SUV's

From Portfolio....a picture is worth how many words? This one says it all.

suvs.jpg

 

 

Posted on Tuesday, July 1, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

Energy

A thought provoking article from The Economist, and a special report...Click Here.

The future of Energy

Jun 19th 2008
From The Economist print edition

A fundamental change is coming sooner than you might think


 

SINCE the industrial revolution 200 years ago, mankind has depended on fossil fuel. The notion that this might change is hard to contemplate. Greens may hector. Consciences may nag. The central heating's thermostat may turn down a notch or two. A less thirsty car may sit in the drive. But actually stop using the stuff? Impossible to imagine: surely there isn't a serious alternative?

Such a failure of imagination has been at the heart of the debate about climate change. The green message—use less energy—is not going to solve the problem unless economic growth stops at the same time. If it does not (and it won't), any efficiency saving will soon be eaten up by higher consumption per head. Even the hair-shirt option, then, will bring only short-term relief. And when a dire prophecy from environmentalism's jeremiad looks as if it is coming true, as the price of petroleum rises through the roof and the idea that oil might run out is no longer whispered in corners but openly discussed, there is a temptation to believe that the end of the world is, indeed, nigh.

This time it's serious

Alternative energy sounds like a cop-out. Windmills and solar cells hardly seem like ways of producing enough electricity to power a busy, self-interested world, as furnaces and steam-turbines now do. Battery-powered cars, meanwhile, are slightly comic: more like milk-floats than Maseratis. But the proponents of the new alternatives are serious. Though many are interested in environmental benefits, their main motive is money. They are investing their cash in ideas that they think will make them large amounts more. And for the alternatives to do that, they need to be both as cheap as (or cheaper than) and as easy to use as (or easier than) what they are replacing.

For oil replacements, cheap suddenly looks less of a problem. The biofuels or batteries that will power cars in the alternative future should beat petrol at today's prices. Of course, today's prices are not tomorrow's. The price of oil may fall; but so will the price of biofuels, as innovation improves crops, manufacturing processes and fuels.

Electrical energy, meanwhile, will remain cheaper than petrol energy in almost any foreseeable future, and tomorrow's electric cars will be as easy to fill with juice from a socket as today's are with petrol from a pump. Unlike cars powered by hydrogen fuel cells, of the sort launched by Honda this week, battery cars do not need new pipes to deliver their energy. The existing grid, tweaked and smartened to make better use of its power stations, should be infrastructure enough. What matters is the nature of those power stations.

The price is right

They, too, are more and more likely to be alternative. Wind power is taking on natural gas, which has risen in price in sympathy with oil. Wind is closing in on the price of coal, as well. Solar energy is a few years behind, but the most modern systems already promise wind-like prices. Indeed, both industries are so successful that manufacturers cannot keep up, and supply bottlenecks are forcing prices higher than they otherwise would be. It would help if coal—the cheapest fuel for making electricity—were taxed to pay for the climate-changing effects of the carbon dioxide produced when it burns, but even without such a tax, some ambitious entrepreneurs are already talking of alternatives that are cheaper than coal.

Older, more cynical hands may find this disturbingly familiar. The last time such alternatives were widely discussed was during the early 1970s. Then, too, a spike in the price of oil coincided with a fear that natural limits to supply were close. The newspapers were full of articles on solar power, fusion and converting the economy to run on fuel cells and hydrogen.

Of course, there was no geological shortage of oil, just a politically manipulated one. Nor is there a geological shortage this time round. But that does not matter, for there are two differences between then and now. The first is that this price rise is driven by demand. More energy is needed all round. That gives alternatives a real opening. The second is that 35 years have winnowed the technological wheat from the chaff. Few believe in fusion now, though uranium-powered fission reactors may be coming back into fashion. And, despite Honda's launch, the idea of a hydrogen economy is also fading fast. Thirty-five years of improvements have, however, made wind, solar power and high-tech batteries attractive.

As these alternatives start to roll out in earnest, their rise, optimists hope, will become inexorable. Economies of scale will develop and armies of engineers will tweak them to make them better and cheaper still. Some, indeed, think alternative energy will be the basis of a boom bigger than information technology.

Whether that boom will happen quickly enough to stop the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere reaching dangerous levels is moot. But without alternative energy sources such a rise is certain. The best thing that rich-world governments can do is to encourage the alternatives by taxing carbon (even knowing that places like China and India will not) and removing subsidies that favour fossil fuels. Competition should do the rest—for the fledgling firms of the alternative-energy industry are in competition with each other as much as they are with the incumbent fossil-fuel companies. Let a hundred flowers bloom. When they have, China, too, may find some it likes the look of. Therein lies the best hope for the energy business, and the planet.

 

Posted on Monday, June 30, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

F700

f700.jpgIf you have been following our Think Verde blog, you know that the F700 captured our imagination from the moment we saw photos. Its a bold and compelling statement on the future orientation of the luxury car.

 

 

The F700 captures and transmist the essence of what luxury cars will be in the near future.

From Autoweek an informative video...Click Here.

 

Posted on Thursday, June 26, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

Prices

A thought provoking commentary from Neil Reynolds of The Globe and Mail...how are prices related?

High oil price? Just blame the consumer

Gobe and Mail Update

Saudi Arabia's decision to pump more oil could mean that it thinks oil prices are too high and that increased supply will cause them to fall. It could mean that it thinks prices have peaked and that it can now maximize its profits by increasing production. It could mean that King Abdullah, on sober geopolitical reflection, decided to do U.S. President George W. Bush a personal favour. Or it could mean that the Trilateral Commission (or take your pick: Masonic Order, the Rockefellers, Boy Scouts of America) conspired to make it happen.

The marvellous thing is that the reason doesn't really matter – at least not in allocating the use of an apparently expensive natural resource. A billion people, more or less, will decide this issue, based solely on home economics, all by themselves.

Who “fixes” the price of oil? We, the people, fix it in a thoroughly democratic manner through our private, personal decisions – whether to buy gasoline on any given day, for example, and how much; whether to buy a high-mileage car or a low-mileage car and where to drive it. The Saudi decision to increase supply, as with the thousands of other factors that influence price, is essentially irrelevant in this global reckoning. People alone determine demand. The implications are inherently radical.

Knowledgeable people with global perspectives don't determine prices. Ignorant people with household budgets determine prices. By extension, knowledgeable people can't run a rational economy, no matter how brilliant or how well connected. Without consciously trying, ignorant people can and do.

It was Friedrich Hayek, the Nobel Prize-winning Austrian economist, who described this spontaneous, decentralized price-fixing process as “a marvel” – an unusual word for any economist. A marvellous thing, after all, is an extravagantly improbable thing; the word implies the supernatural. For Mr. Hayek, only such a transcendent superlative could describe the way in which (relatively) freely determined prices in a (relatively) free marketplace can efficiently allocate scarce resources in a world forever short of almost everything: “The marvel is that in a case like that of a scarcity of one raw material, without an order being issued, without more than perhaps a handful of people knowing the cause, tens of thousands of people, whose identity could not be ascertained by months of investigation, are made to use the material or its products more sparingly.

“I have used the word marvel to shock the reader out of the complacency with which we often take the working of this mechanism for granted. I am convinced that if it were the result of deliberate human design … this mechanism would have been acclaimed as one of the greatest triumphs of the human mind. Its misfortune is that it is not the product of human design and the people guided by it do not know why they are made to do what they do.”

These astute observations come from Mr. Hayek's 1945 essay, The Use of Knowledge in Society. In it, Mr. Hayek says the most significant single fact about any (relatively free) system of prices is the absence of knowledge required for it to function – “how little the individual participants need to know in order to be able to take the right action.” He describes prices as “a kind of machinery” that enables producers to watch sales at different price levels (“as an engineer might watch the hands of a few dials”) in order to adjust production.

Mr. Hayek wrote his best-known work, The Road to Serfdom, based primarily on his observations of the Soviet and National Socialist economies during the Second World War, as a domestic warning to Britain, where he had acquired citizenship. A Reader's Digest condensed edition introduced him to the United States and he moved from the London School of Economics to the University of Chicago in 1950. Although passionately championed by free-market conservatives, Mr. Hayek regarded himself as a classical liberal, writing an essay in his 70s – Why I Am Not A Conservative – to explain why. (Conservatives were too nationalistic, he said, too hostile to free-market economic reforms.) In his 80s, Mr. Hayek turned more radical still, advocating the denationalization of currencies. He died, aged 93, in 1992.

Most economists eventually embraced Mr. Hayek's explanation of prices as “the result of human action but not human design,” the result of an impossibly complex process in which multitudes of people arrive at the same judgment “that might have been reached by a single mind possessing all the information which is, in fact, dispersed among all the people.” Yet people still feel the need to blame someone for high prices, still feel the need to call on government to do something – to tax the windfall profits of the oil companies, to get rid of the commodity speculators, to impose yet higher gasoline taxes – distorting further the honest-to-God price information that people need to make their decisions. And governments, sadly, still listen.

Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

Motorcycles and Emissions

From the LA Times...

Motorcycles and emissions: The surprising facts

motorcycle emission testing
Irfan Kham/ Los Angeles Times
Tom Santos, 56, uses a Dynamometer to simulate the emission test of a Gas Gas FSR 450 motorcycle at California Air Resources Board facility in El Monte.
By Susan Carpenter, THROTTLE JOCKEY
June 11, 2008
I'd like to begin this column with an apology. I'm sorry for ruining your day.

This story is about emissions. More specifically, it's about the surprising level of emissions spewing from on-road motorcycles and scooters. In California, such bikes make up 3.6% of registered vehicles and 1% of vehicle miles traveled, yet they account for 10% of passenger vehicles' smog-forming emissions in the state. In fact, the average motorbike is about 10 times more polluting per mile than a passenger car, light truck or SUV, according to a California Air Resources Board comparison of emissions-compliant vehicles.

    For those of you who are wondering why I'm being such a killjoy, my reason is this: I've been hearing from an increasing number of readers who want to know if two-wheelers, which consume far less fuel, are also smog busters. Because scientific questions tend to come with complicated answers, I thought I'd do my best to explain what pollutants a gas-powered motorbike emits and why.

    Motorcycles and scooters are, on average, about twice as fuel efficient as cars. Compact and lightweight, their internal-combustion engines do a better job of converting fuel into energy that makes the vehicle move. But extracting more energy from the fuel has a downside. It produces greater amounts of a smog-forming emission called oxides of nitrogen.

    Oxides of nitrogen are one of three pollutants the Environmental Protection Agency and the Air Resources Board measure to see whether vehicles meet acceptable emissions levels and can be sold legally. Smog-forming hydrocarbons -- unburned compounds in fuel that escape through the tailpipe, fuel lines and gas tank -- are also measured, as is carbon monoxide. Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, isn't measured by either agency, but motorcycles are generally better than other vehicles in this regard since they use less fuel per mile.

    As with other passenger vehicles, there are technologies to offset motorcycle emissions, such as catalytic converters, but those technologies tend to be too big, too heavy or too hot to fit on a motorcycle and work as effectively as similar systems on larger, enclosed vehicles that have more space to accommodate them. That's why the EPA and the air board are more lenient on bikes than they are on other passenger vehicles.

    "The emissions picture [for motorcycles] is fairly grim," said John Swanton of the Air Resources Board, "but we think it's fair for where motorcycles are today."

    Emissions standards for motorcycles are already more forgiving than they are for cars, light trucks and SUVs. Not only are motorcycles allowed to emit more than cars, they are also tested at lower speeds, which pollutes less. And motorcycle manufacturers only have to ensure that their vehicles of 179 cc and above meet governmental emissions criteria for the first 18,600 miles of a bike's life, compared with 150,000 miles for cars.

    Five years ago, the EPA tightened its emissions standards for on-road motorcycles with a two-tier system, the first of which tightened requirements for the 2006 model year. The second, even stricter phase kicks in for 2010.

    California is the only state in the country with its own emissions standards, which are the same as the EPA standards except they've been fast-tracked to kick in two years earlier. In effect, the stricter standard has already been met for many of the on-highway motorcycles on the market because any 2008 model year bike that is sold in California already meets the EPA standard for 2010.

    Right now, there are no plans for the air board or the EPA to further tighten motorcycle emissions requirements because:

    * Motorcycles account for such a small portion of vehicle miles traveled.

    * There haven't been enough advances in motorcycle emissions technologies to enable further pollution reduction to any significant degree.

    * There are other, even bigger polluters to deal with, such as diesel trucks, construction equipment and non-emissions-compliant products from China.

    Noncompliant Chinese vehicles have become such a pollution issue in California, in fact, that the Air Resources Board has just added a new motorcycle emissions facility at its Haagen-Smit Lab in El Monte to test them. The board estimates as many as 20,000 all-terrain vehicles, dirt bikes and scooters are shipped into California from China each month, many of them with emissions that are at least 10 times higher than the state's requirements.

    Long story short: Motorcycles, even small ones, are more polluting than Hummers, but it's the best that can be done for now. If you want to make a difference, consider an electric two-wheeler for your next bike or a gas-powered model with fuel injection and a 3-way catalytic converter.

     
    Posted on Thursday, June 12, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

    Electric Cars

    An informative article from Financial Times...

    An industry charged up: electric vehicles are poised to go mainstream
    Monday May 26 2008 12:05

    The vanguard of a green automotive revolution will roll out next spring on an unlikely set of wheels: a Mercedes luxury sedan. The marque's S400 BlueHybrid will be the first mass-produced vehicle equipped with a lithium-ion battery, like the ones in laptops or mobile phones - but powerful enough to help propel a large luxury car.

    The S-Class car, a "mild" hybrid that will still draw most of its power from petrol, is unlikely to outsell Toyota (NYSE:TM) 's top-selling Prius, nor - though fuel-efficient for its size - will it be the greenest car on the road. But its battery will give it pole position in a potentially paradigm-shifting technology.

    Other carmakers are to follow within two to three years, with cars that use lithium-ion to provide most or even all of their power from electricity. The coming large-scale hybridisation and electrification of cars promises to transform how they are made, who profits from them and the way they are sold and driven.

    "There's a tremendous momentum and electric vehicles will be introduced very quickly in the next decade," says Wolfgang Bernhart, partner with Roland Berger Strategy Consultants.

    If oil prices continue to rise and battery prices fall, he thinks electric vehicles could come to account for more than 25 per cent of the European market and 10 per cent globally. The estimate does not include hybrids, which have combustion engines but are powered partly by batteries that recharge from energy released by the car.

    If so, it would mark one of the biggest technological shifts in a century of automotive history. Hybrids today account for a tiny portion of total automotive sales - less than 10 per cent even for Toyota, which is by far the market leader. Pure electric cars are rarer still, seldom sighted outside California.

    What can change that - and what can still get in the way? After all, electric cars have had false starts before, failing to win consumers' acceptance because of their cost, performance or driving range. General Motors (NYSE:GM) discontinued its pioneering EV1 in 2003, citing related concerns and, in the words of a recent documentary, "killing the electric car".

    Yet surging petrol prices, advances in lithium-ion technology and growing environmental pressure on manufacturers and motorists to adopt greener vehicles are giving electric and hybrid models a new and arguably permanent lease on life. Carmakers are fast-tracking an unprecedented number of electric and hybrid vehicles through their product pipeline. By 2010 GM will be using lithium-ion batteries in three of its Saturn and Chevrolet brand hybrid cars. GM is introducing hybrids at the rate of one per quarter and says it will have 16 by 2012.

    GM's signature green vehicle of the moment - executives describe it as a "moon shot" - is the Chevrolet Volt (pictured above), a plug-in electric car due to launch in late 2010. The car will have enough lithium-ion power to send most American drivers on electric power to work and back home, where they can recharge the car in their garage at night.

    A petrol "range extender" will back up the electric motor on long trips but GM claims most commuters will visit petrol stations only rarely. Toyota also plans to have its plug-in hybrid on the road by 2010 and hybrid versions of all its cars by the 2020s.

    Renault/Nissan (NASDAQ:NSANY) , the industry's third-largest group, will go further, with pure electric cars providing an expected range of about 100 miles (160 km), to be sold in the US and Japan from 2010 and globally from 2012. Carlos Ghosn, the alliance's chief executive, has identified leadership in electric vehicles as a top objective in Nissan's new five-year business plan.

    While as recently as a year ago carmakers' green-car announcements often had overtones of worthy science projects or corporate window-dressing, their actions in recent months point to electric propulsion becoming a core business. "You're going to see more changes in powertrain technology over the next five years than you've seen in the last 50," says Rod Lache, an analyst with Deutsche Bank.

    Financial markets are beginning to tally the potential for profits from this technological step-change. AllianceBernstein, the US asset manager, estimates that the market for automotive batteries alone could grow from about $9bn (£4.5bn, €5.7bn) now to at least $150bn by 2030. By that time, hybrid and electric cars could make up most of the world's 1bn-plus vehicle fleet. A Morgan Stanley report describes plug-in electric vehicles as having the potential to "revolutionise the automobile as we know it". It compares the nascent industry to producers of MP3 players in 1998.

    As the car industry goes electric, new companies will enter the picture. Battery manufacturers are vying to develop products and build factories capable of scaling up to meet bigger demand. Power utilities are forging bonds with carmakers, seeing electric vehicles as a significant future source of demand for their off-peak capacity. Other companies are studying ways of building the infrastructure to recharge and service electric cars. Toyota and EDF, the French utility, are working together on recharging spots around Europe. Project Better Place, a $200m US start-up, is working with Renault/Nissan on recharging venues to back the roll-out of electric cars in Israel and Denmark and aims to expand its business to the UK and elsewhere.

    If the technology lives up to its promise, it will diminish cars' environmental impact as countries such as China and India adopt mass "motorisation". China's government is studying ways of promoting electric technology with an eye to leapfrogging its industry's overseas competitors. Emerging automakers including Chery, BYD and Geely are developing or adopting it in cars. "We have to be ready if they decide to incentivise hybrids," says Nick Reilly, head of Asia-Pacific for GM, which last month premiered a hybrid version of its Buick LaCrosse model in Beijing.

    Like most revolutions, this one has complex causes. The first is technological: breakthroughs in lithium-ion are now delivering batteries light and compact enough to fit into cars without weighing them down or cramping the cabin but with enough energy to propel them over meaningful distances. While earlier electric cars had prim "eco-car" designs and short ranges, smaller batteries will therefore make for better-looking vehicles with much-improved performance. Tesla Motors and Fisker Automotive, California-based electric car start-ups, are even putting the batteries into sports cars.

    Tighter environmental regulations and $135-a-barrel oil are also focusing carmakers' minds as never before. The European Union is legislating to force manufacturers to cut their average carbon dioxide emissions by about one-quarter by 2012. Carbon dioxide based tax rules in about a dozen European countries are pushing drivers into lower-emission cars, as are congestion-charging schemes in cities around the world. America last year introduced fuel-economy rules requiring carmakers to boost average miles per gallon. California is leading a push by several US states to require carmakers to offer zero-emission vehicles.

    Even more important, there are signs that growing production scale and rising carbon taxes are easing the main deterrent to drivers buying hybrid and electric cars: price. The Prius, largely because of its expensive battery, costs as much as $5,000 more than similar conventional cars. But a study by Edmunds.com, a US car-buying website, concludes that the gap is closing. Takeo Fukui, Honda (NYSE:HMC) 's president (below), last week said he saw the price differential between petrol and hybrid coming down to about $2,000. His company is expanding its range of planned hybrids and hopes to sell 500,000 of them a year by the early 2010s.

    In a perhaps more telling sign of changed times, GM - which sells most of its cars in America's heartland - is producing hybrid versions of its bulky core vehicles such as the Chevrolet Tahoe sport utility vehicle and the Silverado pick-up truck, which are particularly vulnerable to rising pump prices.

    But GM describes the Volt as its most important vehicle currently under development. The project is being overseen directly by senior managers including Bob Lutz, GM's global head of vehicle development and an acknowledged lover of fast, big-engined cars.

    To be sure, the future of carmaking will probably never be entirely electric. Because of the need for recharging points, all-electric cars are likelier to flourish in dense urban centres. Carmakers continue to develop ever cleaner petrol and diesel cars that achieve more miles per gallon by using smaller engines, lighter materials and better design but sacrifice little in performance. Some will contain hybrid powertrains but many - especially smaller cars - will not. Even Mr Ghosn, an early enthusiast of electric cars, acknowledges that they will form only part of a future palette of energy-saving automotive technologies in coming years.

    Questions also hang over lithium-ion . The batteries have a tendency to overheat and catch fire in smaller appliances, an event known as "thermal runaway". Carmakers and battery manufacturers say their products will be safe but the risk is nightmarish for automotive groups.

    While GM is hurrying to meet its 2010 deadline to launch the Volt, Toyota - which has struggled with quality issues recently - is giving itself the time to study performance and reliability issues drivers will face. Honda, while forging ahead with hybrids, remains sceptical about electric cars and will use current-generation nickel metal hydride batteries in its hybrid next year. "Safety is the critical issue," acknowledges Charles Gassenheimer, chairman of Ener1, a producer of lithium-ion batteries.

    Despite these doubts, hybrid and electric cars will be helped by the constraints that are emerging for competing cleaner-car technologies. Cleaner diesel cars have dramatically brought down average emissions in Europe but diesel now accounts for about half of the market and carmakers are looking elsewhere to cut their emissions. Diesel's penetration is expected to increase in the US and China, the world's two largest vehicle markets, but in both countries it faces a battle for acceptance.

    Biofuels form part of the automotive industry's response to tighter environmental regulations but a growing debate around their impact on food prices could stunt their potential. Most carmakers reckon hydrogen fuel-cell cars are at least a decade from commercial viability. This leaves electrification as the industry's simplest way to deliver the big increases in miles per gallon and reductions in carbon dioxide that regulators are demanding.

    To build a mass market, manufacturers recognise they will have to develop electric vehicles that ask drivers to sacrifice little or nothing in comfort or convenience. GM, while grappling with designing the Volt around its T-shaped battery pack, speaks of the need to address "range anxiety", drivers' worries of being stuck with nowhere to recharge. The car's range extender is meant to address this.

    Project Better Place is proposing an arrangement under which drivers would swap their cars' depleted batteries for recharged ones within five minutes. Shai Agassi, its founder, says drivers could pre-pay for recharging, much as they would for mobile phone air-time, and companies like his might offer cars "for free" as part of a long-term contract. Some carmakers express doubts about the logistics of swapping batteries and other aspects of the company's plans.

    For battery producers, the challenge is to develop batteries that are safe and capable of recharging fully, over the decade or so of a car's life, without losing power the way mobile phone batteries have tended to. They are also contending with the need to make large up-front investments in a fast-moving technology. Unit costs will only come down once they build scale.

    GM has invited subsidiaries of Germany's Continental and 's LG to compete for the business of supplying batteries for the Volt. But Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi, in keeping with Japanese carmakers' traditionally closer relationships with suppliers, have moved to maintain control through stakes in lithium-ion joint ventures.

    Independent companies such as Johnson Controls (NYSE:JCI) , Ener1 and A123 Systems - working with Continental for the Volt - are entering the field to produce cells or fully integrated battery packs. "It's an alphabet soup," says Alex Molinaroli, head of power solutions at Johnson Controls. "Clearly there are going to be winners and losers."

    THE PERILS OF THE COAL-FIRED COUPÉ

    Electric vehicles offer the best chance of creating zero-emission cars - transport that has no adverse impact on the climate, writes Fiona Harvey. The potential prize is huge. According to the Stern report, a 2006 study commissioned by the UK government, transport is the world's third biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for 14 per cent of the total. The number of vehicles in use around the world, moreover, is expected to grow rapidly as emerging economies develop.

    But several conditions need to be met before the technology can be classed as truly carbon-free. The most important is outside car manufacturers' control. Whether or not an electric vehicle is greener than a conventional one is largely a function of how the electricity is generated. If it comes from dirty and inefficient coal-fired power stations, then the car will have a high "carbon footprint". If the power comes solely from renewable sources such as wind farms or solar plants, the car will be zero-emission.

    In general, electric cars have a lower carbon footprint. But at the margins, a highly efficient small petrol-driven car could have less impact on the climate than an electric car fuelled from a grid made up mainly of coal-fired plants.

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found last year that even hybrid electric vehicles, depending on the design, could save between 20 per cent and 57 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions compared with standard cars. The UK's King review of transport emissions found that electric vehicles used with today's electricity generation mix could operate at a little less than 80 grammes of carbon dioxide per kilometre. A greatly increased use of renewables and nuclear energy, as well as coal-fired power plants from which the carbon dioxide is captured and stored, could see this fall to about 30 grammes per km, a fifth of what many cars achieve today.

    Dong Energy, a Danish renewable energy company, recently announced a partnership with Project Better Place, an electric car infrastructure provider, to create conditions for a fleet of Danish electric cars. Anders Eldrup, chief executive of Dong Energy, says the high proportion of wind energy used in Denmark makes the cars much greener than they would be in many countries: "This is really taking carbon out of the picture."

    Achieving a low-carbon electricity infrastructure is difficult but if greenhouse gas emissions from road transport are to be cut substantially, electric cars must play a large part. According to the King review, "fully electric, battery-powered vehicles, if using zero or low-carbon electricity, offer the most direct opportunity to decarbonise road transport over the longer term". The review found alternatives - such as biofuels, hydrogen or simply making existing cars more efficient - did not produce such high carbon savings.

    At present, electric cars can be heavier than conventional equivalents because of their large batteries. Advances in battery technologies, however, should allow this weight to be cut. Using lighter materials such as carbon composites should also cut the amount of electricity required.

    Caroline Öhrn, senior research analyst at Venture Business Research, says: "One can see a pollution issue related to the expanded use of batteries. They will require a considerable amount of recycling once the batteries are no longer usable."

    Electric cars have other environmental benefits: they do not produce the particulates associated with burning fossil fuels. The American Lung Association found in a study that switching to electric cars in California alone would save at least $2.2bn (£1.1bn, €1.4bn) a year in health costs related to people's exposure to fine particulate matter from conventional cars and that 300 cases of premature death, 260 cases of chronic bronchitis and more than 7,000 asthma attacks could be avoided each year as a result. They are also less noisy.

     

     
    Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

    Electric Sky

    saturn_sky.jpgElectric Saturn Sky from AMP Motorworks...Click Here.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

    Keep on Trucking

    From the L A Times...

    Keep on Trucking...

    Big rig Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times
    Driver Bill Rethwisch, 34, with his rig at a truck stop in Ontario. Rethwisch, who operates out of Tomah, Wis., bought his 2008 Kenworth T660 semi-tractor because it has such aerodynamics features as a slopped hood and no exhaust stacks. The reduced drag helps to make the rig more fuel-efficient.

    Their massive vehicles' low mpg weighs down the bottom line, spurring cultural and technological shifts.
    By Ken Bensinger, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
    May 17, 2008
    If you think gas is expensive, be thankful you're not a trucker. Filling up their 18-wheel, 80,000-pound leviathans can cost more than $1,300 these days.

    Because of short supply, the price of diesel has gone up more than twice as much as gasoline in the last year, reaching a U.S. all-time high this week of an average of $4.33 a gallon. With little hope of a near-term decline -- oil futures rose $2.17 to settle at a record $126.29 a barrel Friday -- the run-up is causing panic and prompting radical cultural and technological shifts in the struggling trucking industry.Instead of obsessing over chrome trim or the latest cab amenities to ease life on the road, truck owners and operators who are fed up with getting 5 miles per gallon are delving into long-ignored subjects such as aerodynamics, cruising speeds and tire efficiency.

    Engineers and manufacturers are furiously developing fuel-friendly technology. And commercial fleets are using high-tech software to calculate every aspect of their drivers' routes, down to where they should fill up and where they should stop for the night.

    Bill Rethwisch, an independent long-haul trucker, recently traded in his Peterbilt 379 for a new Kenworth T660 rig. Although he prefers the traditional looks of the Peterbilt, with its boxy hood, flat, chromed grille and towering exhaust pipes, he knows it was aerodynamically flawed.

    The $119,000 Kenworth, marketed as the company's most aerodynamic truck ever, has a streamlined wedge shape and eliminates projections such as the smokestacks. The result, Rethwisch said, is an increase from 4.5 mpg in the Peterbilt to the Kenworth's 6.5 mpg, which saves him upward of $2,000 a month at the pump.

    "The Peterbilt is the classiest and coolest-looking truck around," said Rethwisch, who hauls dairy products from Wisconsin to California and goes home loaded with produce. "But cool only goes so far when fuel prices are so high."

    The shift is not unlike what's happening with passenger cars -- drivers are abandoning gas-thirsty SUVs and pickups in favor of zippy subcompacts. But with U.S. trucks burning upward of 20 billion gallons of diesel a year and trucking industry bankruptcies soaring, shifting to more efficient vehicles can be a matter of business survival.

    "There has long been an aversion to new technology and new approaches in heavy trucking," said Peter Nesvold, a transportation analyst at Bear Stearns. "But as costs of fuel rise higher, that's changing."

    This fall, in an attempt to appease the conflicting desires of truckers for classic-looking vehicles and improved fuel economy, Navistar's International brand will start selling the LoneStar, an aerodynamic truck that slathers chrome over bumpers and grille while getting 5% to 15% better mileage than square-nosed trucks.

    But Bob Weber, chief engineer for International, expects the company's new ProStar to be its bestseller. It lacks bling but offers the best mileage in the business. Weber says the truck gets as many as 7.5 miles per gallon -- practically Prius-like in the trucking world.

    "Aerodynamics is huge," said Weber, who explained that wind resistance can account for more than half of a truck's fuel consumption at highway speeds.

    Another factor is velocity. In general, the faster a truck goes, the more fuel it uses per mile. Although many drivers are resistant, some fleets have begun using electronic regulators that cap speed, often well below legal limits. Last week, the American Trucking Assn. proposed setting a nationwide top speed for trucks at 65 mph.

    Two major trucking companies, Con-Way Inc. and Schneider National Inc., said this month they would dial back their speedometers, Con-Way to 65 mph from 70 and Schneider to 60 mph from 63.

    Dennis Damman, director of engineering for Schneider, the nation's largest privately held trucking company, said that for each mile of speed reduced below 65 mph, a truck saves 1.5% in fuel consumption.

    "The days of 75 miles per hour on the road are gone," he said.

    Fleets, meanwhile, are also using increasingly complex computer programs that calculate the most efficient route possible and minimize the time without revenue-producing loads, said Clayton Boyce, an American Trucking Assn. spokesman. Those programs, he said, can even tell drivers where they should stop for fuel and when to rest.

    Rest stops are themselves a fuel issue. Today's trucks have air conditioning, entertainment systems and even video games, all of which require electricity -- and most truckers get it by idling their hulking, 600-horsepower diesel engines. That can churn through several gallons of fuel in an hour.

    Now more truckers are installing a small onboard diesel generator, called an alternate power unit, that runs in the engine's place. Truckers used to eschew APUs because they can cost as much as $10,000, but with high diesel prices, the devices can pay for themselves in little more than a year.

    "An APU allows them to turn that big engine off," said Jon Eide, senior vice president of Wells Fargo & Co.'s commercial vehicle lending division, which has $1.8 billion in heavy-duty truck and trailer loans outstanding. "That's a very efficient source of fuel savings."

    Tires, too, are getting a once-over. For decades, the top priorities in truck tires were durability and cost. Now, fuel efficiency has moved to the head of the list.

    Although new compounds and tread patterns help, another promising technology is "super singles," which replace side-by-side tire setups with a single, wider tire. That cuts weight by as much as 1,000 pounds and reduces energy loss from tire compression -- which, after aerodynamics, is the largest contributor to fuel consumption at highway speeds. Experts say super singles can cut fuel use by 3%.

    Several manufacturers are making hybrid trucks, which capture braking energy to boost mileage, making them perfect for vehicles that make frequent stops, like garbage trucks.

    On Friday, the Port of Los Angeles unveiled a fully electric truck it helped develop that's capable of towing shipping containers as far as 30 miles on a single charge.

    Kambiz Salari, a fluid dynamics engineer at California's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, has spent the last decade developing inventions that increase fuel economy, including a giant fan situated behind a truck's cab that reduces drag-creating turbulence.

    None has been adopted commercially, but this year the Energy Department is offering grants to trucking companies that will test those devices on their fleets. "Fuel costs are bringing attention to our research," Salari said.

    "This industry is changing," said Weber, the Navistar engineer. "Ten mpg is now feasible."

    Posted on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

    Fisker Prototype

    The usual a picture is worth....

    fisker_prototype_08_2.jpg

    fisker_prototype_05.jpg

     

    The blog entry from Autopia...Click Here.

     

    Posted on Monday, May 12, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail

    Bentley

    bentley.jpgAn informative document describing Bentley's perspective on raising fuel economy and lowering carbon emissions...Click Here.

     

    From Autopia the story on the small electric car...Cick Here.

     

     

    Posted on Thursday, May 8, 2008 by Registered CommenterStrada Auto Store in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail
    displaying entries 1-10 of 125    previous page | next page