harmon
Thanks. Yes, this is a non-technical article, which I thought would be good for most people. Having said that, the next “Brass Tack” is more technical.
Looking forward to the rest
I agree with everything….except for one thing: “live where you work, and work where you live”. Give up the commute. The electric car is not a substitute for gas guzzlers in a society structured to commute because of bad city planning policies that entice people to sit for hours in a car on the expressway….what a life! “live where you work, and work where you live” means that you work from home or walk to work. When work moves or jobs change you move to closer spot. The affordability of housing will govern, but frankly, I hate sitting in a car regardless of whether it is an ev and taking hours at 10 miles and hour on the freeway bumper to bumper. The EV by itself will not improve our lives. We need to stop commuting long distances or even the 60 mile range of the battery is a long distance if it takes 2 hours to get to work. The real investment opportunity is: “live where you work, and work where you live”, buy that condo downtown in the city where you work, before the rush is on because of high gas prices and high ev prices from the OEM’s. I have been trying to sell ev conversions for some 20 years… there is no market for ev’s unless you give them away without your conversion company going broke or getting sued because they ran out of juice on a bad day. It’s a fat chance that governments will raise taxes on gasoline or commuting because all hell would break loose. Everybody is addicted to commuting. Anything that interferes with the ‘pleasures’ and profits of commuting is like prohibition!
‘Live where you work, work where you live’ works fine until you realise that life is not lived for work. In making a decision where to live, we consider the job of our spouse, and the schools that our children are attending. Community stability is important. We could start out buying a condo, both getting a job nearby, sending the kids to a nearby school. Then what happens: one partner decides to change jobs for a better position and it is a few miles away; the kids graduate from high school and the university is a few miles away in two different directions.
I agree with the underlying idea that land use decisions could deliver much better transportation systems. I tell people that they should move 20% closer to their work, a much better outcome for the environment than changing your lightbulbs.
Much of what Bill Weaver states in his article, I would agree with. We may well be kept in the dark about the end of reasonably priced petroleum because of demand by the entry of China and India into the equation and the fact that peak oil time has passed and supplies are beginning to dwindle. However, I believe that the major OEM’s fully realize this as fact. Mr. Weaver’s article being written some time ago does not reflect recent occurrences in the OEM market. The dillema GM has found itself in can only be escaped by going to full production of the EVs; i.e. the Volt and its derivatives. It is the only avenue for GM to drive down. As a follower of GM-Volt.com, I marvel at the comments made there. Your insight into what drives consumer buying, is the same that I believe will determine what transpires over the next several years. On the GM-Volt blog, many believe that the transition from ICE to EV will take longer than a few short years. Analysts believe that OEMs are overestimating demand for EV’s IMO, the transition will be short for the reason that you indicate; the consumer will want to make a style statement, and the vehicle details will not be that important until the buyer sits in an EV and test drives one. EV production and sales will drive the green industry and those companies that produce quality products for the automotive industry like Raser Technology and products for the electric power industry like Altairnano are prime investment opportunities for the present.
I own a 2010 ford fusion hybrid. It’s the best car I ever owned. If an EV of that quality was produced I would like to own it.
I would very much like to pursue Alternative use of conventional Energy.Toward that end, I would really like to see the EPA-OBD II Annual Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law closely examined, and changed.As it stands right now, it is entirely possible for any Gasoline powered Vehicle, from 1996 to the present, to fail it’s Emissions Inspection, for not emitting enough polluting Exhaust Emissions ! All such Vehicles have on board Oxygen [O2] Exhaust Sensors.These O2 Sensors are set up to detect a level of polluting Exhaust Emissions that would indicate that Gasoline is being consumed by an Engine at 14.7 parts of Air to 1 part of Fuel.If there is a low level of Oxygen, and a high level of Pollution, a Vehicle will fail it’s Emissions Inspection, as well it should.But, Gasoline can be safely vaporized into a mixture that is 100 parts of Air to 1 part of Fuel.With this, even the largest SUV could easily get 50 + MPG, and emit a fraction of the Emissions of a conventional 14.7/1 Fuel System, with an increase in Power, and much longer Engine life.I’m not the first to figure this out.Far from it ! For proof, do a search on [the late] Tom Ogle, and Charles Nelson Pogue.Then, go to http://energy21.freeservers.com/bookrep.html, and scan down the page to just before the update.But, even if it is not to be believed that Fuel Vaporization is entirely possible, it’s illegal to even attempt to do so, with any Vehicle, 13 years old, or newer.O2 Sensors are set up to detect that Fuel is being consumed at 14.7/1. A mixture of 100 / 1 will not emit enough Polluting Exhaust Emissions to register on O2 Sensors.When such a Vehicle is connected to an OBD II Emissions Inspection Analyzer, an O2 Sensor Failure Code will be generated, which will result in a failed Emissions Inspection.O2 Sensor Exemptions are permitted for Vehicles that have been legally converted to operate on Natural Gas, Propane, or Hydrogen, and are Registered as such.But not for vaporized Gasoline.Thus, it is entirely possible, under this EPA-OBD II Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law, for any Gasoline powered Vehicle, 13 years old, or newer, to fail it’s Emissions Test, for not emitting enough polluting Exhaust Emissions ! As long as this insane 14.7/1 Law that only benefits Big Oil remains in effect, the only way to make Vehicles more “efficient” will be to make them lighter, and smaller.This has got to change ! I have asked the Question many times ; “Why is it illegal for any Gasoline powered Vehicle, 13 Years old, or newer, to emit too little polluting Exhaust Emissions”? So far, not one Big Oil Executive, Politician, or Concerned Environmentalist can, or will answer the Question.Those that have replied can’t seem to come up with an Answer either.Can you ?
It seems all we read about in the press are stories about auto companies talking about their autos and saying that the hold up is the batteries not being ready for prime time. Yet, in he last couple of days we read about Smith Electric delivering trucks to some big companies without mentioning the battery supplier. What’s the reason for not speaking to the prime power source of these these vehicles? We found out that Valence Technology was the battery supplier to these vehicles from a Valence press release congratulating Smith Electric for their fine work… Apparently there are some batteries ready for prime time. Another example – Aptera is supposedly close to production and delivery of the three wheelers in the next couple of months. They refuse to name their supplier yet, I would almost bet that every industry insider knows. Aptera has surely made up their minds on whose battery will power their cars what with lead times and the amount of time it takes to test these batteries that were not ready for prime time. I think most consumers would like to know which batteries will power the cars. Which are using the chemistries that have a tendency to overheat and catch fire? Are there companies that have a safe chemistry? How long will the batteries cycle before needing to be replaced?
I’d like to read about the Tanfield/Valence story and how Kokam was chosen to supply Smith Electric over Valence for their US SEV company. Valence had a supply agreement with Tanfield but earlier this year that seemed to have concluded, yet the showing in Washington with the SE vehicles shows that there is still some sort of relationship. Are Valences batteries ready for prime time?
Valence has stated for a couple of years now that they can produce ‘ off the shelf ‘ batteries at volume numbers and are able to rapidly ramp up production to meet future demand. Yet very few takers. Why is that?
So… just a few questions, but that’s because the authors that write these stories do not seem to dig very deep and just take the Auto Companies view that the batteries are just not ready yet.
From a small time investor interested in the battery business,
Steve
Greet job! This article supports investors in The Netherlands to take a risk and invest in EV’s.
We, in Holland, have small distances between cities and EV’s will be accepted fast.
Our country is only 100 by 200 miles in which 16 million people live and work.
You can understand that we will do everything to start with EV’s.
thanks
Craig,
Yeah, I agree that Roberts comments are a little jaded, and yours as well, but I feel that you both are right on track. If give me hope that the smaller start ups will not only have a better chance of producing EV’s they will most likely have a longer window for production before product saturation. I joke that I hope gas hits $8 a gallon and the big three go out of business. I really don’t mean it but I don’t think I’m far from the truth.
Good article, I look forward the next.
Tim Ritchey
Just say NO to Minks and HUMMERS! :- )
Craig,
Really great job. Anyone who has been paying any attention to EVs in the US for the last ten years or so knows that you are absolutely correct in your assessment of the OEMs and their collective antagonistic belligerent efforts to stifle Evs is today being reinforced with delays, denile and token jestures. They all had wonderful entries over a decade ago which no doubt would have evolved into even better machines with the advent of the burgeoning battery business had they not tryed to sweep it all under the rug. Today with their lame excuses of in sufficient battery technology doesn’t acknowlege that they were already producing viable vehicles without the batteries. Those of us lucky enough to have saved a few of these vehicles know that they worked great with the old batteries and they work even better with the new ones, but this has come at a steep price with vertually no assistance from the manufactures.
Anxious for the next tacks.
great observation, looking forward to 2nd part & thanks a lot, dan
Thanks for the report. I’m the co-founder of an EV company Current Motor Company (www.currentmotor.com). We chose to enter the two-wheel EV market and we’re in the final stages of bringing our first product – a maxi-scooter to market. While your article is four-wheel-centric one area where scooters make a good match for EVs is that it’s easier to overcome the “unlimited range” hurdle. Furthermore, folks often buy scooters expressly for commuting – which is a known, fixed journey – hence they can overcome “range anxiety”.
This somewhat speaks to point (a) on page 9 of your report. Furthermore, the scooter market in the US is still growing and the scooter market in Europe and Asia is far larger. As such we feel that this is a good market to be in. Feel free to contact me if you’d like more info about what we do and how we’re going about doing it.
Personally I agree with most if not all of yours and Bill Weaver’s arguments. However, how do you feel we can best “win the hearts and minds” of the market place? Or, more aggressively, how can we take the battle to the traditional, entrenched businesses who pour billions into the marketing of conventional ICE and hybrids?
BTW, I have mixed feelings about hybrids. On the one hand I see that they represent a reasonable transition technology. However, on the other I see that they’re an effective way for the auto industry to still make ICE’s and make solutions that are more complex (and more expensive) than they need to be.
Clear, insightful reading. Thanks for your offer, Craig, I look forward to reading Parts 2 & 3.
I think some of the big OEM’s including GE (General E L E C T R I C) will be watching closely and looking to aquire EV manufacturers with promising products rather than do the development themselves. You could also look at the EV as an appliance with wheels. Lower barrier-to-entry do to so many off-the-shelf components vs all the complications of the ICE, its transmission, and exhaust system. Could find a significant number of entrants once a good energy storage unit is in place to offer affordable driving ranges. EEStore looks the most promising to me at this point.
I also think the nitche EV manufacturers will be of much less interest to the big players.
There must be millions of new ICE cars sitting at ports and storage lots all over the world awaiting delivery to owners who do not want to buy them. Add to these cars all the used cars in retail lots all over the world and cumulatively, you have an enormous untapped potential for the electric conversion market. Admittedly, a large proportion of these cars will not be suitable for conversion – but a lot will..and given my country’s governmental lethargy to embrace the electric vehicle at a high level, it’s upto back yard converters and mum and dad start ups to make the change. Better batteries please (and more of them…)
I totally agree with everything said in the article. As a holder of an MBA degree, I found that the points taken up by both Mssrs. Shields and Weaver hit the nail on the head – clear, concise, and straight to the point. As a lifelong aficionado of alternative energy, I wait in delighted anticipation for the revolution in transportation that is sure to come.
I agree with Craig. A lot of acceptable solutions for electric passenger cars (light duty vehicles) were already proposed and I agree that are very viable. Unfortunately for heavy vehicles (interurban buses and trucks) are not so many. Concerning that, a very interesting proposition is made in the site http://www.hibridesign.com. I think that can be achieved in our present times and represents a real world solution.
Craig,
Thanks for your well-formulated and straight-to-the-point EV document.
Without fully dismissing market research, I want to pinpoint that Akio Morita (a founder of Sony) also wasn’t convinced of market research. And I think it was Philips (a/o consumer electronics) that noticed that people selected a different color in market research sessions than afterwards in the shop.
Unlike you, I am not sure that ‘numerous market holes’ will exist. I agree with some specific purpose vehicles (not the financial SPV’s :-)), but IMHO it will be very limited in size and scale because economies of scale & keeping up with the Joneses. Although it was the case in the past, say >60 years ago, I do not foresee every major city/country having its own EV manufacturer either.
Finally, you might want to set-up a group on LinkedIn (if required, I would gladly help you with that, just send me a note).
Regards,
Martin
from Belgium, like Holland, also a good candidate for a rapid EV deployment because of small distances.
P.S. And as for all those guys & galls of the coal, oil, nuclear and auto industries who have been delaying it all for years/decades, I wonder if they can look proudly into the eyes of their innocent kids…
Tesla Model S is my dream car after all
Thank you Craig,
My personal business is going through some growing pains as well. I used to make parts for the auto industry. Needless to say all of us can not keep making parts for things that are no longer needed. Is there anyone that you know that needs a private machine shop. Old school type? No windows or onlooking eyes. Ive been in mfg. for 30 years and have a nice shop in my back yard. We are always willing to talk to anyone, as that is what business is. Thanks
Chris and Elaine
candeprecision@yahoo.com
Craig,
I found your assesment and analysis spot-on. We are in an extremely volatile mix of forces, anyone of which can drive us to extremes in shorter and shorter timeframes. Having worked in an around OEM automotive companies, I support your analysis that they are most likey to *follow* the EV trend, not lead it. Even if Nissan forges ahead as hoped / planned, their ability to satisfy the collosal global market will be almost insignificant. Your summary of the five key factors that shape opportunities was a wonderful condensation of essential driving forces. I look forward to seeing your other two *tacks* soon.
Cheers,
Bill Costantino
Let me say first that I have about 21 years of experience in the vehicle supply industry – foreign and domestic – with BS and MS in Engineering, MBA, and have been keeping close tabs on EV industry. Here are my opinions based on much analyses: I agree that EV’s and related enabling technologies (batteries, charge stations, motors, inverters, converters, etc.) is a great area to invest in. Avoid investing in small OEM’s who are only styling or assembling – instead invest in the suppliers and OEM’s who are leading in the enabling technologies. Monitor key rates like battery cost in $/kWh, power density, miles per kWh, etc….place your money on the companies with world class numbers and best trends in those numbers. EV’s will remain niche for many years and have best business case in urban mega cities with low range duty cycles and where small vehicles are needed. In early 1900’s many cars were EV’s and then they lost out to gasoline engines due to better cost and performance. 1970’s a large EV wave came in with the fuel crisis that caused gasoline prices to increase greatly…again gasoline won out as fuel prices dropped. Now again we get another EV wave due to high gas prices. Now why will EV win a niche in developed countries?…key enabler is lithium-ion technology that can get the power density up for a range that is usable for some consumers and the pack cost will result in economics that work when scale is large enough (500k per year per battery plant). Consumer research indicates only 5% of American’s are true “greenies” – but many of those people will not be able to afford the first EV’s. The catch 22 issue is real like most technology….need volume for economic price but need economic price for good volume. So answer is global launches of small EV’s…like Nissan is planning. But adoption will take time and gasoline vehicles will be here for many more decades. Remember, most Americans do still have land line phones and still use DVD’s – the truth is it takes new technology many years to earn trust and respect and behavior change of people. People will put their trust in well known brands like Nissan, Toyota, Ford (yes…all the domestic OEM’s will launch EV’s also). Remember that most American’s do NOT believe in the global warming scare and that it is a large political war….they don’t care…they will buy EV’s if it adds value to their life. Only for a few percent of buyers will that value be related to the “environment”. Value comes in many ways…EV’s will be cleaner for our air….EV’s will be silent…EV’s will allow people to avoid a gas stations….EV’s will allow people to avoid gas price volatility & related monthly cash flow changes…and there are more. The writers in this article obviously have no experience in what it takes to design, develop, manufacture, and market a new vehicle – especially with new technology. One error and the OEM has one vehicle on the road that caused harm to a human and your business is OVER! Battery cell temperature control over charge cycles and vehicle life is far from trivial with a duty cycle much more severe than any consumer electronics device. That risk takes much resources to manage and win…so most niche OEM’s you now read about will not be around in 5 years. Be very careful investing in the small OEM’s. EV will stay niche because many American’s have larger families and jobs that require larger vehicles for cargo, towing, and longer driving distances that EV’s will have hard time to win on value equation. Those will shift to hybrids and maybe one day to fuel cell EV’s. So many people may own an EV AND a gasoline vehicle. Nissan appears to have a sound strategy with small urban car/CUV segment. As global OEM’s enter the EV “niche”, their global scale will obsolete most small niche OEMs. Exception may be for high end sports care type niche like Fisker or Tesla or low speed EV’s that have been out for years already….but that volume is too small for much impact. Hypothetically if you think EV’s will replace all cars then I have a lake I would love to sell you….think about it – if EV’s ever reached a point where they cause oil production to drop significantly then gas prices would fall and gas-based vehicles will be more economic to buy and operate for long ranges that MOST American’s need and thus will be around for many many decades. Be careful investing in groups that share views that are not balanced and look at both sides…especially when they appear more focus on political viewpoints, support conspiracies, and emotion-based decisions rather than sound research and analyses. Such decisions will likely cost you dearly and with our 401k’s/IRA’s like they are now, do NOT go that route. If you want $$$ pay-back then send your $$ into the companies that are leading in the enabling technologies. Do you research and track the key metrics and trends and adjust your investments at least 2 to 3 times a year based on sound analyses. Good Luck!
Craig,
I am fortunate to have been appointed to a recently created position for my company – VP of Business Development. This is not a Sales position, but a business strategy position. I have an MSEE and 40+ years of engineering and marketing management experience in all types of electronics companies to apply to the position. In less than a year, I have found good opportunities for my company to enter the solar PV inverter market and the Smart Grid (all four layers) using basically our current product lines and one new disruptive technology we are bringing to the market. I am now researching how to get the company into the EV market. I have spent a lot of time studying this market and now understand clearly why the current EV market started with hybrids (batteries are more expensive than ICEs) and slow to move away from them (while batteries remain expensive). GM should be give credit for at least starting with a plug-in, range extended, EV structure in the Volt. My problem with the EV market is sorting out all the opportunities to find the best match between our corporate culture (we are a public company so have little patience with slow to mature revenue and profit), our corporate product strengths, and niches in the EV market.
After much study of the automobile and EV market, my gut instinct is similar to yours. Like you, I read all of the studies that say how difficult it will be to move buyers away from ICEs to EVs. BUT, I long to avoid gas stations and be able to “fill-up” my EV’s tank at night in my garage and when needed sell some power back to the grid at a good price. However, I am not enough of a greenie that I am willing to pay a lot more to do that – a little more – but not a lot more. I do believe we are at peak oil and am very concerned about the lack of public and government knowledge/concern for the havoc the oil price oscillations that are inevitable will have on the world’s economies and its political stability. Like the previous two oil price spikes, I do believe the future ones in combination with the massive and diverse investment in battery techology will combine the stick of high prices with the carrot of low EV costs to move a lot of people to EVs – IF they are available.
Like you, my wife is into horses and we live on a horse ranch north of San Diego. Good luck on your venture and I look forward to the next installment.
Bruce
Bruce: You make some great points here. Please see my email to you, and my blog post on the corporate culture and electric vehicles, which will be up soon.
First, thank you for thought provoking material. That is always the first step.
While I am not a PhD sociologist, you are for the moment stuck with an electrical engineer who has also had a strong interest in peak oil and alternative energy for many years. I find that, in the majority of conversations I have on the over-arching discussion, we are almost never disagreeing about evidence, but rather the time domains involved. So it seems with this first installment of your paper.
A fair amount of writing has been done on energy transitions in post industrial societies when the economics has been in favor of such transitions. Cutting to the chase on this, two or more decades are usually required following the recognition that the economics work. We do not yet have favorable economics for a transition, although close if you believe First Solar’s statement that they have it down to about $1.20/w. Solar thermal and wind are even more problematic due to transmission issues and their associated cost.
A second problem that is a moving target of sorts is policy and law. Modern societies are now more bureaucratic than ever in history. It is a constantly increasing slope that never reorganizes to a baseline. Precedent does us little good in this arena, since we are ever exploring new territory therein. We see this all around us in the inability of government to get alternative energy projects approved on a timely basis despite an overwhelming voter approval in the communities they are occurring in. Specific to vehicles, legislation to increase the speed limits of NEV’s has been stalled for years. I assume it will happen, but when?
We are blinded by the ‘early adopter’ phenomenon and its corollaries. All the people who are my friends and colleagues tend to be like-minded and it reminds us of the necessity to do good science when attempting to characterize opinion.
A very difficult to quantify problem that you mentioned are the automotive OEMs. Certain internal documentation I have been fortunate enough to see, strongly suggests a larger than 50% collapse in profit if automotive drive trains no longer contain ICE’s and their associated mandatory support components. It is the rare business that is comfortable with shrinking greater than 50% and it is the rare consumer who is comfortable purchasing expensive technology that does not have massive name recognition. To get around this, one needs an intermediary that is considered both large (therefore unlikely to fail) and trustworthy. The latter is important because the consumer wants to know there is a reasonable assumption of liability when things go wrong.
My personal priorities have trashing the planet at the top of the problems list, followed by the economics of foreign oil. Peak oil is not really an issue per se, because in our lifetimes, at least, there will only be temporary shortages. The current economics of production strongly suggest that it is possible to make a handy profit in bitumen or kerogen conversions to synthetic oil above $80/bbl. Aside from price fluctuations due to commodity market speculation, we have the opportunity to make plenty of synthetic oil for the remainder of this century. I did not say, however, that was a good idea. Just happens to be fact.
As tough as nuclear waste is to deal with, carbon sequestration is even harder. I’m not saying we shouldn’t do it, but its a lot harder. Annual Energy Outlook makes it clear where our problems lie. I won’t repeat them herein, as I’m sure you already know the issue is coal.
Now to EVs. To be candid, I have a Mini E. It is an excellent example of Electric Car 1.0. I won’t go into that here. My house produces more electricity than I use. Without getting into the myriad details, I get an approximately 86mpg equivalent at the current price of unleaded and kWh on a 12 year payback curve. That is far from near-infinite. I understand that you have excitement about this topic, as do I.
Capital investment in electric vehicles strikes me as most positive at the low end. NEVs that do not go very fast and thus do not have the exponential power consumption issues of a highway ready vehicle, make the most attractive economic argument. It is also the case that they are not dependent on Lithium technology batteries in terms of the total kWh required. The statistics of the commute make a strong argument for them as well, assuming our society is capable of slowing down a bit. That last part is unfortunately unlikely. I lived through the gas lines of 1973 and Nixon proclaiming the 55mph limit. The reception to that was so strong, you’d have thought we were being collectively sold into slavery. For now, that’s my data point on slowing people down.
As much as I cheerlead for the Volt, it is now my opinion that it is DOA. Greater complexity than current cars, greater maintenance issues than current cars, much greater price than current cars, and a world of competition that isn’t waiting until the last quarter of 2010, if that. I don’t believe the Volt is central to your paper’s thinking, but I do believe it will have an impact on perceptions if a failure. I work in some highly progressive environments, from the perspective of the people and the accessible knowledge. I am the only one experimenting with electric transportation of any variety. People love the idea of checking the Mini E out. No one has asked how to get one. The RAV 4 electric guy in town shows up every Earth Day, but I have yet to see the necessary threshold of energy in the conversations he has had with those who ask him about it. They usually wander over to the PV booths and ask if its any cheaper this year.
Imo, V2G is similar to hydrogen fuel cell cars. Very interesting topic with little to no future. Batteries age considerably due to charge and discharge cycles, regardless of technology or the BMS. It will be the stupid indeed consumer who lets the utility or their own house draw down their parked car’s charge anymore than 10%, if that. Good idea if the house is islanded, but not otherwise.
Finally, it couldn’t be a worse time, in terms of our current recession. Even good ideas don’t get funding and consumers are hoarding what little cash they have. Latest news is that the Obama administration is now talking about taxes for the middle class going up. The CARS rebate is taking the edge off the pent up demand and may, if additional monies are allocated, result in 750,000 or so auto sales. Those are sales that get removed from the table of possibilities as new (and inviting) alternatives are presented. The next three years, at a minimum, are going to be a rough patch.
Dear Craig,
Thanks so much for the Brass Tack, I am an electronics engineer and engaged in the manufacturing of automobile parts in India, apart from that my passion is designing automobile but of a different kind. Few years back I designed and manufactured the smallest gasoline powered two wheeler in India and sold around 100 of them, but as you know the two stroke engine was a majour environment threat so we discontinued and your mail came to me at such a time that we had just finished the testing of the same vehicle with an electric motor, after reading the first brass tack I have become more determined to go ahead with the conversion of my old design to Electric one keeping the school kids in mind and other short-distance commuters. We are also working on the e-rickshaw , I think we all have to do our bit to save the environment. Just to share we have also developed and are manufacturing the biomass stoves for cooking, these are being used by the people living in rural India where they were previously using just wood as the cooking medium which was causing lot of smoke and our stove is smokeless, we are also attached with British Petrolium for these stoves.
I thank you once again for the Brass One sent.
Wishing you all the best .
Regards
Sajeev Kathuria
Thank you so much. Your decision to pursue your electric vehicle design is an inspiration to us all.
I believe all of the major talking points in this article. I am planning an EV conversion from a gas guzzler as soon as I can afford it and have a place to do it. (I’m in the process of building an off-grid garage to do it in right now.) After reading an article called “A Confederacy of Dunces,” watching “Who Killed The Electric Car” and giving thought to the grid tied solar array I had designed and installed in my backyard that my local utility will not allow me to operate, I am certain that the affordable electric car will not happen in my lifetime in the state of Alabama. If I were in California and had enough money and/or connections, I could be driving a Tesla Roadster, AC Propulsion E-Box or an E-Mini. A more traditional type car with electric propulsion will be some time in coming to little jerk water towns that have no interest in the environment or the future. Our politicians have written laws that are not designed for the good of the people, but for personal pocket-lining and for appearances sake.
Mark: Thanks. As you will see in my blog post on The Politics of Electric Vehicles, I share your viewpoints.
Exxon is an energy company: when clean alternative energy becomes profitable, they will include it in their portfolio. Go where the smart money goes: I think T. Boone is a pretty smart fellow. GM did not kill the electric car, lack of public interest killed it. My mother never wore a mink, but it was not because of her conscious for the poor animals. EVs will be adopted when they become affordable and practical. My ride does not identify me, it gets me from point A to B in a comfortable, safe and practical way. I don’t care how others view me for driving an SUV, I have my reasons, and I stopped worrying about how strangers judge me after I completed highschool. Sure there are investment opportunities out there but I believe niche markets will take a long time to show a profit. Personnally I am hoping EESTOR will come through in late 2009 with their ultracapacitor so my znn stock, part EESTOR owners, will go through the roof. Thanks for your entertaining, free PDF. You should re-read it though and correct a few typos.
Hi Wally;
Thank you for your educational efforts. Self serving corporations are a quicksand against creativity and healthy competition.
I also understand cold fusion research a lot better thanks to your article.
Cheers
Roy
Thanks for the Cold Fusion interview. I didn’t read all of the comments yet, so I hope I don’t step on any toes.
I have been following the CF (suppression)issue since day 1, and frankly, it stinks. Dr. Eugene Mallove started a magazine to cover this and other anomalous energy topics many years ago, and if anyone wants to know the whole story, I suggest they visit http://www.infinite-energy.com.
As for the science: the problem falls squarely on top of entrenched empires of academia. Having an energy source is not a threat to much of anything, really. The average person isn’t going to build it unless something drastic changes. The real threat is to physics and science as authority figures. When Pons and Fleischman announced their discovery, the engines of discredit immediately went into operation around the world. Most simply put, it opens up venues of discovery which had been closed by relativity and quantum scientists many years ago. It especially points directly toward having to re-open the idea of ether physics in new ways, and that throws out decades of mathematical ‘prizes’ and ‘proofs’ that said there was no such thing. It reopens some of the biological ideas of guys like Wilhelm Reich and others who discovered transmutation of elements inside living cells. It even affects the issue of research into UFO’s and crop circles because it forces science to acknowledge that it doesn’t know anywhere near the real truth about how the universe works (including the textbook companies who lie for them).
Cold fusion isn’t just a threat to Exxon. It’s a threat to all that we thought we were as human beings.
Most people simply do stuff. They make up reasons for doing stuff. In that order. Why encourage them to do with with free, unlimited energy?
We need to learn the lessons yet to come about depleting resources, secret governments, and overconsumption: if we survive, that is. We can’t learn those lessons the easy way.
I am active here in Mexico in – Hybrid, electric vehicle design, as well as PV and solar concentrator technologies, wind and geothermal are not feasible here because of our location, but I am working with NGO´s to promote ecologically sound , sustainable systems. I also work with Aprovecho Research center in Oregon with respect to making better stoves available to the indigenous peoples in the surrounding mountains.
Hello, Craig Shields,
Thanks for the part two about Cold Fusion and also for the big amount of information sent.
You are in the right course for the worldwide massification of renewable energy sources, as part of the solution
for the problems in this planet.
Thanks. Best Regards.
Manuel Gama
Craig,
Brass two is very interesting and informative. It is always good to have the opportunity to examine different perspectives on controversial subjects such as cold fusion. While I lean toward the possibility that cold fusion has merit and deserves more support, I also agree that “Big Oil/ Big money ” are huge antagonists protecting their interests with their large and powerful disinformation machines not the least of which is Fox news, however the comlexity of the subject matter and vast unknown territory that it encompasses will no doubt be recieved by the general public with indifference, just like Einstien and Copernicas wild theories need to have tangible proof to be accepted and until then are percieved as heresy.
As far as viewing this piece, it is interesting and somewhat helpful. I would not appreciate spending money fo it since in today’s age there are literally thousands similar commentaries available on the web that one can view for nothing. I think that I was expecting something in depth and more explicit on specific investments. Just for what it is worth, based on your replies it looks just like other blogs that any thread can generate.
Bouty
While car makers keep promising Ev’s in the near future, the oil industry keeps the oil prices at an artificially high level in order to squeeze the consumers until the actual oil supplies really begin to dwindle. Then and only then will a serious commitment of investment be made into EV’s by the automobile industry and followed up by demand by the consumers of the whole world. Unfortunately, it always takes a serious situation or a threatening situation to change peoples thinking. The global warning signs have been posted for a long time, but it too will take a serious loss of life or a very steep loss of the food chain before governments and people around the world actually effect the environment for the better. Maybe it is human nature or greed that forces the world to act the way it does. At any rate, things will change when the choices left leave this world with no other alternative. By the way, the ESSTOR company in Texas is on the right track for an alternate battery supply for EV’s. Hopefully they can revolutionize the EV future for America and the world.
I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ITEM #1 OR #2. I AM NOT ABLE TO ACCESS THEM. cAN YOU HELP? THANK YOU, ED.
Hello Edwin,
I just emailed you the first two reports, of my “Three Brass Tacks” series. However, if you did not receive the first two reports at the time that they were originally sent to you, it is possible you will not receive the ones I just emailed you. Oftentimes when such email attachments do not arrive, there is something stopping them from reaching you, which is usually some type of security system that your computer or email service has in operation.
Sincerely,
Craig
Morning Craig!
Congratulations for the work and brilliant initiative!
We know (and feel) that the traditional automotive industry has no interest in the dissemination of new technologies that could restart the game in this valuable market. Here in Brazil we are developing a project for three years, of a compact urban electric vehicle for two people, the Tricycle Pompeo, designed to run at least 200km, time of recharging for up to four hours, and selling price of around U.S. $ 15 k. We intend to launch, also a version with low-power ICE, which can use gasoline or ethanol (brazilian flex-fuel technology), at a price of $ 10k.
Best Regards
Carlos Motta
During our brief conversation last week I mentioned a meeting, Charting a Course for Electric Transportation held in RTP, NC and sponsored by the Research Triangle Energy Consortium. You might be interested in viewing a tape of that meeting. Go to http://online.ncsu.edu/Mediasite/Viewer/?peid=16e8b94ab81d460facc35845738e8cdf . Since the RTP area has been identified as a Project Get Ready site by the Rocky Mountain Institute, a lot of folks are thinking about these issues and some of their ideas are presented here.
I have no expertise on the subject of cold fusion but Hyperion is reportedly manufacturing a self contained nuclear reactor that’s about a five foot cube, costs $25M and will power 20,000 homes for five years. I think it gets “returned to sender” for recycling, refurbishing and will then be returned to a user, obviously for some more money. It’s like a high powered longer term use copy of Shai Agassi’s battery swap program, but for homes instead of BEV’s.
I’ll look forward to making final comments after reading the third tack. Take care.
I found Wallys input very interesting on cold fusion,perhaps you have a more contact information. We are Alternate Energy based in San Diego, and have been working on portable fuel cells for many years. Our approach has been to build a fuel cell out of ceramics including the PEM,the first prototype was a 1/4 size of a lithium laptop battery but we managed 14.6volt for under 10 hours.We have to rely on angel funding to keep moving forward. Craig, how do you tap into the grant/stimulas money that is supposed to be available for green technolgy
You can reach Wally through his workplace, AC Propulsion – http://www.acpropulsion.com. As for the stimulus $, sorry, I know very little about that.
Great piece on cold fusion and insightful analysis, but I think it is very naive to think that anything wil be significantly different under Obama. I just don’t see it happening any differently.
Government is government.
Regarding cold fusion, I am skeptical. However, rather than simply dismissing it as ridiculous, it should be carefully studied and objectively evaluated by people who will not let prejudice get in their way.
When it was first determined that many diseases are caused by germs, there were skeptics who ridiculed the idea. Of course, we now know that germs do cause disease. There are other examples of cases in which new discoveries were ridiculed until they were proven true. The same may possibly be true of cold fusion.
Thanks for your feedback, Frank. Trust me, I was DEEPLY skeptical of this whole subject until I spoke with Wally. Of course, the whole subject is quite controversial, and, I expect, will remain so for some time. At the very least, we are a very long way from any real practical utility here.
Not necessarily far from it, Craig. When we don’t know what the technology is, how can we say it isn’t simple and easy to implement?
With all of the discussions, I keep thinking back to 1994 when I told the VP of engineering of the company I worked for at the time that it didn’t matter if cold fusion, fuel cells, or magic bunnies became the power source of choice: we would still need electric chassis research and wheel motors and power electronics and regenerative braking systems and energy storage.
Unless we get anti-gravity, then new bets come into play.
3rd brass tack.
I don’t feel you 3 reports have been very good. The chart of the cost as you noted on number 3 is very out of date. You also don’t account to the water use with coal, nuclear and NG not to mention hydro. I feel it will not compell someone to change as it should if you presented up to date info with all the issues.
I teach solar clases at 2 community colleges and NABCEP. I layout all the facts as they are today. It’s very convincing.
Note – your article said =The cost on the graph are alredy out of date.
Craig,
Very enlightening information. In fact I have often thought that the very same idea of a wind anemometer device would work as a large water turbine and wondered why it had not been used. It is sad to think that other vested interests have prevented such ideas from coming to fruition. It is believeable though when one stops to think about Electric Cars and where they were a decade ago and even now with so many entries on the horizon, that we are still going to have to wait another ten years before there are enough of them to make a difference in our “oil addiction”. We need more Warren Buffets, Bill Gates, Ted Turners, Elon Musks and T. Boone Pickens to go against the tide. Projects like hydrokinetics require large investments even if relatively smaller by comparison to conventional geneation. This is something the small investor really can’t accomplish by himself moreover while the environmentaland and long term investment costs benefits are obvious there is no doubt about the clout that coal and nuclear companies weald.
I believe that you should consider focusing on “distributed generation” using many electric storage sites (like electric cars) to offset high demand spikes and benefiting renewables as a viable investor choice. That is something that not only the smaller investor can get involved with but one that benefits the entire energy picture. Of course the big hold up there is having a “smart grid” which puts things back into the same situation of big resource suppliers do not benefit from “distributed generation” so they do not lend any supoort in fact probably spend for lobbying against it.
Once again I must comment on the value of these three tacks as perhaps dubious in terms of what someone is willing to pay for information. I am not sure who your audience is but the ideas that you have presented while very interesting are quite numerous on the web. One example I get free from Popular Science weekly covers many similar ideas from inventors I have seen for many years from PS, tha ever seem to get any more coverage. I also have to comment on even fairly large projects like the wind farms of Texas and Cape Cod seem to loose their momentum for various reasons no doubt influenced by “big coal”. So how will hydrokinetics be able to counter the same presures? For what its worth. Thank you for the fastinating information.
Bouty
Hallo, Craig Shields,
Thanks for the “PART THREE” and also for the detais sent. “Hydrokinetics” is a nice word.
Forty five years ago, I learned that the Hydraulic dam systems are the cheapest way of generate clean electric power.
A Hydraulic dam system may have three main funtions:
1. To generate clean low cost electric power. 2. To store fresh water for public distribuition. 3. To buffer the effects of strong rain, avoiding the floods, land slides and soil corrosion.
If you really leave in a free country without a bureaucratic monopoly or corruption, you have some chance.
Best Regards.
Manuel Gama
Thanks for your three documents.
It is good to see that for the third one, hydrokinetics, you only cite “political” restrictions, not a single technical one.
So that might be the way forward…
Thanks, Martin. In truth, I’m not sure there are technical considerations. The calcs associated with the HyPEGs I mention in the report suggest that it won’t be hard to build these at a truly competitive cost. Of course, time will tell. I was amused by a remark I heard in a recent meeting with a potential investor, a large architecture/construction company, whose engineer said, “We have a saying around here: ‘It’s ALWAYS cheap until you build it.'”
Graig,
Thanks for compiling your studies and thoughts.
It is clear that your research has convinced you of the benefits of renewable energy, and thats great.
I too am optimistic and a little impatient about our transition to renewable energy, but I also understand the challenges.
I think that the challenges of renewable energies are real, and not driven by large corp, government, or conspiracies.
I think that renewables make complete sense in the long term, but the population thinks short term.
The problem is that coal and oil are such good sources of energy. Coal and oil are effectively solar energy condensed over millions of years. The energy is densely stored in all the carbon double bonds of those molecules. Solar (voltaics or thermal), as well as hydro electric are effectively using energy from the sun at the same rate that the suns power is incident on the earth. Coal and oil have the advantage of being thousands of years of solar energy stored in the molecules which we use in an instant. Its just really hard to beat the nearly free and highly condensed energy that fossil fuels provide.
People seem to want short term advantages with out worrying about long term issues. I think that the problem is with the people (us) not large entities. Every time we choose what to buy, we effectively vote, with our money, where we want the world to go.
I think renewable energy will become a better investment as the population starts to see the world differently.
Report#1-EV development: Another way to state your belief in how EV technology will develop can be described by Malcom Gladwell’s book “Tipping point”. You are suggesting that the market will “tip” in a way that market research cannot predict. Time will tell if that will be the case. I believe EV technology is driven by consumer demand, and we as consumers look for short term returns. EV has a long term return. Public education may help on this issue.
Report#2-Cold fusion: This was a constant lunch discussion when I worked at LLNL. Our current nuclear reactors are fission. The sun does fusion, which is better because of the reduction of nuclear waste. I believe there are lots of scientists passionately working on fusion, either hot (engineering effort to deal with temp and pressure) or cold. They understand its benefits for all of us. I think that the problem is very hard, and not hindered by conspirators. I have see the major funding that has gone into this in an attempt to make it happen. Government, pysiscits, and the general public all want it. I believe the problem is technical in nature, not political or economic.
http://www.lbl.gov/abc/Basic.html is a nice place to get a general background.
Report#3-Hydroelectric: I think that many groups understand the value of hydro. Water, being denser than air stores a lot of energy, either kinetic as with currents, or potential as with hydroelectric plants at dams. It is challenging to make robust systems to harness that energy though. These challenges are probably much easier though than that of fusion which would make them a lower risk investment. With hydro, its all about the maintenance cost. Solar is lower density, but easier to maintain.
So, my feeling is that renewable energy is ultimately a must for our future.
As we start to feel the depletion of oil (Hubbert’s peak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbert_peak ) then the investment opportunities become more pronounced. Until then your passion for renewable energy will help educate others to their long term advantages.
-Mark
Many thanks for wonderful information about renewables, especially about energy from streaming water, and the resistence from the establishment.
HyPEG is HUUUUUGE. In Sweden we are lucky having many big rivers. Four of them are untouched for environmental reasons. HyPEGs are opening up new possibilities.
I am convinced we need one more solution than fossilfree electricity – an industrial carbon cycle parallell to Nature’s photosynthesis. George Olah’s concept of recycling CO2 from flue gases – eventually from the air itself – converting it chemically or electrochemically with water and fossilfree energy to methanol/DME and their derivates synthetic hydrocarbons and their products. The world will need still more electricity than today. Without fossils – what an enormous challenge!
i MUST pay $76 for your info – but how? Please let me know, and please keep me informed continually. Best wishes!
Jan-Gerhard: Thanks for the most interesting comments. See blog entry with today’s date.
No, the $76 figure was an earlier idea of one of my people; the reports are free.
The cold fusion and water hydro editions were both interesting and informative. It would appear that both are going to require time and political support to be realized as solutions to our peak oil problem. I would be interested in opportunities that are closer to implementation and are possible for the “common” man to implement. While large scale new sources of energy are needed, we also need to get the bulk of the population involved in both conservation and energy generation where possible.
Please keep the information coming. I had written off cold fusion as a sham until I saw this information and spent time learning more about it on the web. You have provided valuable insights and information to balance the “spin” which many of the large companies involved with energy want the world to believe.
THANKING YOU IN ADVANCE !!! THIS IS SOMETHING THAT AMERICA , WALLSTREET & THE WORLD NEEDS , OR WILL
SURELY NEED IN THE NEAR FUTURE ! I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A VERY SIMPLE DEVICE TO MULTIPLY THE MILAGE OF
ELECTRICALLY CHARGED VEHICLES WHEREIN WE WOULD SELDOM EVER HAVE TO REVERT TO GASOLINE POWER .
I BEGUN THIS PROJECT WHEN GASOLINE REACHED FOR $ 4.50 PER GALLON !!! I DO BELIEVE IT COULD BE USED TO A
GREAT ADVANTAGE TO EXTEND THE RANGE OF SUCH VEHICLES AS THE CHEVY VOLT ( HAVING WORKED WITH GASOLINE FUELED VEHICLES , CARS , TRUCKS , TRACTORS , AIRCRAFT SINCE WORLD WAR TWO I SEE NO REASON IT WILL NOT PREFORM ! MY PROBLEM IS I HAVE TO FIND SOME ONE WHO IS ABLE TO GET OT INTO THE MARKET PLACE AS I AM UNABLE TO TRAVEL AT THIS TIME !!!
THANKS AGAIN ” BILL B. “
Your three articles were extremely insightful and well written. [We need you to be our Secretary of Energy.] The Hydrokinetics article really tells me that our government officials need a wake-up call.
It is obvious that the purpose of these articals is to develope interest in investing. I have, since childhood, marveled at the
power of the ocean, and wondered as to ways that it might be harnesed to work, like dams do, to produce power. Just to even think of the shear, unstopable, unlimited, free power of the ocean, is to stager the imagination. Why no one in the money and power, back when electricity was catching on and growing in the 20th century, didn’t monopolize this resource is hard to understand. Had this resource been harnesed back then however crudely, and given the relative technological advancements which have occured in all other industries over the years, why, to compare our power beining produced by the ocean, to coal and oil, woul be to compare a horse to a modern car. So, lets hear about the investment. Thanks, Ed
It seems to me that some years back I saw an interesting devise that was tested that produced electricity by the use of ocean waves. The device looked like a cylinder, that when the wave came in it pushed the cylinder in and when the wave went out it pulled the cylinder out resulting in electricity. I was fascinated with the same idea that you were in looking at all that natural energy and no one taking advantage of it. I believe a company did produce these units and you probably can find some information if you search Island living and the production of electricity.
I have to agree with Edwin Bowermans comment, we missed the boat on the first few go arounds with renewable energy, let’s not miss it again! Forget about the Black Gold and Texas Tea give me Swimming Pools and Movie Stars!
Fascinating threads and I am sure this will be a great place to come for intelligent hope. However, I often wonder if we Eloi are too few and the Morlocks too many. Knowing full well that there is the chance for anyone to come join the future, break out of their blindness to the fact that what is good for the planet is good for them, now and individually. Besides making the Brass Tacks mandatory reading in school, or spamming this list to everyone, do others have ideas or stories on how they are affecting the needed revolution?
I have been dying to see an economical EV. With the completion of the Cash for Clunkers program and the associated 750,000 dead cars, there might be a way to make that happen. Of the 750,000 or so cars turned in, there must be 50K to 100K vehicles that still have a body and rolling chassis in good shape. The scrap value, now that the engine has been killed and any salvagable parts are no longer available, for each car is about a hundred to five-hundred bucks. I might be wrong, but I heard that the cost of conversion from ICE to EV for every day, short driving (under 40 miles) use was about nine grand.
If someone could put that all together, add a few bucks for profit and sell it, I would buy it. What a statement! A 1984 Pontiac GLE convertable, powered by electricity, cruising around sothern California, all for under eleven five.
Sign me up!
Steve, The cash for Clunkers prohibited sales of the entire vehicle even without the engine to prevent installation of an engine from the salvage yard and a clunker body being reused as a complete vehicle ever again, so they are all being crushed or ground up into small pieces in a chipper. Also the infusion of so many body parts would reduce the value of the scrap yard’s current inventory. They therefore are just not available.
To get an economical Glider for conversion to BEV contact the “Pick-it-up” abandoned or unwanted vehicles on private property (if you have the title, for up to $300) who advertise in the newspaper or “Craig’s List” , Most of them will give you choice of vehicles they pick up with clean title for about $500 and drop it at your house. Most areas have several, call them and ask about it. Of course you get what you pay for but a blown head gasket is usually not worth the cost to repair.
Everyone talks about the batteries, and yet the First successful automobiles in the USA were Electrics. such as the Baker and the Melburn Light Electrics. No need then for Lithium , just Lead-acid and Edison (Nickle Iron) cells. My point is the WAIT WAIT WAIT for better batteries is just a delaying tactic. The nickle cell chemistry patents held in hostage by Chevron need to be improved with research and place that chemistry into production!
The second bug impediment to EV s is Repair and Service. Currently If you take an all electric vehicle to any dealers service center or stand alone service center, they will fix window glass, body dents and painting, tire sales and flat repair, brake service,light bulb replacement, or chassis lubrication. But they have no one trained to work on the Electric Drive System! Chevy has said they will have one electric drive tech / mech for each cluster of four dealerships. Toyota still has NONE! That makes it unlikely anyone will buy their electric cars doesn’t it!
Investors need to fill that nich. Start EV Service Centers, or the Vocational schools to train the Tech / Mechs to work in them. We have been seeking investors see our website at http://home.RR.com/evtrainingcenter for an inspiration.
Electric Vehicles need Service Centers (Would you buy a car you had to repair yourself without even a parts supplier within 100 miles?) Servicers can be a van setup that comes to you, or a small shop with a trailer to carry your EV to the shop, or part of a Sales Operation (Dealership) for EV s which with a service department can sell used vehicles too.
D.Miles, Director, EV Training Institute Inc., Central Florida
Why use a car service organization when there our a big bunch of forklift service enterprises that are specialized in electric drive and battery teqnology. Toyota have one of the largest forklift service organization in the world. I think the argument of a non brand service organization will prevent one from buying an electric car. The forklift service personnel most often have a history of repairing cars also.
I just read part 1 – “driving profits now”. I think Craig makes some valid points, particularly that the existing big auto makers are not willing to risk capital to start something new, particularly when people are barely buying their products and they are cash strapped. Ditto for reduced profits from maintenance, etc.
However, I’m more optimistic that the big ones can do something, hopefully along with smaller companies too. Particularly, I see GM’s Volt as a well timed product – presuming it performs as expected and doesn’t cost too much. The reasons are simple: range and charging. Let me briefly address each of these:
Range – even if most people’s daily usage is well under 40 miles, how many people want to go out and rent a vehicle each time they need to travel further? Even if you have two cars, both could be subject to the same predicament. For example, I have a minivan I use for hauling the family and work materials. Almost always 40 miles.
Charging – mostly this is pretty obvious. But, let me add that given some quantity of plug-in EVs (volt style) on the road will, I think, give time for charging infrastructure to develop. Once developed, pure EVs will be practical for long range and hopefully palatable to the mass consumer. The Volt-category of vehicle will make this transition much easier.
I hope we can see a plethora of vechicles like this, with a reasonable price, perhaps subsidized initially by government incentives. Big auto can benefit from this much easier than jumping to pure EVs. Of course, I would much prefer to have a pure EV!
Mr Tesla back in 1939 understood the power contained in our surrounding atmosphere and he in the most simplest way developed a antenna that conducted electricity (tuned to the earths resonance frequency) out of the atmosphere, which was mounted to the trunk of his electric car which relayed the electric current to a dash mounted control circuit comprised of vacuum tubes which fed the AC motor under the hood of the car. He drove it for a week without recharging as it never needed any batteries to recharge. People of his day said that was the work of the devil (black magic). In disgust he abandoned any future work in that field. Westinghouse provided the funding for the car, but declined to further the project as he said ( quote) ” there is no money to be made with a car that drives for free” Tesla was born a hundred years before his time” If he was here now, big oil would not stand a chance. He predicted before his death of a time when we would be enveloped in a oil crisis and would have to go back to electric cars. Why cant anyone here in the USA tackle this simple project and resurrect Tesla’s electric car. Then make it work for your home! Free is the way it should be.
Thanks for “Brass Tacks” I am not supprised at your finding out that market surveys very often ask the wrong questions and so get the wrong answers the most recent inthe auto field was of course the Ford Edsel ,. I would like to throw a new spanner into the works, ALL EV popponents seem to have forgoten a section of the market, the rural vehicle owner here where I am to go shopping it is a 62 mile trip in and some running round and then return often a 180 mile total journey covering freeway trips , 20- 25% hills and then the stop start of the township. The paralell hybrid is a joke for us as 90% of the drive it would be on ICE with the fuel consumption varieing with road speed, series hybrid with an electric motor as the transmission and the ICE running at a constant RPM in its most fuel eficient mode and giving an output of about 40 to 60 % of the duty cycle into the batteries and a battery pack to give an EV range (uncharged) of about 120mile would go a long way toward answering the rural vehicle requirments and may well put a major dent into the socalled SUV markets by allowing a comparable multiuse vericle with an EV pedigree and the I can face anything the world can throw at me attitude of the SUV owner/driver
I have always been interested in electric vehicles. At age 13, I put together an electric trolley. A starter motor “geared down” via V belt and pulleys to one wheel. I used to get about half an hour out of the battery – great fun. Charger over night.
Has anyone got any closer to figuring out what Nikola Tesla did for powering his electric car in 1931?
An alternator originally developed and patented by Raymond Kromrey is well worth a look. This has REVERSE characteristics to conventional alternators, in that instead of having increasing back EMF drag the more power you withdraw from it, this instead REDUCES the mechanical work the drive motor has to do !!
Claims by John Bedini are that units he has made are typically 120% efficient!
I am in the process of putting one together now to test.
absolutely spot on! i live in new zealand and tried to get an electric car since 2002, unsuccessfully! i even got a personal refusal from the then minister of land transport safety to import a left hand driven renault twingo from switzerland. i travelled to london to try and get a citroen berlingo electric right hand drive, only to find out that citroen had stopped making them a month before in sept 2005. i tried to import a second hand electric car from japan but could not find one.
after all this i decided to convert a citroen dyane 1973 to electric. it took me about 9 months to get all the necessary parts and about 4 weeks actual time to convert it. i put solar cells on my shed roof and i am now driving for free with no pollution! 100 km per charge and the car cost NZ$ 25 000, solar unit NZ$ 18 000. i had a bit of help from a mechanic and an electrician.
if i can do it WHY CAN’T THE CAR COMPANIES DO IT? as you point out, because they do not want to!!
Dears Bill Moore and Craig Shields,
Thanks for your good will on the personalised service, well informed and great in courage.
EV World is the biggest challenge to everyone. It is almost dynamite over the minds, which is good.
I believe in global warming as well as in the conspiracy theory. This means that the main problem is not technical,
but political.
Thanks, Best Regards.
Manuel Gama
Speaking personally, I believe that the real problem is as much cultural as it is technological. Resistance to change is systemic in (North American) society and institutionalized through numerous government agencies at all levels. Tens of thousands of people are employed to maintain and defend the status quo governing who drives, what they drive, where they drive, how fast they can or should drive and what multitude of standards they have to meet to drive at all.
In pactice, this is proving to be destructive, if not fatal, to innovation because, as you correctly point out, “consumers can only respond to those modes when they actually arrive”. In the case of LSVs, the enthusiastic and positive comments from those who actually own and use an LSV are diametrically opposite to the negative, sometimes sneering comments from those who have never driven one. The US could be reaping the benefits now of a thriving electric low speed segment using existing technology. But that would require a major change in public attitude, lifestyle and possibly American self-image because the LSV challenges society’s preconceptions about what it means to ‘drive’, and who is ‘entitled’ to road access.
In this environment, progress may very likely be stalled until an electric vehicle conforms exactly to the staus quo in design, function, performance and price. This is where we are today.
To motivate people to change, innovation needs to be demonstrated and implemented at the local level in willing towns and cities but this would require changes at NHTSA, DOE, state legislatures and municipal councils. This is very unlikely to occur quickly enough.
Hi Craig,
Here is my feed back page by page on your Part 1. I support EVs but they still have a way to go in the space of consumer markets:
Page 2
Regarding your premise about the experts being wrong about purchasing patterns – I’m not sure I agree but I do understand the power of branding. However, that said, branding works far better for products that don’t have to measure up in their performance and capacity to an established long lived product like an ICE automobile. Put another way if, infrastructure debates aside, toe to toe an electric car does not measure up to the total functional capacity of an ICE. It has less range, less top speed and you pay more for what you get. We can talk about values all you want, and there is always a market segment that can be reached through this, but folks at large measure their purchase power purely on what they can manage to pay up front or reasonably handle through a finance basis. I’ve been to many EV venues where the most popular questions are; how fast, how far, and how much? Most everyone quietly walks away when they hear the answers.
Page 3
“We tend to buy branded products – . . . . . . – and aspire to be in the future.”
I agree BUT only when the market space is new. TV, computers, and virtual retailers (.coms), all had one thing in common: They had no real predecessors to measure themselves against and their product expectations and metrics could be self described by the product. The electric car unfortunately does not have this convenience. Think of it this way – if I told you that I just invented an analog based computer that used a fraction of the raw materials and power of a conventional computer, but would cost twice as much, run half your applications and run the internet for limited hours in a day before needing a “rest period”, would you be running to the store to buy it? Sure, I could brand it with movie star images and give it all the hype I could muster, but in the end I have a metric to equal or beat set forth by the digital world. Let’s use a real world case – Vectrix. We can attribute their demise to a number of factors, but in the end people won’t buy a product that costs 2x up front when gas is less than the painful threshold of affordability. End case. Vectrix even struggled in markets that had regulatory advantages on its side in the EU. You can argue operational costs all you want over the life of the vehicle, but people buy what they can afford today upfront (regardless if that is paid in full or financed).
Your last paragraph on page three is what I agree with. But isn’t that stating the obvious (we can debate the part about “sell like hot cakes”). Here you agree with my general assessment – cost is #1 closely followed by product performance metrics established by the existing history of competing products. Here I would argue that you’ve increased the opportunity for EVs with comparable prices, but the performance metrics must be reasonably in line, otherwise people will say ‘why pay the same for something that has less range and needs to sit around charging for a while before I can use it again’. Once you give people capacity it’s hard to take it away. Do suburban homes really need to sit on ½+ acre plots when building on just enough land space for a house and a driveway serve the function? The expectation has already been ingrained, and cost will be the driver to force acceptance.
The big truck/SUV market bottom fell apart due to painful gas prices between 07 and 08. This coupled with justified panic behavior by vehicle owners / leasers left people with negative value on vehicles due to supply over load to the wholesaler market. Ouch! That sting is enough to make anyone think twice about Hummers and big vehicles, social graces aside.
I agree that social engineering plays a role, but it alone is not enough to stem the tide or change a direction. It has to be coupled with larger forces. Economics and metrics are the two big motivators in the equation and cannot be overlooked. When all three forces conspire then you have a win and an irresistible force that creates sweeping change. Social engineering alone won’t cut it.
Page 4
Your conclusion at the top of the page is invalid (sorry to be so harsh, not intended that way, you write a compelling piece but I don’t think it hits reality). As I stated before all the examples you put forward, cell phone, I-Pod, etc. have one thing over the current state of EVs – they beat the old metrics! Why wouldn’t people pay more for a cell phone over a landline if they have the convenience of calling from anywhere at any time? Why wouldn’t I want a device that replaces the bulk of all my old media that conveniently transports and plugs right into my audio infrastructure? Superior metrics in these new products simply are compelling and address the immediate nature of consumer motivations. Today’s EV does not give enough in terms of metrics (we can talk about pollution and mpg equivalent all you want) and certainly not in cost. People are not directly paying for pollution (you know what I mean when I say this), so that is not a metric that is felt/dwelled upon by people. If there was a national pollution tax on cars measured by engine displacement and miles traveled every year then maybe we’d have more traction with EVs.
Your second paragraph astounds me – you as a marketing person know better here. What you are saying is “build it and they will come”. This is the reason why so many businesses fail. You’ll have to do much better than this to win me over here.
The rest of this page can be summed up with your three point listed:
1. Almost never need to buy gasoline – let’s not argue this point, you base this statement on statistics but reject the same kind of data when it comes to current state of marketing EVs. This statement works because it has a direct effect on the purchaser.
2. Have made a viable contribution to health etc. – I agree that folks are sympathetic to this as an altruistic cause, but because they are indirectly affected by this so it’s not in the forefront of their minds. It is under the covers and they don’t have the same response. This is human nature like it or not.
3. Freeing our country etc. – Ditto from comment number 2 above. As long as we can have a semblance of our current lifestyle it’s an indirect effect.
Page 5
The sections prior to the Bill Weaver essay essentially validate my points. Without pain points to make up for the lacking in today’s state of EVs, it’s a tough market. Altruism has a limited market when my wallet has a budget. If I can buy a pair of conventional socks for $2.50 and have a second choice for socks made from organic materials and responsibly manufactured (fair trade practices) for $5.00, then I have a niche market because in the grand scheme of things the doubling in price is still a very small percentage of my total earning power. Note, I said niche market because even here people will say “socks are socks” so why pay $5. That’s not to say that you can’t build a brand around the $5 socks, you can, but en masse the $2.50 product wins. That’s why cheap restaurants survive hard times and fancy ones tend to fold.
Bill Weaver’s Essay
I couldn’t have said it better. I would temper a few points but in the grand scheme he nailed it.
Page 9 to 10
OK – finally you hit the number! I agree with the idea of specialty markets that allow a startup to take hold because the product performance expectations align with the technology at hand. Honestly if we were logical creatures mass transit would be high on the public’s mind coupled with public light rail and perhaps public station cars (more like urban class medium speed vehicles) in place for us to get around in. At best we would own just one private vehicle for those off chance excursions. But we are not logical creatures at heart so market behavior is often deemed “not able to be predicted or to work as anticipated”. Logical arguments about product purchases based on altruism don’t win over a limited budget if the price of the product represents a significant portion of one’s income.
Conclusions:
Your first five pages are off focus and really out of sync with your final conclusions. You need to better unify your message. The first five pages are the proverbial preaching to the choir. Who are you trying to target with this (the average reader, B2B, investors, EV manufacturers, market analysts, etc.)? Align your message in the intro with the conclusion. The paper contradicts itself as it is currently structured.
Last two pages tell me something but I’m looking for some more meat. You are starting to hook me with the Miles story.
If your Part2 and 3 go into market analysis (again, I don’t know who this paper is for) then how will it compare to http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reportinfo.asp?report_id=992799&t=t&cat_id= and similar type market reports? Again, I don’t know the purpose or target of your paper.
Hi Craig,
Thanks for Brass Tack2. As an opinion editorial this does wonders but I would question the timing of the article. If this was released on the next price spike in oil and energy I think it would get a lot of attention, but right now it may get lost in the static of health care, the economy and unemployment.
As a casual reader and op-ed piece the conspiratorial aspect of it has me hooked, but as an informative piece to investors it leaves me lacking. Wearing an investor’s hat I would have the following outcomes from your article: Don’t hold my breath when it comes to cold fusion investment opportunities; current private enterprise does not support it; I should look elsewhere when it comes to renewable energy like solar thermal and hydrokinetics.
As with my comments in Brass Tack1 I want to know more about the areas where opportunity exists. You left me hanging there and spent a lot of time around a possible conspiracy theory. I want to know success stories regarding solar thermal and hydrokinetics and how you can demonstrate to me that you can show me the way. Purely from an investor’s viewpoint there is nothing in part 1 or 2 that has elevated me or informed me in a way that gives me a tangible insight on why I need to put my money in what you mention.
In terms of the $76 price for the three pieces, this is not significant because most investor information sources are far pricier. That said however investors buy news subscriptions that point out tangible statistics that support the underlying qualitative opinions of its author. Anything that falls short will prove of little value to the investment community.
Count as far as a pure investor’s information source: Brass Tack1 – strike 1; Brass Tack2 – strike 2. If this were an op-ed I’d give you a double for Tack1 and a triple for Tack2.
The first “Brass tack” was good,
The Second sounded like a dissertation from Roswell, NM, (Lots of talk sounding like an explanation of a technology in a Science Fiction Novel.) In a HOT FUSION setup four hydrogen atoms with an electron and a proton in each combine to make Helium with two protons, two electrons, and two neutrons. the neutrons seem to be made from a proton and an electron slammed together for each one, but the total weight of the proton and an electron is greater than the weight of a neutron ! And it is the annihilation of that mass which results in the surplus of energy.
We are really looking forward to some sound theoretical engineering in “Brass Tacks #3”.
Fantasy is not sound advice for Investment in an Enterprise.
I see that the discussion is also about electric vehicles.
I have a proposal for a national network of electric-powered Magnetic-Levitation rails that can carry freight, and later passengers, at speeds competitive with air travel. For local off-network travel, these same vehicles would preferably be powered by batteries. See my slightly out-of-date website at http://www.LeviCar.com. I will be updating the web site this month.
This is not about generating green energy, but rather a more efficient way to use energy.
I hope that many of you will take some time to look at my website. My e-mail address is accessible through the website.
Enjoyed your reports very much. I especially like the investment perspective. However, I don’t have big bucks to invest. Have you considered starting a mutual fund directed at alternative energy. This could attract more investment money, which would help the industry, and even make money for small investors. Everyone wins.
Hi Craig
Your brass tacks part 1 and 2 make interesting reading. I am not an expert on Electric vehicles and even more so cold fusion however must admit I tend to agree with Serafino Carri’s feedback. Speaking as a non technical consumer the current price/range/performance equation for EV’s verses ICE must change until it is within shouting distance of the ICE if you want mass adoption. Not all the elements of the equation need to be the same. Here in the UK for example perhaps range is less of an issue for most consumers than say in a continental size state like the US, as long as there is at least 100-150 miles range and ubiquitous and rapid recharging AND overall cost of ownership is broadly approximate to ICE vehicles then consumers may well be persuaded because the much lower running and fuel costs compensate for lower range or more frequent recharging. While individual elements of the equation may differ the overall equation must be competitive verses ICE.
After reading “Three Brass Tacks” part one, it would seem that you are “Preaching to the Choir.” We are the market for EV’s. We are the people that are beginning to care about “Sustainability” and the survival of our species. The fact that the American consumers might be a bit slow to embrace a new technology is pure economics. Make a car that looks good, drives good and gets you from point A to point B more efficiently, it will sell. Keep it simple. As far as our perception of who we are, it can be changed with education. Of course it will take time, but have you noticed how many “Smart” cars are on the road now? Death traps on wheels, but they are still out there. The reason that the furs became a thing of the past was the public outcry with demonstrations. Are we will to demostrate against oil? Probably not. This new paradigm has to come naturally with good technology, good media, good education and simple economics. They need to make sense to replace something that has worked for over 100 years. Forget what good environmentally it is. That will be a great byproduct of success not to mention the quiet streets! I can’t wait!
Another comment on replacing oil with electricity. Not much improvement here. 50% of New England’s electricity comes from coal. so we are actually replacing oil with coal. Unless we can get more people to generate their own power as I do, than one nonrenewable resource for another is not much progess.
We do need government support for the shift. Tax breaks are a help. The problem right now is that most companies are in “Survival mode”. “Green” takes a backseat to economics. One thing that is on our side is the fact that the price oil and electricity is going to keep going up as time goes on. Alternative energies are on the war path. Wind is now displacing some of the coal usage. We are number one in the world for wind generation. We just got started. That’s awesome! With solar also moving forward, we will need a new infrastructure to support it. New 750 volt DC power lines will begin replacing the old systems. This will make the system better able to utilize these intermittent renewable energy sources. It is going to happen one way or another. The companies that refuse to understand this will just cease to exist! GM saw this coming and dismantled their EV programs. Kind of nuts, huh? Almost sunk them.
Free Markets will help make this happen. If Chrysler’s 200EV or the Chevy Volt doesn’t come out within the next couple of years, then I will consider going elsewhere to get my next car! It’s going to happen anyway, just wait and see.
Thanks for the article,
Tom
Thanks for Tack #3, Hydrokinetics. You provided the current coal-fired generation capacity and derived the number of 8 MW devices which would replace them, but I don’t have a clear idea of how much river bottom it would take to replace a typical power plant, nor of the total potential harvestable energy available (in the US, for instance). Can you provide that information?
Also, you mentioned the DoE’s interest a couple of times (at least once in the cover email and once in the paper itself) but if you developed that aspect, I must have missed it (and it seems important).
Thanks again for three thought-provoking articles.
Hi Craig,
Thanks for your Brass Tack3. I think after my harsh reviews of 1 and 2, your 3 is a winner. You give a good intro that appeals to common sense backed by some good technologies and examples. I would add the following to your article:
Your installed cost chart is great but it would be wonderful if in addition you can add an operational cost chart. As you stated in the article a land based 4 MW generator set is less costly on an installed basis than that for a coal fired one, but that begs the question why don’t we have more diesel / steam 4 MW generators then? Answer – operational costs.
Does the HyPEG operational cost outperform that of a utility scale generator? Does is outperform that of an equivalent 4 MW steam/diesel generator? This would be great selling and educational points to investors. Do this and you will have hit a solid triple score if not a home-run on this round.
Great article and a real improvement over the previous two when wearing my investor’s hat. It is also written in a style that works well as an op-ed or marketing piece.
Your favorite critic,
– Serafino Carri
Hi Craig
Thank you for the great read in the three Brass tacks. I found BT 1 a great encouragment for me to continue my dream of converting cars to electric at a reasonable cost.
I started to build my electric car about 1 year ago. It was a big challenge. It made me realise how closed a lot of people are to new ideas. Trying to source parts that are not off the shelf and asking questions that were not the standard often resulted in looks or comments suggesting i was some how deranged.
Fortunately I am fairly persistent and have completed my car and have now traveled around 3000 klms. It was and still is an exiting and challenging time. I am very exited about the future and hope to start on my 2nd EV very soon and with a bit of luck and persistence I hope to make a wage out if it some time in the future.
Thanks again for BT
regards David
people
David: Thanks for the note. I certainly know the feeling of people looking at me “as if I were deranged.” Don’t sweat it; it comes with the territory of doing something different and challenging established viewpoints. Best of luck to you. Please feel free to post more details of the EV you built; that’s exciting.
Craig,
I live in California. I read the first two of your posts and was not sure how to comment. However, on number 3 you hit the jackpot. On number 1, I am already a convert and am attempting to put together an electric MGB. Motor and controller I have, but batteries are proving to be a bit of a challenge.
On hydrokinetics, I would agree, there is not much excitement in the energy and political circles. I would assume that this is because the idea of more dams across rivers over the world is not a good idea any more. I watched the building of the Kariba dam across the Zambesi river and the installation of the power systems on the south bank there. However, the north bank installation for Zambia actually broke one of the largest civil engineering companies in the world, and the systems were never installed. Building this way for hydro-electric has always been too expensive in money and lives.
You may be interested to note that a tidal system was put into place between two of the Channel Islands off the French coast where tides run to 42 feet (spring tides) some decades ago. I do not know if it is still running.
I love your idea of the horizontal (vertical axis) system to be placed across rivers. I think it would be a great boon to the third world. We would have great places to put a number of them in Inyanga (Zimbabwe). They could be made the same size and dropped in all over the place. Placing such units in areas such as the Columbia river (western USA) would present a challenge as the river has to be kept dredged to allow ships to reach Portland. However, they could be placed in the non-dredged areas. Being a sailor, I have some ideas on your system. We need to talk.
Peter
Hi there, i enjoyed reading your brass tacks and am a little cross to say the least, not at your good self, but at the governments and CEO’s etc who knowingly put down these new technologies. Are they insane? Do they not realise that our future depends on the development of these things and they are in a perfect position to develop them? It must be that they eventually lead to “cheaper” energy and big companies cannot have consumers gradually paying less for things. It is saddening that money really does seem to make the world go round and greed shall surely destroy it….
Really enjoyed the first edition of “Three Brass Tacks!”
I just read the first mail you sent on Brass Tacs. Thanks for your sincerity.
You bet. “Sincerity.” Thanks; I’m flattered.
Thanks for all 3 Brass Tacks. Can we discuss possible business relations on your HyPEGs.
Sure. Please let me know what role you’d like to play. Please feel free to email or call anytime.
I found part 1 of Brass Tacks to be very insightful. I appreciated the fact that it deals with the current pros and cons of electric vehicles and how the large manufacturers run into limitations by consumers. Cheers for the article.
Hello Craig, thanks for sharing your wonderful knowledge with me. I am still a novoice in renewable source of energy and i am looking forward to make my way up and explore the upportunities. i would appreciate if you can give me tips as to which segment i whould start with as a beginer and then the directions i whould follow as i mature in accordance with time. Thank you once more for all you help. i have still not received the 3 brass tracks but i look forward to get it may be in a few days. Have a wonderful day
Thanks for the kind words. I’m not sure I can be terribly specific in response to your very good question. I would suggest that you read the blog posts here; they cover a great deal of material, and I try to make sure we don’t leave too many stones unturned. My book, when it becomes available in a week or two, is another, deeper attempt to provide a broad survey of the subject. In any case, thanks again for writing, and best of luck in your endeavors.
Hello, Mr. Craig.. Many thanks for all your free reports which speaks about Renewable Energy…
I would appreciate if you could guide us more on Recycling of Solar Panels which has become a necessity leaving no other option… it would be very helpful if you could give your precious opinion that what key aspects should be considered to setup recycling facility as an entrepreneur and as an Investor to invest in the same…
Regards,
Surekha
You have finally written an article about something that I have a passion for and have been unsuccessful in finding capital to start our electric vehicle business.
Let me say this: that to understand the electric vehicle business or any business involved in automotive technology, you really need to have spent serious time working at an OEM to understand that business. By working, I am not talking about being a financial person counting beans in the jar everyday or a legal person trying to keep the company out of trouble, I am talking about the core competency skills required to be successful in automotive and those are designing, developing, testing, and manufacturing great product. You also need a strong dose of marketing and sales. Everyone needs to know what the customer wants. But what is most important is leadership with vision of the future, 5 years, 10 yeasr, even 20 years out and knowledge of how to get there.
I had the good fortune to have worked for General Motors for about 25 years. I worked primarily in product engineering and program management. I also had the fortune to have worked in a lot of different areas because my focus was to become a vehicle systems engineer, which one day might have lead me to be a car division Chief Engineer. GM like many large companies was a game of musical chairs, where all people tried to move quickly around the Corporation becoming a Jack of all trades but master of none. To really learn you need to stay with a car program from start to finish. GM lost that focus, but my skill set was still total vehicle focused. During the last 5 years I worked on the EV1 and on EV conversion programs. I left GM and worked with 2 Tier 1 suppliers for 6 years and then started my own consulting business in electric and hybrid electric vehicles. My last experiences linked me to my current position as President and Founder of EnVironmental Transportation Solutions, LLC, a company that develops, markets, and soon to start production of a city based electric Low Speed Vehicle, called EcoVElectric. What makes us unique is not only our road-worthy family of products and both also our unique business structure which allows us to design in America, source in America, build in America and still be thousands of dollars less than our competition. However our challenge remains to get the capital we need to start production.
Let me get to your article. I think the issue of the success of EV’s is way beyond marketing. The American public thinks with its pocketbook. EV’s, either with or without Government subsides will be limited in success, because they do not make economic sense. How does the average person justify spending $33,500 for an electric Malibu (Volt) with different appearance? Yes there will be early adopters, but after they have bought Volts, where are the rest of the sales going to come from? I predict after the market stabilizes, the OEM’s will be back to Obama asking for more financial subsidy for EV’s. If America is serious about EV’s and alternative energy, then we need to tax people directly for use of oil and coal generated electricity. I have a proposal on how to do this and where the money goes and how these tax dollars are spent including public over sight. Until alternative energy is lower cost that status quo, we are talking to a wall. EV’s can be lower cost than ICE vehicles but the OEM’s need to work to bring cost down, which I think they don’t want. I also think that your comments about it will take the polar ice caps to melt is wrong. We will have a war in the Middle East long before climate change and that will bring this country to it knees. 1970’s will happen again but it will be 10X worse since we are now 3X more dependent on foreign oil. And that is how Washington works, totally reactionary, never proactive. We need proactive politicians (oxymoron?? I also think the V2G is way over expressed. The utility companies are stuck because they can’t build now power plants and we are running out of power. V2G offers some load balancing but there is no extra energy created with V2G which is what this country needs. I also do not think the utility companies have done a very good calculation on the “real” costs to pull a kWh out of an EV’s battery pack. Battery packs are not like fuel tanks. They age, shrink in energy capacity, wear out and need to be replaced. Each kWh pulled must be cost justified to the owner or he will elect to not allow the grid to take energy from their cars. This calculation is easy to do if you know the price of your battery pack in $/kWh and you know the number of cycles your batteries can sustain. Just divide the two and you get the $/kWh/cycle.
I agree that EV’s will happen from outside of mainstream automotive, but the one’s that will succeed will have a strong core of workers and leaders from the auto industry. Without this knowledge, the companies will not survive. There are a bunch of these new companies popping up, but my prediction is most if not all will fail. This includes Tesla, Fisker, Coda, Aptera, and a big bunch of others.
Why is this so? Bill Weaver is pretty much on target, but is missing some issues. Yes, capital costs to do something new is always expensive, but then you put on management the huge investment in place today in people to design, test, validate ICE’s (internal combustion engines), facilities and equipment to manufacture engines and transmissions in high volume and highly developed supply base for parts; you have the formula for fear.
The issue of risk and liabilities is really pretty small for the OEM’s because they know their customers and how they use products very well. Product liability is a huge concern for start ups who do not know this information nor do they know how to test their products to the extremes that customers drive. They do not have the background or experience to ask the right questions. These questions are called the things you don’t know, that you don’t know and they can be very severe finding out.
Mr. Weaver’s statement only scratches the issue EV’s change in the current automotive world. It is not only the fact that EV’s require significantly less service, in fact an EV is almost maintenance free, but EV’s are more like your furnace motor and will last a long, long time. The major paradigm change is that people who buy EV’s will like the convenience they offer, the reliability they possess and the long life without problems they exhibit. Owners will not be back to the dealer every 2, 3, or 4years to trade in their old car to avoid problems and maintenance expenses that their ICE cars of the past had. This will turn the current auto world upside down, but the public is the clear winner and that is why EV’s will happen. What will happen is that people will get new battery packs at the end of the 10 year battery pack life and drive the vehicles for another 10 years.
So what are the OEM’s of the World doing to slow down this paradigm change? Lots of things. First of all they like hybrids because hybrids typically use ICE’s that they know how to build, they know wear out in about 10 years and they know people have to bring their vehicles back constantly for service and maintenance. The OEM’s like this and like the complexity hybrids offer. The OEM’s constantly put concern into the public about “range anxiety.” They put fear into the public about the need for charge stations everywhere. They put fear into the public over the high cost of EV’s. Basically the OEM’s don’t want change that will cause them to have to reinvent themselves, because they basically can not do that. My favorite example of this is the fact that the Swiss invented the electric watch, showed it at a Swiss watch show as a novelty not worth pursuing, and stepped back. Japan took the idea to mass production. Now all the Swiss build are expensive exclusive mechanical novelty watches; they could not reinvent themselves and loss most of the World’s market for watches. The cost of EV’s is now high and the OEM’s are trying to keep them that way. If you look at all the EV batteries being developed and manufactured, none of them are interchangeable. There are no size standards for EV batteries. This will keep battery costs high, development costs high, time to market long, and technology development slow. Today you buy almost any portable electronic device and 90% of them use standard AA, AAA, C, D or 9V batteries that you can buy anywhere and very low cost. That is what standardization does. When every manufacturer has their own size battery, the replacement costs will be extremely high, when the batteries do not have to be if battery modules were standardized to some extent. Not one of the factories, we the US taxpayers have given grant money to support, will build an interchangeable battery module. They are all building plants to build one OEM’s battery. Sure they can build others, but that takes lots of money and time.
Carlos Ghosn is a true paradigm breaker and leader. But Nissan does not have a choice. Nissan is ranked as #8 in World sales and Renault is #10 (but when combined they are #4). Nissan must make the effort or they will disappear. The choice they have accepted is to go to electric drive when everyone else is trying to avoid EV’s or are doing EV’s only to appear green. Nissan will have their work cut out to get EV’s to be more affordable but they will succeed because they are committed to electric drive.
Craig,
I just read ‘The Three Brass Tacks’.
There are always unforeseen changes that make a difference in markets. We see that environmental consciousness has made a huge difference in the hybrid car market.
I agree that there is a coming rise in gasoline prices that will help push the EV market.
I believe that two potential technologies may help make EV’s improve their marketability.
All the big car companies have been working on carbon fiber technologies that will drastically lower the weight of vehicles. When this technology becomes cost competitive with steel (which may well be accelerated by the coming rise in steel prices which were at a record high before the recession) the fuel economy of every vehicle will rise. Especially for EV’s this lowering in weight will greatly extend the range making them more attractive.
As thin film PV’s get lower in price and the technology for painted PV coatings comes closer to production, the potential for adding a coating of PV to EV’s will help on the range issue during daylight (when most driving gets done). Imagine your car charging itself while you are at work.
The fact that smaller manufacturers can think outside the box and improvise quicker gives them a big advantage in capturing a rapidly changing market.
There are also amazing advances in capacitor storage of electricity that may surpass batteries as the preferred storage medium for electricity.
The key is to challenge engineers to innovate and then watch what happens.
Dependence on cheap oil caused engineers and chemists to create solutions using petroleum as a starting point. Once they got out of that mindset, more sustainable options were found.
I like the Apollo Alliance as an organization that asks us to make a national agenda that is based on sustainability. They use the Apollo program as an example of how much we can achieve when we set an ambitious national agenda. Kennedy aimed for us to get to the moon in ten years and we got there in nine! A national agenda of achieving a sustainable energy future will produce innovation we can not imagine.
Test
It is said that investors are unwilling to mass produce the lifepo4 battery (the best EV battery to date) because a newer tech might make it obsolete. I disagree because the led acid (even though almost useless as an EV battery) is still heavily invested in.
We don’t have time to look for something better. Therefore, if a corporation can figure out a way to make this newer version of the li-ion battery as cheap or cheaper than led acid, it will “always be a hit”!
I highly doubt that there are not sufficient quantities of the element needed in the Earth’s crust to make this so on an ever exponentiating level…
This, then would give RE the ability of exponentiation and even “powering” a V2G setup.
We were contemplating obtaining some solar panels for our residence recently. The only problem was the price. The least expensive system we identified was around ten thousand bucks. It would have taken us decades to make back that amount. At any rate, we happened across these recommendations for making your own solar panels. We ended up going that way. It saved us quite a bit of money, and the totally free, environmentally friendly power is great! 🙂 We operate several of our appliances off this grid.
Speaking of environment friendly energy, my son and I built a free power power generator last month going off of this design. It was actually quite simple to make, despite the fact that I’m hardly a mechanically inclined person. It is really cool. We bring it camping and utilize it to run our compact devices. As opposed to solar power systems, this thing appears to function cloudy or shine.