Newest urban electric vehicle

Quote: 98Clubs

Amazing that we Americans dont embrace the better torque for hills, and overall better fuel effeciency of the Cleaned up Diesel Fuel. Many local gas stations sell it for all those pickup trucks and Delivery vans, so no "truck-stop" paranoia. IIRC in the early 80'a Ford, Chevy and Toyota tried using non-turbo versions... slow and smoky (of course lower design quality too).

I don't remember Ford but GM had a diesel version of the Chevy 350 CID engine, a crappy conversion not much more sophisticated than an independent builder could do. People insisted they "made it bad" to kill the diesel market in the USA. True or not, it killed the diesel market in the USA for 25 years. Fell apart fast as the block was not strong enough and really bad at starting in the cold, a bigger problem then before so many more people moved to the sunbelt.

My dad was a diesel mechanic for years, built (rebuilt) Detroit Diesel Engines for years and always insisted diesels were just as good as gasoline *if* you had a good diesel and not the crap that the automakers put in their cars. Back then even the European makes that had diesels were crappy, it just was not ready for primetime.

I don't see diesels catching on big in the USA. We seem to have developed a relationship with Europe where we sell them auto-diesel and they sell us unleaded. Americans seem to dislike paying more upfront for the diesel and more per gallon even if you get better mileage. This could change if we get running the things on corn oil figured out, use the corn for that which is probably more efficient than making it to ethanol. Also lets you use the corn oil for cooking first.

I maintain that if we could get a gasoline/diesel that could seamlessly switch to natural gas (CNG) and propoane then we would have something good. The present and near (50 yrs) future still seems to be with liquid fuels.

Quote: AZDuffman

Or if you have a 25+ mile commute and work different shifts.

100-150 miles is enough for two shifts a day, covering the worst-case scenario. How large a % of jobs even has shifts anyway? And then only counting ones worth commuting 25 miles each way - you aren't doing that for Burger King.
No one's expecting EV to replace everything else, especially not today.

Quote: AZDuffman

Not enough time to charge? Better like walking. Come home near empty and get a call from a relative or friend needs help and need to go back out, same thing.

There is an average of 2.28 vehicles in each household in US. In a typical suburban setting there are about 10 homes very close to you, for a total of 25 vehicles. Unless you are particularly asocial, more than half, let's say 6/10, are likely to be willing to lend you their car, bringing the total to 16 available vehicles, or 15 if we exclude yours.

The average American spends about 4.5 hours per day watching TV at home, another 3 hours doing household activities and eating, with other activities adding up to a total of about 9-10.5 hours per day at home, not including sleeping, or 40%.
That arrives at an average of 15*0.4=6 vehicles available. If the events were independent (they aren't, but for simplicity), the probability that no vehicle is available would be 0.6^15=0.00047, or 0.05%.

Adding a 10% probability that the vehicle is discharged, it's availability of 0.36, for a risk of 0.125%. Adding a 90% availability for your vehicle, this has 8077 to 1 odds of occurring, for an average of 1 day in 22 years when no vehicle is available. That's hardly a deal-breaker. However simplified this estimate is.

Quote: AZDuffman

Cars actually make more sense than public transportation for most people. Most people do not commute from and to places with dense enough population of residences or businesses to be run profitably.

I'm not so sure. What is the current ratio of urban to suburban+rural population in US?

Quote: 98Clubs

I love the smell of diesel in the morning ;o)

Is that a reference to a Apocalypse Now? Or am I just showing my age?

Quote: P90I

'm not so sure. What is the current ratio of urban to suburban+rural population in US?

The census bureau defines metropolitan statistical areas to encompass 83.6% of the population. But that is probably much too broad of a definition of urban for your question.

Looking at counties (excluding Alaska),
17.5% of the population lives on 0.5% of the land
26% of the population lives on 1% of the land ,
36% lives on 2% and
40% lives on 3%.

The 0.5% of the land containing 17.5% of the population (54 million) would be 30 most densely populated counties in the country (NYC boroughs are also counties):

New York County New York
Kings County New York
Bronx County New York
Queens County New York
San Francisco County California
Hudson County New Jersey
Suffolk County Massachusetts
Philadelphia County Pennsylvania
Baltimore City Maryland
Essex County New Jersey
Cook County Illinois
Nassau County New York
Milwaukee County Wisconsin
Bergen County New Jersey
Orange County California
Pinellas County Florida
Wayne County Michigan
Cuyahoga County Ohio
DuPage County Illinois
Fairfax County Virginia
Dallas County Texas
Middlesex County New Jersey
DeKalb County Georgia
Los Angeles County California
Harris County Texas
Marion County Indiana
Westchester County New York
Franklin County Ohio
Tarrant County Texas
Hennepin County Minnesota

The original target destinations of the car are San Francisco CA and Suffolk County MA (i.e. Boston).

After several years of doubling the size of the Congestion Charging Zone in London, the city is returning to the original boundaries on the Eastern end. Electric Vehicles are exempt from the Congestion zone charge (which is about $12 a day).

Quote: P90

100-150 miles is enough for two shifts a day, covering the worst-case scenario. How large a % of jobs even has shifts anyway? And then only counting ones worth commuting 25 miles each way - you aren't doing that for Burger King.

I don't know about you but I don't work at Burger King. I do know plenty of people, I am one myself, that have a "side" job ore two. My side job can require over 100 miles round trip and it requires it after the 30 mile trip to the main job. Mine is on the high side of miles driven, but most of the others I know would require a good cusion over the 100-150 mile range EVs offer as many is the night you get home at midnight and have to leave at 6:00 AM.

Quote:

There is an average of 2.28 vehicles in each household in US. In a typical suburban setting there are about 10 homes very close to you, for a total of 25 vehicles. Unless you are particularly asocial, more than half, let's say 6/10, are likely to be willing to lend you their car, bringing the total to 16 available vehicles, or 15 if we exclude yours.

This is bordering on absurd. How often have you "borrowed" a nbeighbors car when yours broke down? How often have you lent yours out? My guess is "never or almost never." It isn't going to happen. Here is what will happen. You will go to your neighbor's house and ask to borrow one of their 2.28 vehicles. They will say, "sorry, but I have to go to work/store/wherever later." Aside from the fact that they probably do need to do this factr is most people simply never want someone else to be using their car.

I will repeat it again, the simple problem is EVs ignore the fact that energy does not like to be stored. Until this is overcome and a battery is developed that can be charged in less than 10 minutes to give a range of over 300 miles; and said battery does not take up half the available storage space in the car while not leaking or catching on fire; until this happens, EVs are going nowhere.

And I don't see any of that happening for 100+ years, if even then. Something else will catch on first-either another liquid fuel or even a suitcase-sized nuclear charged device sealed and delivering power forever. The first can happen rather fast, the later would also take 100 years.

Quote: AZDuffman

I will repeat it again, the simple problem is EVs ignore the fact that energy does not like to be stored. Until this is overcome and a battery is developed that can be charged in less than 10 minutes to give a range of over 300 miles; and said battery does not take up half the available storage space in the car while not leaking or catching on fire; until this happens, EVs are going nowhere.

And I don't see any of that happening for 100+ years, if even then. Something else will catch on first-either another liquid fuel or even a suitcase-sized nuclear charged device sealed and delivering power forever. The first can happen rather fast, the later would also take 100 years.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) original goal was enacted in 1990, was to require 10 percent of the nearly 1 million new vehicle sales in the state to be all-electric by 2003. For California to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent of 1990 level by 2050, it must have nearly 400,000 zero emission vehicles on the road by 2020, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

If your point is that someday the EV will never be a serious challenge to gasoline car in the USA, then I would agree with you. But it could still be a presence in some of our larger denser cities.

Quote: pacomartin

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) original goal was enacted in 1990, was to require 10 percent of the nearly 1 million new vehicle sales in the state to be all-electric by 2003. For California to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent of 1990 level by 2050, it must have nearly 400,000 zero emission vehicles on the road by 2020, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

If your point is that someday the EV will never be a serious challenge to gasoline car in the USA, then I would agree with you. But it could still be a presence in some of our larger denser cities.

And California had to back off of this when it realized you cannot force people to buy what they do not want. California is trying the same nonsense again now, with what I predict will be similar results. Hopefully "greenhouse gasses" will soon be realized to be the fraud that they are and we can stop the crazieness.

In golf-cart commuinities EVs may have a place, but even then the development cost will not be repaid in the form of profits. Just use golf carts.

Quote: AZDuffman

In golf-cart commuinities EVs may have a place, but even then the development cost will not be repaid in the form of profits. Just use golf carts.

These Hiriko vehicles are a lot more expensive than most golf courses. Some people spend a lot of money on spiffed out golf carts because there is always some market for prestige. But I assume most golf cart trails are limited to 15-20 mph. The ability of the Hiriko to acheive 30-40 mph, and to be able to park in an 8' by 8' square is not necessary.

I imagine they might be helpful to some people who want to leave the golf cart trails and go on city streets.

Fancy golf cart



What really makes more sense is to have a vehicle for urban driving that costs less than $4K. Then it might actually make sense to have a second vehicle for when you want to go somewhere 5 miles away to pick up groceries or to go to a bar.

Quote: AZDuffman

My side job can require over 100 miles round trip and it requires it after the 30 mile trip to the main job.

Congratulations on your single-handed environmental footprint of two complete American families, at least in this regard.

Quote: AZDuffman

How often have you "borrowed" a neighbors car when yours broke down?

It hasn't yet with me, but I did quite a few times when I needed the cargo space.

Quote: AZDuffman

How often have you lent yours out?

Last time was actually just a day ago. Though it was a friend, to be precise.

Quote: AZDuffman

Until this is overcome and a battery is developed that can be charged in less than 10 minutes to give a range of over 300 miles;

And until it costs less than a gasoline car, accelerates faster, climbs rocks and fords streams, sits seven people and parks in less space than a Smart.

You can't always get everything at once with new technology.

Before applephone, a typical cell would last about a week of moderate use on one charge, the worst to happen after tossing it across the room is the battery cover would come off, there were plenty of water-resistant models if you wanted more, and some could do a month on one charge.
Now the battery isn't even expected to have anything by the end of the day, you have to check if it isn't smashed after falling off a table, and despite the lack of buttons, there is a grand total of one model with at least splash resistance. Yet next to everyone goes for it.

Quote: AZDuffman

And I don't see any of that happening for 100+ years, if even then. Something else will catch on first-either another liquid fuel or even a suitcase-sized nuclear charged device sealed and delivering power forever.

Me neither. But the chemistry isn't going to change, there are only so many liquid fuels possible, if you don't include liquefied gases. And however well established in 50's zeerust nuclear batteries may be, they aren't coming down to car size.

People often hope future technology to work exactly like today's, but better. Despite the telegraph being close to two centuries old, most fiction writers expected newspapers of the space age to come on microfilm, not through a transnational electrical network.
And the idea of clothes irons with cables to be plugged in is ridiculous - of course their future super-material would just hold heat from the stove for a whole hour. Or even better, it would be just like a charcoal iron, except you load it with chunks of uranium that keep it hot for years.