On Tuesday Exxon made public a new development within it’s chemicals business which they feel will be key in future batteries for EV’s being lighter and more efficient. They have developed a film which is used to separate the positive and negative electrodes apart which can withstand much higher heat levels than the current alternatives. This will allow for larger Lithium Ion (Li-Ion) batteries which won’t overheat. The beauty of Li-Ion batteries is that they hold a charge for much longer than nickel-methyl hydride batteries, and are much lighter. Unfortunately, it’s tendency to overheat, or even catch fire has been a hindrance in it’s use in EV’s. According to Jim Harris, senior VP of Exxon Mobil Chemical Co., although the Li-Ion battery will continue to be hot, the new film will allow for larger Li-Ion batteries stable enough to utilise in EV’s.

The first thing that came to mind for me was, if there supposedly is no problem with oil production and we continue to operate with the “business-as-usual” attitude (even though it’s plainly evident that something’s awry,) then why is an Oil Giant who is making huge profits at the moment suddenly interested in battery technology for powering of EV’s, unless only because they know something we don’t (or at least isn’t being made public?) O.K. this might be a little “conspiracy theory,” but check out this site, and then download and read this report, and let me know what you think. If you read between the lines, it certainly appears that there is at least some truth to this, and that’s pretty scary! I don’t carry the same cynicism though - I feel that it probably will be a tough road, but humanity will find a way - We always have!

United Parcel Service (UPS) rolled out a delivery service in California specifically for small parcels with a 100% EV fleet recently. They bought 42 electric cars and trucks (ZAP Xebra) from the well-known EV manufacturer ZAP. This is a first for UPS in that they have never used electric vehiclesbefore. It is becoming increasingly difficult for the conventional UPS delivery vans to do small parcel deliveries, and with the added benefit of lower fuel consumption and emissions it seemed the obvious choice. Drivers will now also be monitoring the electricity usage to analyse the cost savings and emission reductions being achieved.

ZAP CEO Stever Schneider said that “This is the missing link for small package deliveries in congested areas. Packages go from the airplanes, to the tractor trailers, to the delivery vans, then to the drop-off nodes. From there the ZAP trucks make the final delivery to the consumer in a zero-emission vehicle that costs less to operate. It’s a perfect example of how green technology can help corporate America’s bottom line.”

UPS will be setting up distribution points where their conventional trucks will transfer their packages to the EV Fleet, which will be responsible for the delivery to the final destination, specifically smaller communities and downtown areas, which the conveniontal trucks are finding harder to deliver to due to their size.

Imagine for a moment that your utility company draws power on occasion from your EV to stabilise the grid and pays you for it. Pretty far-out right? Well, apparently not!

Google, the IEEE, the Natural Resources Defense Council, a former CIA director, a U.S. senator held a symposium on the 19th of September and discussed just this, along with other relevant topics. The discussion revolved around the concept of a “smart grid” which allows EV’s to communicate with the grid and charge itself when demand and price is at its lowest, and when demand is at high levels, the grid can syphon off a small percentage of power from those EV’s that are plugged in and not in use. So basically, you’re only paying the lowest possible rate, and being paid for power that’s drawn from your EV’s battery from time to time.

There are, of course some difficulties with this concept. One concern is how this would affect battery life of the EV. Periodic demands from the grid, even if for only a tiny amount of the battery’s stored energy, would obviously affect the cells’ life span, but no one knows how much.  Utility and finance companies are looking into the idea of leasing the batteries to EV owners and then charge a fixed rate to recharge it, and pay back when “drawing” a small amount of electrical power from it to the grid. Then once your battery performance becomes too low to use in your EV, the company swaps it out with a new one, refurbishes the old one and utilises it for storage of power generated from renewable source power stations - something power companies have thus far never accommodated for at any scale.

For this concept to work, technology and policy advances are required, and is under intense development all around the world.

One of the biggest downfalls we hear critics talk about the EV is the amount of time it takes to recharge. Charge times of anything from 2 hours to 12+ hours on various models have been mentioned. That’s a long break at a filling station! So if I told you that it may be possible in the near future to fully charge your EV in about 10 minutes, would that quieten the critics?

Thanks to Altair Nanotechnologies, the design of a battery with high-surface-area nano-patterned electrodes and an unusually stable lithium chemistry, EV batteries can now be safely charged to full capacity in about 10 minutes - not recommended you try that with most lithium batteries (ka-boom?!)

BUT before we start breaking out the bubbly, there’s a small problem. Whilst the technology for the battery is a brilliant break-through, in order to be able to accomplish a “10-minute-fill” you’d need about 250 kilowatts of power— five times more than an average office building uses at its peak. So that means, unless you have an electrical substation in your back yard, you’re probably not going to be able to use this technology at home. Even rapid charge filling stations with an average of 4 filling points would require the power-equivalent an electrical substation to charge all 4 points at the same time, and I’d guess that we’d put a huge amount of pressure on the power grid if you had thousands of EV’s being rapid-charged all at once! So is that it for the rapid-charge theory? I’d say it’s just the beginning!

This is a brand-new technology. Obviously with further R&D I’m certain new developments will arise which allow for this concept to be more practical. Sven Thesen, supervisor of PG&E’s Clean Air Transportation group says PG&E is exploring the idea of installing battery storage facilities at its substations to facilitate rapid charging. The batteries would be charged overnight when the demand on the power grid is at its lowest, and the stored power can then be used for the rapid-charging process. It’s not just all talk either - PG&E plans to install an EV charging station capable of rapid charging at its Davis California facility utilising this concept in 2008.

Certainly a partnership between electrical companies and filling stations could see this become a reality, and open up a lot of new opportunities for the savvy entrepreneur…!

In order for us to be able to compare the two most popular options for alternative vehicle propulsion systems (Hydrogen and Electric), we need to understand The Hydrogen Fuel cell a little better.

First off, in order for the Hydrogen Fuel cell to work properly, one would need a pure form of Hydrogen gas (I.E. carbon-free), oxygen which can be derived from the air, and a catalyst for the reaction in order to create electricity, which in turn propels the car. So basically it’s a mini power factory generating electricity derived from Hydrogen which is stored in high-pressure tanks on the vehicle (that’s a scary topic all it’s own , but I guess we ARE comfortable with flammable/toxic petrol in our cars, so whatever!) The only “waste” would be water. However, even under tremendous pressure, prototype hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have a range of about 100 miles. The popular theory that one could extract Hydrogen from water stored in tanks on the vehicle through electrolysis is far too expensive, inefficient and impractical to implement anytime in the near future. A slightly different option may be to use a large on-board reformer that would pull hydrogen out of a fuel such as methanol, but you would still be left with toxic pollutants including CO2, and the demand for whichever fuel is required would rise steeply, which would defeat the purpose.

With all that in mind, you may or may not know that car manufacturers are anything between 10 to 25 years away from seeing mass-market hydrogen-powered vehicles, since the technology is still a way off. And what of infrastructure? Well, you’d basically have to convert every single petrol station into a Hydrogen station - that’s a HUGE project, and a LOT of money! It would take a long time to replace the existing infrastructure with a hydrogen manufacturing, distribution and fueling infrastructure , and involves many risks, expenses and by-products we may even still be unaware of. On the other hand, a battery powered electric vehicle uses an infrastructure that is already available in every modern country known to man: you household’s electricity supply.

You may think “OK, 10-25 years, plus maybe another 10 years to fully replace the infrastructure. No big deal, we can wait.” I beg to differ! What of our “global warming issue?” But more practically, let’s look at our oil supply issue. Ex CEO of Total, one of the major global oil companies, predicted that oil output would peak around 2020. The Current CEO says that 100 million barrels per day production is “in my view, an optimistic case.” Here’s where the crisis lies: calculations based on the current global trends (for example, 15% per annum growth in Chinese demand on for oil) suggests that 140 million barrels per day would be needed by 2030. I think the figures speak for themselves - roughly translating to global economic depression long before 2030!

The bottom line is that EV’s are by far the most suitable substitute available to us right now, both economically and for the health of the Earth. I don’t necessarily rule out that a technology of tomorrow may come about which proves otherwise, but for now pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking isn’t helping the situation! EV technology is available today, and constantly improving, allowing for the transition from conventional vehicles to EV’s to be a relatively painless process, and as mentioned earlier, the infrastructure basically already exists. You may feel that my position on this is biased, but I challenge you to find facts that prove me wrong!

For starters let’s all agree that the combustion engine that exists in all cars of today are a major contributor to the pollution which causes global warming around the world. With emerging markets only getting stronger (such as India, China etc.) there’ll be undoubtedly a much larger number of vehicles on the road very soon from now, only worsening the problem.

So is the electric car a solution? Well, for starters EVs have no tailpipe or evaporative emissions at all, since there’s no fuel or combustion system. One should also consider the amount of “oil” used when a car goes in for oil changes, air filters, tune-ups, mufflers, timing belts, or emission tests (if that doesn’t make too much sense, I highly recommend you watch “Who Killed the Electric Car?” where they explain this concept in detail) - EVs are virtually maintenance-free.

However, there are those that will argue that EV’s don’t solve the problem, since all it does is transfer the emissions from the car itself to the power station which is charging the EV on a daily basis. Certainly there are emissions associated with fossil-fuel-burning power plants, but the emissions directly associated with charging EVs are extremely low. Let’s not forget that if the EV is charged from a zero emission power source such as nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, and wind power, then the electric car is 100% clean! The overall mix of power plants in the U.S. is 55 percent coal, 9 percent natural gas, and 4 percent oil (*World Resources Institute.) The other 32 percent include other energy sources such as hydroelectric, solar, wind, nuclear and geothermal. Although half of the U.S. uses coal-fired plants for electricity, EVs recharging from these facilities are predicted to produce less CO2 than conventional combustion vehicles, and will reduce CO2 emissions in the country by about 20 percent. Imagine what EV’s that are being charged from renewable sources would do to the emissions value? In France most of the electricity comes from nuclear power plants. Hence, emissions produced to charge EVs would be cut down to almost non-existant across the board.

The next issue critics raise is that the country could not possibly support the energy requirement of a sudden surge of EVs on the road. The Electric Power Resource Institute (EPRI) estimates that the U.S. can support 50 million EVs without requiring a single extra power plant. Another study puts this number closer to 20 million. Thousands more could be added if they are charged at night during off-peak hours, which is the time that majority of EVs would be charged anyway. 20 million EVs, each with 100,000 miles on the odometer, would reduce CO2 emissions by 500 000 000 000 000 kilgorams (that’s 500 million tons) in the U.S. alone, without requiring any more power plants.

In conclusion, with the constant development of new technology designed to reduce emmissions and improve the efficiency of power plans, thus far EVs continue to be the best solution towards attaining clean air, and reducing our dependence on oil.

ZAP, in partnership with Lotus Engineering have designed a new EV that will result in one of the most advanced electric cars ever developed. The aptly-named ZAP-X Crossover does potentially offer a very real transition option from conventional combustion vehicles, as the short-falls of electric vehicles have been almost completely eradicated in this new design. The award-winning APX lightweight aluminium architecture allows for unparalleled performance and usability. The drive system comprises of innovative electric motors inside each of the wheels, which in partnership can deliver up to 644 horsepower, and speeds of 0-60mph in 4.8 seconds, up to a maximum speed of 155mph. The power system enables the vehicle to travel up to 350 miles before needing a charge, and the new rapid-charge technology allows for battery recharging in as little as 10 minutes. Seating allows for up to 7 passengers (not a type-o) and some very cool new gadgets included as standard too, such as touch-screen controls, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, High-Res Video, Windows XP, iPod Ready, firewire, GPS, USB2 and more! Regenerative braking as standard, and energy collecting windows and windshields allow for some additional charging, too.

With everything you’d want out of a conventional sports car, it also has the versatility of being used as a family vehicle too! Definitely 10 points from me – look forward to this one!

Got you curious? Click here for more information.