Clever Car -- the future of automobiles

Very likely now that Geely will buy Volvo as the ownership of Volvo's patents, etc. is resolved - Geely will get rights to them:

"... the Swedish company would retain ownership of its key technologies and IPRs after a sale by Ford, and the Chinese carmaker would obtain the ownership of Volvo's key technologies and IPRs through acquiring Volvo.

... Ford confirmed it had picked Geely as the preferred bidder for the U.S. company's Volvo Unit on October 28. Ford put Volvo on sale in December and Geely offered to buy 100 percent of Volvo. ..."

From: http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90778/90861/6826752.html

BTW, there is now wide spread belief that GM will never be able to pay back money advance by its four owners (US tax payers, Canadian tax payers, UAW, and one other, the German tax payers, I think, but my memory is uncertain on this last one). A group of Chinese automakers is considering buying GM.

A sale of GM to China would meet with considerable political resistance, but probably is the only way the current four owners can recover the money they lent to GM. The Chinese division of GM is very profitable and at present rate of growth in a couple of years, GM will sell more cars in China, than in the US. Perhaps, China will only want to buy what is now the Chinese division. That may be politically easier to achieve.

This post is a little off thread, but the thread is about the future of automobiles - that is in Asia, especially China and India.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Here is some data* on Tesla's new all-electric sports car to illusatrate my point:

: ... $128,500 Roadster Sport, which has 40 more horsepower, increased peak torque and special suspension. An air-cooled electric motor makes 288 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque. With a top speed of 125 mph, it’ll travel from 0 to 60 in a hot-to-trot 3.7 seconds. The Environmental Protection Agency’s stated range for the car is 244 miles on a full charge. ..."

Lets say the rubber wheels are slightly less than one foot. Then the car can make 300 pounds of force. Without slowing down (or from a "standing start" on a hill) it can climb the hill if the component of the 10,000 pound gravity force is down the hill is 300 pound or less. I.e. if the sin of the elevation angle from horizontal is (3/100) or less. Taking a radian as 57 degrees (from memory) the max hill is 57x0.03 = 1.7 degrees. That does not sound very steep, but recally that is WITHOUT SLOWING DOWN.

To compare to a IC motor car we would need to know how fast the car is going up the hill. 1 horsepower = 33,000 foot-pounds/minute so 288HP making an up hill force of 300 pounds is (288x33,000/300) feet/ minute or in mph (228x330x60)/(5280x3) = 228x33x20/528 = 228x660/528 = 285mph, but I have neglected wind resistance and computed more han twice the max speed (125mph).

Thus, lets assume the electric car is climbing a steeper hill and slowing down some also (as and IC motor car would) but at the speed where the IC motor car has it max torque. At this lower than 285mph speed both cars (each with 300HP motors) can climb the hill side by side, but both will be slowing down. I.e. using some of their kinetic energy to help climb the hill.

SUMMARY: As far as hill climbing both cars are approximatley equal. It would be interesting to get Tesla to do a "side-by side" match up test on hill climbing; however, the electric car easily wins the 0 to 60mph with its only 3.7 seconds - that was my main point in post 182. The hill climb is sort of a "red herring" as both cars would slow down on a steep hill but climb it.

The real difference between the cars is their cost. Typically the all electric will cost at least twice as much. Probably why BYD sold only about 100 in 2008 and Tesla's total is about 700. For most people they are too expensive. This is why I am not investing in Lithium miners - there will be plenty to meet the demand, at just over the production cost, which is comming down, especially when one considers that no lithium is consumed - it will almost all be recycled into new batteries.
---------------------
* From: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601093&sid=admre0duBSdo

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Later by edit: They are pricing it at only $25,000!
“About 50,000 Nissan Leaf hatchbacks, which run entirely on lithium-ion batteries, will roll off the Sunderland {England} production line a year.”
From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8573724.stm

Billy T comment:
That is assuming they can be sold. Typically the Li ion batteries make car cost about twice what same car with IC motor would cost. Perhaps Nissan will use low cost Japanese loans to finance the batteries for the car buyer to only lease, not own? –That would also help remove owner’s doubts about how many years the battery will last. Later by edit: at $25K, they may be doing as I suggested - lease the batteries to you.

Note that most car companies are not investing much in the US, (more like contracting) even with its supposedly large market. Here are the near term investment plans announced by major car companies for Brazilian investments, in billions of dollars:

GM 5 during 2008 to 2012
VW 6.2 during 2010 to 2014
Ford 4.0 during 2011 to 2015
Renault 1.0 during 2010 to 2012
Fiat 1.8 during 2010

Data from page B8 of Folio de Sao Paulo, 23 March 2010.

Also Chinese company SAIC has just started producing the 350, (a sporty model) which is about the same size as a Ford Focus, at its Pukou plant in Najing, China and will soon be building them in England as well as expanding its English made MG line to include a new hatchback.

“SAIC bought much of MG Rover's intellectual property when the UK marque collapsed in 2005, while Chinese rival Nanjing Automobile Group acquired what was left of the MG Rover group. The two companies merged in 2007….”

I might add that India's Tata group bought Land Rover and Jaguar. Well at least the Brits have the new Morris Mini still and it seem to be doing well.
From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8585114.stm

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

" March 29 (Bloomberg) -- Zhejiang Geely Holding Co. agreed to buy Volvo Cars from Ford Motor Co. for $1.8 billion in the biggest overseas acquisition by a Chinese automaker. The price includes a $200 million note and the remainder to be paid in cash ..."

From: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601010&sid=aZaj_9wRph7c

Billy T comment:
Nice to have 1.6 billion cash or credit for that much cash.

 

Not so. See a guy juggling while riding on it and one enjoying his drink while going side ways! - Just lean a little and it goes that way, front, back or directly to either side. Li-ion battery in this 20 pound personal mobility unit will take you farther than you want to walk even thru dense pedestrian traffic on a sidewalk. No wheelchair can do that! See it in use here:
http://money.cnn.com/video/technology/2010/04/08/n_tt_honda_u3x_unicycle.cnnmoney/

BTW, when I walk there is no backrest or hand holds either - it is to replace walking, go further and faster with much less effort. I bet in mass production it is cheaper than a wheel chair and for most needing them will replace them. Segways will be big bulky things you can not store in your car' s trunk with the load of groceries you quickly bought riding this mobility unit thru the store.

 

Wow! Surely that is a child of Segway? I remember seeing Deka Patents for a unicycle / uniball Segway. Have they done a deal with Honda or is this Honda's independent technology? Sure beats scraping up the bucks for repossessed cars.

 

China's entry, called the "Leaf" after its green solar voltatic energy collecting top, I think:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

No steering wheel!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Parks in small spaces. Sun from left? No problem. Top swings to side for shade and entry ease.
Five more photo pages on it at:http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/photo/2010-04/13/content_9722430_2.htm

 

Now that I've seen the video, you are right. I guess the way the guy was sitting in the still looked awkward to me, and I envisioned it going a little faster..more like a segway.

 

What did you expect? He is the CEO. :bugeye: Not use to really working.

I bet it can. The demo was in small area, which limited speed. May not have much torque, but on roughly level area, wheel torque steadily applied, it should go as fast as a Segway can. On the level, wind resistance should be the speed limit as electric motor keeps supplying torque. I am more concerned with its ability to climb a hill - not its top speed.

 

Yes it likely can but as everything else Japanese it has problems stopping.

 

.

ah, yeah i saw those, a chinese car actually, there's also the idea of smart jets, for safer air travel, and safer air trafic, that jets can manage their trafic in the air, for a more coherent and faster way to travel,

 

.

wait, is it chinese, or japanese? i think it's more likely japanese.

 

Nice joke; but to stop I assume you just lean back and it will try to run under you -i.e. be reversing the torque.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Girl selling Chery's

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

another winner, for VW I think.
All Beijing Autoshow entries looks like a winners to me.
See more models on display at: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2010autochina/showgirls.html Chery girls

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

No wonder China is selling more cars than the USA now - they have learned from us, how to.

 

Is this true that NiMH batteries would be great for electric cars but big oil has patents blocking their use? See: http://www.twocentspermile.com/
And http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries

Perhaps it is true:
"Large-format NiMH batteries were commercially viable and ready for mass production, but Chevron and other oil-related interests suppressed the technology to forestall the introduction of plug-in hybrids.[40]

In her book, Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that Will Recharge America, published in February 2007, Sherry Boschert argues that large-format NiMH batteries are commercially viable but that Cobasys refuses to sell or license them to small companies or individuals. {minimum order is 10,000 car sized batteries} Boschert concludes that "it's possible that Cobasys (Chevron) is squelching all access to large NiMH batteries through its control of patent licenses in order to remove a competitor to gasoline. ..."

Quote from wiki and ref [40] given there. See more at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobasys#Battelle-Geneva.27s_pioneering_work_on_NiMH.2C_1967

 

Cars don't come with models.

We have L-ion batteries now that have higher energy densities and greater efficiency then NiMetal.

 

I bet if there is any higher efficiency in a car it is mainly due to the lower weight. Here is compact review of batteries from Oxford Analytica:

"Four different types of battery can be used in an EV:

--Lithium-ion (Li-ion). This is currently the most widely used battery in consumer electronics. Its primary advantage is its high specific energy density (capacity to store energy). Its main disadvantage is that certain situations, such as overheating, can cause a Li-ion battery to explode.

--Nickel-metal hydride (NiMH). This technology is widely used in petrol-electric hybrid cars, and the battery is reportedly more stable than Li-ion, but it has a lower specific energy density.

--Nickel Cadmium (NiCd). This technology's main advantage is its high energy-discharge rate, but its energy density is inferior to that of NiMH and Li-ion.

--Lead-acid batteries. These are common in most cars today, and have been used to power EVs. While cheap and safe, they are very bulky and heavy, and cannot compete on range or life.

Cost. Batteries are responsible for most of the upfront costs of EVs. ..."

 

I would not be seen dead in that.

 

If you are referring to the models in post 194, I agree, being live in them would be much better.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Good news for electric cars, Afganistan (possibly for the Taliban instead) and bad for Evo Moralis / Bolivia:

"... United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves ...

The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe. ...

While it could take many years to develop a mining industry, the potential is so great that officials and executives in the industry believe it could attract heavy investment even before mines are profitable, providing the possibility of jobs that could distract from generations of war. ... “This will become the backbone of the Afghan economy,” said Jalil Jumriany, an adviser to the Afghan minister of mines.

American and Afghan officials agreed to discuss the mineral discoveries at a difficult moment in the war in Afghanistan. The American-led offensive in Marja in southern Afghanistan has achieved only limited gains. Meanwhile, charges of corruption and favoritism continue to plague the Karzai government, and Mr. Karzai seems increasingly embittered toward the White House. {So is Bolivia's Evo Moralis, owner of now world's second largest known deposit of Lithium.} ...

Instead of bringing peace, the newfound mineral wealth could lead the Taliban to battle even more fiercely to regain control of the country. The corruption that is already rampant in the Karzai government could also be amplified by the new wealth, particularly if a handful of well-connected oligarchs, some with personal ties to the president, gain control of the resources. Just last year, Afghanistan’s minister of mines was accused by American officials of accepting a $30 million bribe to award China the rights to develop its copper mine. ..."

From: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html?scp=2&sq=minerals&st=cse