>But the phrase "if by some miracle" isn't just a figure of speech; it would
take something close to that to get there. Nearly everything about the way
we live and work is based on lots of driving. Hybrid (gas and electric) cars
could help some, but they're still expensive, and it will be a long time
before they're more than a curiosity. And they won't do much to get our VMTs
down to saner levels. Raising the cost of gas would be a sane policy move,
but it would hammer the poor and pinch and already-strapped middle class.
Those nasty distributional effects could be offset with tax rebates, but it
would take decades to recast our sprawling megalopolises. And that's
assuming we could somehow summon the political will to get started on the
task, in a country that can't even handle the modest demands of the Kyoto
accord. Maybe there's a logic to Bush's lust to colonize Mars after all.
Hi Doug. The term "miracle is fair enough if you are talking about the political will; the political situation looks pretty bleak right now. But if the U.S. had the will it would have no difficulty greatly increasing transportation efficiency. Yes we are heavily spread out. But most people in this country have access to a creaky, unpleasant an efficient bus system. And there have been train systems developed that can run anywhere a regular bus route runs five or more times per day - even in low density suburbs,
Because of the ultra-light weight of the rail system (just barely above that of PRT systems) the elevated track is cheaper to construct and maintain that roads over a 20 year period. .Efficiency per passenger mile is almost 20 times that of automobiles. Because it is an automated system , with routes constructed on the fly as passengers buy tickets, it gets you where you are going almost as fast as a car will in light traffic, which means faster than a car if you have traffic problems. And since minimal stations can be constructed for as little as $60,000, you could install it even in edge cities and tract housing filled suburbs where normal light rail could never work.
But I'll admit there are a lot purposes even an ultra-light rail system won't meet. For those conventional hybrid automobiles are by no means the limit of the possible.
In october of 1997 Solectria demonstrated a prototype electric car they could have sold (if mass produced) for $20,000 to $30,000 dollars per vehicle. [Wait - I'll point out how to bring the priced down in a moment.] This car had a 240 mile range. If you look at the miles per kwh, and realize that our grid turns fuel into electricty at an efficiency a trifle over 35% this was the equivalent of 93 miles per gallon. However, if we shut down our most inefficient power plants, and replaced them with the most efficient and cleanest burning types, we could easily upgrade our grid to at least 45% per overall efficiency, even after transmission losses. That would make the equivalent of a 120 mpg vehicle.
OK, two points here: one is that battery technology has advanced since 1997. We could probably do it for $15,000 to $20,000 - especially if we used inexpensive Thundersky lithium ion batteries currently made in China.
Still fairly expensive; and 240 miles, though more than enough for most commmuters won't work for driving vactions, services people servicing a large area (like some computer repair technicians), and other purposes. However something to consider; yes a lot of the efficiency came from the fact that stationary generators produce power more efficiently than power plants with a weight limit you have to carry around. But you also lose some of that gain from the weight of the battery. A lot of the solectria efficency came from lighter design, aerodynamic shaping regenerative braking, and less rolling resistance on the tires. You could substitute a small gasoline or diesel engine for most of the batteries, and end up with a car that is much lighter, has a conventional range, and is a lot cheaper to build - one that could sell in the 9,000-12,000 range - not the very bottom price for a car, but near it. You would lose some of the efficiency, but not most of it; you would end up with a car that got 60 mpg, to 75 mpg - a hybrid that was less expensive and more efficient than ordinary hybrids. There is a great deal of talk about Hypercars as the car of the future in renewable circles. What I think tends to be overlooked is that Solectria actually prototypes a Hypercar, but ran it on batteries instead of direct fuel.
Now this is NOT to argue that technology will magically save us; it is to argue that the technology could save us if our current owners were willing to deploy it, or if we had the political muscle to force them to.
Now this is just passenger transportation. Freight transport is another issue, air and water still another. Still it is indicative of what could be done.
-- Please note: Personal messages should be sent to [garlpublic] followed by the [at] sign with isp of [comcast], then [dot] and then an extension of net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20050414/05e349d4/attachment.htm>