Would battery operated cars be the best alternative for fuel burning cars??

Question

wouldn't battery operated cars be more feasible in the future than ethanol and cheaper than hybrids. even if they only go about 35 mph wouldn't it be worth it to help stop global warming. they would also prevent many highway fatalities and bring auto insurance to an all time low.

not to mention that it would stop our dependence on foreign oil and stop the funding of terrorist organizations

come on wouldn't it decrease fatalities when you're running 35 instead of 70 or 75
really

Answer 1

The key to alternative fuels is size, heat generation, dissapation, regeneration and the manufacturing process.

I have considered batteries more because that is my field.

The big problem with batteries is weight, heat and how you recharge them.

Current technology is SLA (sealed lead acid) just like the single battery in your car now and you know how heavy they are. Discharge rate is a function of energy used and consider a whole trunk full of batteries and the weight. Now to recharge them you plug a charger into the wall, draw electricty and a power plant somewhere starts to whirr and burn some fossil fuel.

Recently there has been significant improvements in battery technology. Picture a "C" battery that puts out 1.2 volts and 10 AMPS! Traditional "C" batteries give 1.5V and 0.0012 amps for One Hour. In short this new battery is about 4,000 times more efficient.

have a customer that used 10 of these batteries wired together in a pack. He las a large block Vet and disconnected the coil so the engine would not start and connected the pack (3"x5"x7") in place of the normal battery. He turned the key, cranked the motor 8 times and repeated 26 times before the pack went dead. That is power!

Now here is the fun part. He is building motyorcycles that totally run on batteries. They go for about $50,000 and RIP!

He took a bike to the strip and claims to have gone 0-60 in less than 4 SECONDS; I don't know how the guy stayed on.

Electric motors go from stopped to fast very quickly because they are connected to the drive train directly without all the combustion delay and all the pistons etc.

If you have interest send an email and I will give you the link to his site; cool site that will make you drool if you are into speed.

Teh problem with electricity is the recharge as I mentioned before. The complete solution is to use solar cells to recharge but solar cells are just too inefficient.

I think that some people at U Conn. have come up with a nanotechnology thesis that bears investigation.

They are going to have a HUGE FIGHT to proceed because it is a LARGE THREAT to the automobile industry and money talks; same with the oil people.

The change to electricity would require a complere redesign of the traditional motor and the automotive industry is taking token baby steps to "seem Green", but certainly do not want to kill the goose that layed the golden egg in the process.

Sorry that this was so long, but it is a complicated quuestion that can not be answered properly with a flip answer.

GOOD thoughts!
J

Answer 2

Short term 'fix' is bio fuels because they can directly substitute for fossil fuels in more or less existing equipment. But using any 'fuel' in a heat engine eg internal combustion engine is a loosing idea of the 19th century. The laws of physics prevent you getting much more than 35% to 40% of the energy out in a useful form. [typical car engines get out less than 30%. ] Electric motors on the other hand typically convert over 98% to useful motion. Fuel cells also achieve well over 70% even as high as 90%. So a long term aim should be to use electricity as much as possible and to use renewable energy to generate the electricity. This will take a major investment and time. But possible and overall not so expensive. The benefits will easily overcome the costs. The main opposition to this comes from people with vested interests in existing old school technology. Those countries who are a little more on the ball are making the transition. Others are falling behind and will find themselves with outdated in effective infrastructure. They will loose jobs and their economies will stagnate. If you are an American ask yourself why your country is unable to grow its economy at a decent rate? Sure blame the democrats, but they haven't been in power long enough to make a difference. Why is it that most economies in Asia are booming? And going Green fast? Why is China actually installing renewable energy faster than the US and Europe combined? Why is their economy growing so fast? Because they are commie leftists? mmmm maybe. For the rest of the world it is a good thing that over 40% of Americans can't tell fact from fiction and that the % is growing. They are destroying themselves so fast they don't even see it.

Answer 3

with current technology it would be a problem

batteries add over 1000 pounds to the weight of the car and only last a few years before a costly replacement battery or more scrap cars to have to strip and recycle

also onhilly terrain the batteries have some problems keeping up with the extra work

In the cold the battery will not last as long

it would work decently in warm flatland but that would be about it

also battery disposal and recycling.. thats a lot of lead to be laying around in a crash that could also be a lot of lead acid leaking off into storm sewers or off into waterways

Answer 4

The conversion from energy to motion is not 100% efficient. If you are talking about rechargeable batteries, then where does that electricity come from? Power plants that use fossil fuels? Is it cheaper to use the fuel to go directly to mechanical energy? Or is it cheaper to use the fuel to generate electricity (with losses) carry the electricity over the electric lines (with losses) recharge the batter (with losses) and the convert the electrical energy to mechanical energy (with losses). More fossil fuel would be used on a battery powered car, but the emissions could be lower because the fuel is burned remotely.

Answer 5

Battery powered care are the way to go they are easy to maintain and can be recharged at home. For e.g. GM's EV1 which was a good vehicle that GM was leasing. Though GM saw that they would not get much service because it was so easy to maintain that it was slashed in 2003. People protested to keep the leases running but all cars were destroyed. It is sad.

Answer 6

Yes and not. I love the Zap cars, and would eventually like to get one. But they only go about 80 miles before they need to be recharged. That is the reason that Hybrids are such a good option.

Answer 7

If you want more intelligent answers, post this on sciencs. Since I'm an engineer by education, I'll answer it here. It takes energy to charge batteries. That energy usually comes from burning fuel. Remember TANSTAFL- There aint no such thing as free lunch.

Answer 8

Kacky is incorrect, power plants burn fuel (oil, coal etc..) much more efficiently than a automobile engine does, it's more efficient (and produces less pollutants) to make electricity at a generating station to charge a cars batteries, even when you include transmission losses.

Answer 9

I don't think it would stop fatalities at all. It carries so little weight, comparatively, that I would expect them to start making the cars out of tin foil.

Answer 10

Why not Bio-deisel? It burns in the same engines used for regular deisel fuel, and produces 0 CFC's, and no dinosaurs hafta die to make the fuel.