Delorean EV & alternatives

[knightjp]

Alright... We're all fans of the electric Delorean made by Delman. Its great and the electric car is here with us now.
This world will one day run out of oil. With the current crisis looming in the middle east, its gonna be in short supply and prices are going up. Alternative fuels are here, not in large numbers, but present still.
The electric car is here and I liked what I saw on the Delorean website about the EV. However we all know that due to the battery range and time it takes to charge up, the electric car isn't exactly a viable option to completely replace the petrol engine.
Chevy knew this and developed the Volt to answer many of the issues. I believe the Volt's tech is simply the best alternative out there. But if you're looking to remove the petrol engine altogether, Nissan, Peugeot, Mitsubishi all have alternative models.

However Hydrogen is well and truly the best idea for a clean alternative fuel. Fuel Cell technology stands as the best idea. Yes, its costly now, but well worth the effort if Delorean puts in the R&D. After all, the BTTF car's electricity didn't come from it battery, it came from Mr Fusion.

What do you think is the best idea for a green Delorean?

Make the PRV / internal Combustion engine run on hydrogen. Not unheard of. BMW & Mazda have done it. There is a version of a Rotary engine from Mazda that runs of hydrogen. And Delorean did want to have a rotary engine in the original plans for the car. And it would still have a great engine noise
Make it completely electric like Delman with loads of batteries. This option is great, but I'd like to not use the trunk space for batteries. I'd like to have a bit of space for suitcases, etc....
Make it a Fuel Cell car like the Honda FCX Clarity. This is by far the best option I can think of if you like the idea of an electric vehicle without the headaches of the limited range and charging time.


Vote for your choice now...

[WelmoedJ]

First of all it's not a matter of this or that. It probably will be a combination of option that make the result usable, reliable and maintainable.



- Make the PRV / internal Combustion engine run on hydrogen. Not unheard of. BMW & Mazda have done it. There is a version of a Rotary engine from Mazda that runs of hydrogen. And Delorean did want to have a rotary engine in the original plans for the car. And it would still have a great engine noise
Hydrogen is certainly a sound option. However there are a lot of "potholes" in the road to acceptance. These mostly are in the safety and availabilty range.


- Make it completely electric like Delman with loads of batteries. This option is great, but I'd like to not use the trunk space for batteries. I'd like to have a bit of space for suitcases, etc....
Dave has done a lot of work to make the D electric. However if Dave were to do it again now, he probably would take another road towards the electric concept as developments have progressed largely in the years between his then and nowadays options.


- Make it a Fuel Cell car like the Honda FCX Clarity. This is by far the best option I can think of if you like the idea of an electric vehicle without the headaches of the limited range and charging time.
Yes, this also may be a valid option, but mind that to profit our cars need a full re-design.

All choices actually are applicable to make our car use alternative energy.
But re-designing the car is probably way too costly to make the result a cash cow.
And even if you don't decide to make it profitable, it is going to cost a fortune.
Therefore starting from scratch - if you have the money - is a better way, but then it won't be the D as we know it.

Also because of this, no voting from me.

[David T]

There is no efficient way to store electric. Batteries are not the way to go. The energy density is way too low compared to gasoline, natural gas, Hydrogen etc. The main question is how to convert these fuels into motive power efficiently and with little impact on the environment. No one considers how the electric to charge the car is produced. Almost HALF of all the electric in this country is made by burning COAL. All you do is succeed in making the pollution somewhere else and not releasing it from the tailpipe. It is technologically possible to reform gasoline into hydrogen and run a fuel cell. This can be a bridge to a hydrogen based mobile fuel. The problem is economics. People are already unhappy with the price of gasoline now. Any other solution is going to cost a LOT more! GM has a fuel cell program up and running in several cities. All of the major auto manufacturers are working on something. It is a chicken and egg problem. Until there are enough cars there will not be enough refill stations. Without enough refill stations there will never be enough demand for the cars. The answer is "onboard" reforming to make hydrogen but that is expensive and not as efficient.
David Teitelbaum

[dvonk]

this thread asks some tough questions that humans as stewards of the planet will eventually be forced to answer. as our insatiable thirst for energy grows, where will we obtain it? Newton's Third Law comes into affect here; it seems for every positive feature of a 'new' energy source, there is a downside as well. (e.g., nuclear power is a viable source of electricity, but after fission takes place, you are left with radioactive wastes, etc.)

solar power seems to be the 'greenest' of the alternative energy sources (and 'free'), but as David T mentioned, battery storage isnt very efficient, and as of right now, our solar panel technology isnt where it should be either.

[nullset]

However Hydrogen is well and truly the best idea for a clean alternative fuel. Fuel Cell technology stands as the best idea. Yes, its costly now, but well worth the effort if Delorean puts in the R&D. After all, the BTTF car's electricity didn't come from it battery, it came from Mr Fusion.


I'm gonna stop you right there. Hydrogen is not some magical fuel. Do you know how most hydrogen is made these days? Oil or electricity.

Hydrogen is, at best, a poor battery. You take electricity, electrolize water ( put energy into it) to get hydrogen gas.[1]
Then you burn the hydrogen gas and you get water and less energy than it took to electrolize the water.

The hydrogen economy dream of the 90s was a scam that, thankfully, did not come to pass.

Think about it. Hydrogen gas is the least dense thing on Earth. So we're going to try to store it in tanks and underground and expect it to not leak? It also takes an enormous amount of energy to compress it into the liquid form, which would be needed to store/pump it/etc.

--buddy
[1]: Okay, the same amount of energy comes out, but the process is not 100% efficient. It's closer to 25-40% efficient as best. The rest is waste heat.

Also, I would LOVE to see a biodiesel Delorean!

[jawn101]

Call me crazy, but I see immense potential in Thorium powered vehicles. In fact, I can envision (not in the near future, but I think it's possible) a future where we have done away with central power and the "grid" mentality completely. Due to the sustainability, portability and safety of Thorium power, every home and vehicle could have a reactor onboard that would need next to no service or refueling. The compound has a very short half-life, emits only extremely low power alpha radiation (that cannot even penetrate human skin) and a small piece of the material could theoretically power a vehicle using a steam-electric generator for well over 100,000 miles without maintenance or renewal.

A world with safe, plentiful, zero emissions power that isn't suceptible to weather disruption or trade embargos might not be that far off. The *MAJOR* barrier to adoption right now is initial cost of the material. It is abundant but requires heavy refinement to be usable. As I am not fully versed in all aspects of this particular science, I am sure there are other barriers as well - as with any new energy source. I just see lots of potential in the material/technology.

Read more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.html

[knightjp]

Its been so many years since BTTF aired on the silver screen. I'm actually surprised no one has made a Mr. Fusion yet.
I'm no where an expert when it comes to the technology of turning garbage into electrical energy, but I'm sure its not that hard. Or maybe it is...
All I'm saying is that we managed to invent the internet, 3D animation, biodiesel, etc...
Surely some R&D on the subject is available.

And the hydrogen idea isn't fiction, nor is it perfect right now, but there is plenty of R&D in the technology and Honda's FCX Clarity is known as the car of the future. The more I read into the subject, the more I'm convinced that hydrogen is the way forward..
However yes, we are still going to need to find a way to make liquid hydrogen cleanly.

[nullset]

And the hydrogen idea isn't fiction, nor is it perfect right now, but there is plenty of R&D in the technology and Honda's FCX Clarity is known as the car of the future. The more I read into the subject, the more I'm convinced that hydrogen is the way forward..
However yes, we are still going to need to find a way to make liquid hydrogen cleanly.

Hydrogen can be used in a fuel cell to power a slow car.

You have to remember where the hydrogen comes from, though. Fuel cells require pure hydrogen, which can only be made efficiently through electrolysis of water.

Electricity -> hydrogen -> compressed into a liquid -> transported to a gas station -> into your fuel cell -> driving your car.

This is not a very efficient process. Here's a better one:
Electricity -> electrical grid -> charger -> battery -> driving your car.

The latter is around 85% efficient compared with ~40% efficiency of the hydrogen.

It's not a good idea. It's not an energy source, it's an energy sink, or a very poor energy storage mechanism.

Look up "Hydrogen economy" on google or wikipedia for some examples of why it's just a non-starter.

The whole myth was started by politicians, not scientists and engineers.

--buddy

[Spittybug]

What do you think is the best idea for a green Delorean?

Paint.

Economics will dictate the fuels of the future and rightfully so. While governments should legislate to protect that which private enterprise would not necessarily (such as the environment), this can be translated to costs which will play into the equation. Continued research will yield far greater energy storage density for batteries than we currently have. Still, electricity is the energy "transport" mode, not the source of the energy itself. Think of it merely as the common currency for all ultimate sources of the energy (oil, gas, coal, solar, nuclear, geothermal, wind, tidal.......). We will need all of these feeding the common delivery medium, electricity. This is where the hydrogen argument falls apart. Too many technical challenges for hydrogen as the energy carrier. Burning it is great; just water as byproduct. Sourcing it is great too; water, just one little thermodynamic problem in that whole equation however....

There is no reason to believe that the experience curve or Moore's law will cease to function. Power storage density WILL increase, thus making batteries and electricity the ultimate choice for powering everything in our world, not just cars.

[jawn101]

Hydrogen also has drawbacks in transportation. Expected loss of liquid hydrogen to evaporation is approximately 1% per day, even in our best constructed containers. So if you ship hydrogen to remote parts of the world where it will only be consumed occasionally, you will constantly be replenishing the supply either in storage or in the pipelines that would be built to transport it - even though no one is purchasing or using it.

Also, re: battery/electric cars: part of the "car culture" is the mindset that you can get in and go - stop for a few moments to refuel and keep on going. Electric cars that use battery power have to stop more frequently, and for far longer. Imagine 8 hours of charging for only 4 hours of drive time? Not very efficient.

[knightjp]

Surely the transportation of hydrogen is no more complicated than offshore drilling and moving it across the globe on tankers to refineries, etc... :thumbup2:

[jawn101]

Surely the transportation of hydrogen is no more complicated than offshore drilling and moving it across the globe on tankers to refineries, etc... :thumbup2:

It is when you consider that the hydrogen can disappear from a sealed container, and the oil won't :) Without 100% efficient insulation (which we all know isn't possible), the extremely low boiling point of liquid hydrogen can result in significant boil-off during transportation. So then you're faced with the possible solution of keeping the hydrogen refrigerated during transport. And the energy to run those chilling units has to come from somewhere....

This is the kind of cyclical challenge that the entire concept of hydrogen as a significant energy source keeps running in to. At this time it's basically impossible to use it as a commercially viable fuel source outside of a very carefully controlled ideal environment.

Edit:

...Honda's FCX Clarity is known as the car of the future.
Honda's attempt here was really noble. The car itself was a masterpiece of technology. However, (at least in the US) it was useless outside the Los Angeles area where they had set up fuelling stations, and DRASTICALLY subsidised the fuel itself for the participants in the pilot program. To actually call the FCX the car of the future evokes memories of Disney's Tomorowland, where we were promised hourly rides to our cities on the moon by the 1980s. The FCX needs to be regarded for what it is, a brilliant vehicle that was well executed but relies on an infrastructure that doesn't exist and may not be possible.

[Elvis]

What energy keeps our world turning and the inside glowing hot so that it melts iron ?

What keeps it from cooling down and rotating slower ?

Who proved that oil is really fossil ?
And why are todays plants, forests, humans and animals not turning into oil ?

[nullset]

What energy keeps our world turning and the inside glowing hot so that it melts iron ?

What keeps it from cooling down and rotating slower ?

Physics.



Who proved that oil is really fossil ?
And why are todays plants, forests, humans and animals not turning into oil ?

Science. And they will turn into oil….in a few million years.

--buddy

[DniveK]

I vote electric. NASA confirmed working ColdFusion on Jan 14, put one onboard and never worry about recharges again.

[knightjp]

I vote electric. NASA confirmed working ColdFusion on Jan 14, put one onboard and never worry about recharges again.
If this coldfusion translates itself to a real life Mr. Fusion, I'd be glad to have that on my car... LOL

[Dangermouse]

If only our floorpans rotted we could make the perfect green car:

http://i-love-cartoons.us/snags/clipart/Hanna-Barbera/Flintstones/Fred-Flintstone-Barney-Rubble-Car.jpg

[David T]

Losses from the creation and storage of Hydrogen gas can be made no worse than the looses form transporting oil or electric. None of this is lossless. The "trick" is to do it as efficiently as possible and that means liquid hydrogen and that is VERY difficult at this time. Hydrogen is also EXTREMELY flammable and burns invisibly so it is more dangerous than most common fuels. The short term solution would be an on-board reformer. One of the big problems is refill time. No one will want to go into a "gas station" and wait hours to refill. With liquid fuels it is done in minutes. Not the case with electric. Alternative power must compete with a very mature technology, IC engines, and all of the present infrastructure supporting it. A VERY big hurdle to climb. I do not expect an big breakthroughs, only small, incremental improvements over time while the economics catches up. Many of the things you will see offered into the marketplace will be "bridges" to get us to the future we all want. Not all hydrogen is made from burnt water. Much of it is made from condensed air and that also takes a lot of energy. One of the most efficient ways of making hydrogen is from Methane. We already have infrastructure in place for that. Any Hydrogen vehicle can also be made to run on CNG so expect to see a lot more of that first. I have seen and driven fuel cell vehicles and the technology is further along than most people realize. The biggest hurdles now are economics and availability of refill stations.
David Teitelbaum

[knightjp]

Losses from the creation and storage of Hydrogen gas can be made no worse than the looses form transporting oil or electric. None of this is lossless. The "trick" is to do it as efficiently as possible and that means liquid hydrogen and that is VERY difficult at this time. Hydrogen is also EXTREMELY flammable and burns invisibly so it is more dangerous than most common fuels. The short term solution would be an on-board reformer. One of the big problems is refill time. No one will want to go into a "gas station" and wait hours to refill. With liquid fuels it is done in minutes. Not the case with electric. Alternative power must compete with a very mature technology, IC engines, and all of the present infrastructure supporting it. A VERY big hurdle to climb. I do not expect an big breakthroughs, only small, incremental improvements over time while the economics catches up. Many of the things you will see offered into the marketplace will be "bridges" to get us to the future we all want. Not all hydrogen is made from burnt water. Much of it is made from condensed air and that also takes a lot of energy. One of the most efficient ways of making hydrogen is from Methane. We already have infrastructure in place for that. Any Hydrogen vehicle can also be made to run on CNG so expect to see a lot more of that first. I have seen and driven fuel cell vehicles and the technology is further along than most people realize. The biggest hurdles now are economics and availability of refill stations.
David Teitelbaum

Your absolutely right David. Most of the hurdles for alternative power sources simply boils down to economics.

[nullset]

Losses from the creation and storage of Hydrogen gas can be made no worse than the looses form transporting oil or electric.


This is not true. Electrical distribution is ~95% efficient. This is HUGELY more efficient than oil.

Oil does not want to escape to the upper atmosphere. It his much more energy dense than liquid hydrogen, and doesn't require cryogenic temperatures. Those are the facts of physics and chemistry that will not change.

The hydrogen economy was a sham. It will never be our primary means of transporting energy.


None of this is lossless. The "trick" is to do it as efficiently as possible and that means liquid hydrogen and that is VERY difficult at this time. Hydrogen is also EXTREMELY flammable and burns invisibly so it is more dangerous than most common fuels. The short term solution would be an on-board reformer. One of the big problems is refill time. No one will want to go into a "gas station" and wait hours to refill. With liquid fuels it is done in minutes. Not the case with electric.

This is true. That's where hybrids or things like the Volt come in.



Alternative power must compete with a very mature technology, IC engines, and all of the present infrastructure supporting it. A VERY big hurdle to climb. I do not expect an big breakthroughs, only small, incremental improvements over time while the economics catches up. Many of the things you will see offered into the marketplace will be "bridges" to get us to the future we all want. Not all hydrogen is made from burnt water. Much of it is made from condensed air and that also takes a lot of energy. One of the most efficient ways of making hydrogen is from Methane. We already have infrastructure in place for that. Any Hydrogen vehicle can also be made to run on CNG so expect to see a lot more of that first. I have seen and driven fuel cell vehicles and the technology is further along than most people realize. The biggest hurdles now are economics and availability of refill stations.
David Teitelbaum

We will see changes, but they will not come in the form of hydrogen.

Btw, one of the things I tell people when talking about hydrogen is "water is burnt hydrogen". Yes, you can use the ashes from your fireplace to heat your house, you just have to turn them back into wood first. It just so happens that in this case, there is a process for turning water back into hydrogen and oxygen, it's just not free, thanks to those pesky laws of thermodynamics (Short version: You can't win. You can't lose. You can't even break even)

We have a higher chance of vastly improving battery technology than we do of somehow choosing an extremely inefficient way of transporting energy and building out all of that infrastructure.

--buddy

[dmc6960]

We have a higher chance of vastly improving battery technology than we do of somehow choosing an extremely inefficient way of transporting energy and building out all of that infrastructure.


+1 - Batteries will win in the end.

We are continuously improving upon batteries, get higher power densities, faster charging times, more power cycles.

Hydrogen on the other hand is already at its max in its energy storage in a liquid state, and the economics of it will never work out in the long run for the masses.

If someone found a simple chemical/mineral catalyst to separate water with little energy, then perhaps things would change. Until that happens though batteries will win.

[nullset]

If someone found a simple chemical/mineral catalyst to separate water with little energy, then perhaps things would change. Until that happens though batteries will win.

The energy you get from burning hydrogen (combining hydrogen and oxygen) will always be equal to (and, practically, less than) the energy it takes to unburn it (separate hydrogen and oxygen from water).

There's no such thing as "free energy". If there was some magical way to contiunally burn and unburn hydrogen and get work / energy out of it, then you'd have a perpetual motion machine.

--buddy

[David T]

Electrical distribution is not 95% effiecient. There are a LOT of loses in long distance transportation and the transformers to increase and decrease the voltage. This is why you cannot get electricity from all of the hydropower in the west to the eastern part of the country. The only reason oil looks so good as a storage form for fuel is we humans did not have to invest ANY energy into creating it, only recovering it. Creating a storage for energy involves not only the energy to get it into the form you want "BUT ALSO THE ENERGY ITSELF"! As you point out there is no free lunch and anything you do costs in terms of energy. The heart of this debate is how to make and store energy in mobile devices and how to convert it into motive power. Economics will determine the answer and technology will make more choices available. With today's economics and technology the electric car is a novelty limited to niche markets. The hybrid (such as a Prius) is the closest to an actual usable car.
David Teitelbaum

[knightjp]

Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology has to have some appeal, otherwise the automobile industry is wasting a whole load of its resources in useless R&D... There must be some truth or some plan in mind for them to shell thair funds in developing technology.

I agree that the battery powered car is so far the most an appealing choice and works well as a small car for the city. I'm a fan of the Nissan Leaf. I'm more of a fan of the Chevy Volt. Its an electric car, which only utilises the engine when the battery is low; unlike the Prius which switches in between its drives depending on how fast you want to go.
The Volt's idea is basically the best idea out there for now. I'm surprised they're not selling as much as they should. Probably 'cuz the price is too high.

Anyways, in the long term, I'm not counting out hydrogen just yet as there seems to be more R&D going on in that area for a future energy source.

[nullset]

Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology has to have some appeal, otherwise the automobile industry is wasting a whole load of its resources in useless R&D... There must be some truth or some plan in mind for them to shell thair funds in developing technology.


They're mostly doing it for PR. It's never intended to be an actual product you'll be able to buy and use.



Anyways, in the long term, I'm not counting out hydrogen just yet as there seems to be more R&D going on in that area for a future energy source.

Actually most scientists and engineers that were told to investigate hydrogen as a "fuel" (which it isn't) stopped long ago, because they saw it for what it was - a waste of energy.

--buddy

[David T]

This thread is better continued on the many other forums devoted to this topic, it is not Delorean specific. Suffice it to say you should not expect an all electric, practical Delorean anytime soon (or at least till someone perfects a Mr Fusion). The only car that has any chance in the short term is going to be a hybrid with an on-board IC motor to keep the batteries from going dead and getting enough range to make the car usable. In the near term expect to see it run on multiple fuels including CNG and liquid carbon based fuels.
David Teitelbaum

[nullset]

This thread is better continued on the many other forums devoted to this topic, it is not Delorean specific. Suffice it to say you should not expect an all electric, practical Delorean anytime soon (or at least till someone perfects a Mr Fusion). The only car that has any chance in the short term is going to be a hybrid with an on-board IC motor to keep the batteries from going dead and getting enough range to make the car usable. In the near term expect to see it run on multiple fuels including CNG and liquid carbon based fuels.
David Teitelbaum

Have you ever seen the concept of an EV pusher?

Perhaps the Delorean Trailer could be combined with an EV pusher. It's basically in ICE either to charge the batteries on the go, or to actually push the car and charge the batteries.

There, now it's Delorean related!

[knightjp]

They're mostly doing it for PR. It's never intended to be an actual product you'll be able to buy and use.
Actually most scientists and engineers that were told to investigate hydrogen as a "fuel" (which it isn't) stopped long ago, because they saw it for what it was - a waste of energy.

--buddy

You seem absolutely convinced as if you got this knowledge first hand. You're probably right. Are you a researcher? Are you involved in the automotive industry or were you involved in any of the mentioned R&D?

Sounds like it... :)

[nullset]

You seem absolutely convinced as if you got this knowledge first hand. You're probably right. Are you a researcher? Are you involved in the automotive industry or were you involved in any of the mentioned R&D?

Sounds like it... :)

No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

And I'm a skeptic/cynic.