The Political Discussion Thread

[Womble]

For fixed location use, there are alternatives. Nuclear is the best one, but the enviros shut that down. The issue is for mobile use.

What alternative is there for gasoline? Do we have anything that is safely transportable and can meet or exceed the energy density of gasoline ?

Battery tech is progressing pretty fast, and with the right infrastructure, electric cars can beat gasoline. For urban use, electric cars will soon be superior, the main problem will be inter-city and rural travel in large countries.

The problem isn't one of energy but of infrastructure. You can drop a gas station in the middle of nowhere with minimal infrastructure involved, but a charging station requires an order of magnitude more investment.

[Coco Pops]

Hydrogen fuel cells seem to work.. Not sure how widespread they are or if it ever really took off..

No it has never taken off. Plenty of experimental hydrogen vehicles but commercial production seems a bit difficult..

[Falcon Horus]

And Tesla is working on a smaller model car - still a little pricey for me but they are working on it.

[Annoyed]

Battery tech is progressing pretty fast, and with the right infrastructure, electric cars can beat gasoline. For urban use, electric cars will soon be superior, the main problem will be inter-city and rural travel in large countries.

Which means the U.S. Are people supposed to buy two cars now, one electric for local use and a conventional for highway use ? I can see the wealthy doing that, but the average citizen isn't going to be able to do that. So if he 's got the brains god promised a doorknob, he's going to buy the conventional powered car that is not handicapped by an inadequate power source.

The problem isn't one of energy but of infrastructure. You can drop a gas station in the middle of nowhere with minimal infrastructure involved, but a charging station requires an order of magnitude more investment.

You see it as infrastructure, but the real issue is still energy density. We can't at this time store and safely transport enough energy to allow for adequate range and power capacity with anything besides oil based fuels.

Even looking at it from infrastructure fails. If X oil company or some entrepreneur thinks he can make $ with a gas station by the side of some rural highway between cities, they go ahead and build it, paying for the necessary infrastructure themselves.

As you noted, the cost of delivering power to a similarly remote charging station will be very high; rights of way for the cables to bring the power and such. Will anyone buy a recharge at the prices he would have to charge to recoup that investment and make a profit? Particularly since there are very few electrics on the road.

[SoulReaver]

how's it more complicated to build a remote electric recharging station?

an electric pipeline requires cabling that stretches all the way to the station to provide electricity but a gas station requires some sort of pipeline that stretches all the way to the station to provide fuel so in both cases there's a lot of work involved no?

[Annoyed]

how's it more complicated to build a remote electric recharging station?

an electric pipeline requires cabling that stretches all the way to the station to provide electricity but a gas station requires some sort of pipeline that stretches all the way to the station to provide fuel so in both cases there's a lot of work involved no?

No.
Most filling stations have their gasoline delivered to them via tanker trucks. So there are no right of way, maintenance and other costs involved for pipelines, etc.

Also, regarding electric cabling, there would certainly be losses incurred over the long cable runs required to service a remote location. They might get significantly less energy out of the cable at the destination end than was put in at the source end.

[SoulReaver]

then why not something similar for electric stations? (a giant battery to store the energy)

[Falcon Horus]

Or a windmill or solar power, or hydro-power or geothermal power.... Something has to be close by this remote location.

[Annoyed]

And how big / heavy would a giant battery, large enough to "recharge" a filling station have to be?

A battery for a Tesla roadster weighs about 1000 Lbs. This can carry enough energy to go about 250 miles, somewhat lower than the range of a typical automobile.

20 gallons of gas weighs 130 Lbs. Using my 4Runner as an example, (22 MPG highway) that will take me around 440 miles.

How big & heavy would the "battery truck" which would replace the tanker truck have to be to deliver an equivalent amount of energy?

Using the example above, it takes about 7.7 times as much battery weight compared to the weight of the gas tank. Gasoline weighs 6.5 Lbs/Gallon. So, an 8000 Gallon tanker truck carries about 52,000 Lbs.

Your "Battery Truck" would have to carry 400,400 Lbs to match the amount of energy contained in the tanker truck.

Totally unworkable. We couldn't build a delivery truck that could carry that on highways, the highways themselves wouldn't support the weight... I could go on, but I think it's clear that it can't work.

Someday, we probably will develop a safe, practical, portable energy source that can replace oil-based energy, but that day is a very long way off. Battery technology just isn't there yet, not by a long shot.

[Annoyed]

Or a windmill or solar power, or hydro-power or geothermal power.... Something has to be close by this remote location.

How does that sound as an investment for your money? To build a filling station in a remote location, in addition to the normal costs that any station construction would incur (minus buried fuel tanks) you have to build a windmill or solar array, or the hydro/geothermal plant if you happen to be near such an energy source. You would also have to invest in a fairly large battery facility for your station, Wind/Solar are hardly reliable. They are at the whim of the weather, which cannot be relied upon.

Does that sound like an investment you would make with your own money?

I wouldn't , and I rather doubt any other business or individual would either. It's just not financially viable.

[SoulReaver]

maybe smaller battery trucks & more frequent resupplies then

how much energy per volume unit is it possible to squeez into a battery atm? (compared to energy per volume of fuel)

Or a windmill or solar power, or hydro-power or geothermal power.... Something has to be close by this remote location.

or this

[Falcon Horus]

How does that sound as an investment for your money? To build a filling station in a remote location, in addition to the normal costs that any station construction would incur (minus buried fuel tanks) you have to build a windmill or solar array, or the hydro/geothermal plant if you happen to be near such an energy source. You would also have to invest in a fairly large battery facility for your station, Wind/Solar are hardly reliable. They are at the whim of the weather, which cannot be relied upon.

Does that sound like an investment you would make with your own money?

Yes, cause I can see the bigger picture...

[Annoyed]

maybe smaller battery trucks & more frequent resupplies then

how much energy per volume unit is it possible to squeez into a battery atm? (compared to energy per volume of fuel)

or this

From: http://www.carstuffshow.com/blog/how...att-hours-kwh/

We know that 1 kWh contains 3,412 Btu.

We also know that 1 gallon of gasoline contains 115,000 Btu.

The Tesla S battery's capacity is 85kWh

85 * 3412 = 290020 BTU
3 gallons of gas (3 * 115,000) gives you 345,000 BTU of energy.

So, 3 gallons of gasoline contains more energy than the entire capacity of the Tesla S

A 20 gallon gas tank contains 2,300,000 BTU, vs the 290,000 BTU capacity of the Tesla.

Granted, these are rough estimates, and there will certainly be efficiency factors, so throw in whatever correction factor you want, but it's not even close.

As far as more frequent delivery runs, you can't ignore the energy used to deliver the energy to the remote site either. 5-6 delivery runs to deliver the same amount of energy as 1 tanker truck uses 5-6 times the energy to do the same job. How economical (or environmentally sound if you want to look at that aspect) is that?

[Annoyed]

Yes, cause I can see the bigger picture...

Well, perhaps you are an independently wealthy investor with a bent for philanthropic behavior, if so, good for you, but most investors would want to at least make a small profit on their investment, rather than losing their shirt on something like that.

[SoulReaver]

How does that sound as an investment for your money? To build a filling station in a remote location, in addition to the normal costs that any station construction would incur (minus buried fuel tanks) you have to build a windmill or solar array, or the hydro/geothermal plant if you happen to be near such an energy source. You would also have to invest in a fairly large battery facility for your station, Wind/Solar are hardly reliable. They are at the whim of the weather, which cannot be relied upon.

Does that sound like an investment you would make with your own money?

I wouldn't , and I rather doubt any other business or individual would either. It's just not financially viable.

initial costs would be higher but on the other hand it's a one shot deal (no resupply required)

also wind & solar are fickle but the two combined become a lot more reliable

As far as more frequent delivery runs, you can't ignore the energy used to deliver the energy to the remote site either. 5-6 delivery runs to deliver the same amount of energy as 1 tanker truck uses 5-6 times the energy to do the same job. How economical (or environmentally sound if you want to look at that aspect) is that?

but that exact same problem applies to fuel trucks (and the more fuel transported the more fuel required to transport it)