And the primary has to be run constantly with associated losses even when no load is present !
And will work a lot better still in the near future. The target for 'new generation' diesels for autos is 40% for example. And a lot of the ways it will reach those figures are already known, like eliminating the camshaft and using electronic valve control which is FAR more versatile and efficient.
Graham
Do you realise what effect that would have on the number of potholes (and their location) ?
Graham
But the primary has to be constantly energised regardless of loading and that DOES mean losses.
Also, the test bus they made (requiring an amazingly flat road) created such high levels of acoustic noise from the power transfer that it would never be acceptable. I haven't the article in front of me, but a figure in the 70-80 dB region comes to mind.
Graham
That's a minor issue.
The main problem is such things are horrifically expensive with the total cost = number of lanes (in both directions) times number of miles times cost per installed mile.
Technically possible does not mean fiscally possible, a fact the arm wavers usually overlook.
Now when would _that_ be? At 3 am?
Actually the efficiency remain high even with poor "coupling" simply because it doesn't draw much current at low or no load.
The efficiency go up 10% while the cost of fuel goes up 1,000%
You cannot maintain any semblance of a western life style with those numbers.
We'll all be staggering around behind oxen at that rate.
Bret Cahill
That doesn't change the fact that the battery is a consumable just like the electricity that passes through it.
That's why replacement costs must be treated as a consumable just like electricity.
Who cares? It ain't gonna happen unless the _overall_ costs are spreadsheeted.
Bret Cahill
So you must replace the battery every so often. That cost must be spread sheeted just like electricity.
They are both consumables with the battery cost being at least 2X that of the electricity.
Bret Cahill
Now I see what you mean. You mean as in spread over the economic life of the battery.
Have you any supporting numbers for that ? Such as a worked calculation ?
Graham
Believe it or not, I do actually agree about these points.
Graham
Are you going to power an entire interstate so that a few cars or buses can run ?
This where your lack of engineering knowledge lets you down ! You got it 100% back to front.
Graham
Sure, but how do you plan to deal with the effect of real roads in the real world and inconvenient things like suspension travel ?
Roads don't stay flat for long.
Graham
You could do that by driving more economic ICE vehicles.
VW long ago made their '3 litre car'. It takes 3 litres of fuel (< 1 US gallon) to cover 100km or ~ 62mi. It's about 80 US mpg or 100 UK mpg.
Graham
At what ***COST*** ? You SERIOUSLY want to make some savings ? Look elsewhere.
Shipping Wasting 4.37 Million Barrels of Oil a Day
Graham
their
Oh indeed. I just liked that particular drawback. Imagine the tramlining effect too !
BTW, it has now become environmentally unfriendly to recycle newsprint paper in the UK. It costs more (uses more energy) to collect and recycle (which involves using nasty bleaches and so on) than the damn stuff is worth (saves energy). Why ? Oversupply ! Too much is being recycled. The price / tonne the recyclers will pay has dropped from £25 to £1. And at the end of it, all you get is crap paper !
Strange that 'the greens' forgot you can basically grow the stuff (which captures CO2 if you're into that as well ) !
Graham
their
Have you ever driven in Massachusetts? It can take more than year to fill one.
/BAH
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required