A Better Discovery?
- Thread starter Papillon
- Start date
I have this conversation with my "greenie" friends all the time. As if CO2 is the only pollutant. Describe to them/show them a picture of a nickel, copper or other rare earth mining operation? Now THAT'S pollution.
It's kind of like nutrition - people think "low fat" foods are healthy but they are eating a shit-ton of calories in the form of carbs. No bueno.
Oh, no doubt Panasonic are the leaders in the field of li-ion batteries. But 18650 cells are designed for low voltage/amperage out put. Even they know that. Ask Harley. (they use prismatic, not cylinder, cells from Samsung)
MatSci - That' what I do...But not this area any more.
Computer modeling - one of the biggest issues on battery life/efficiency for automotives is that fact that they only use a fraction of the battery capacity; they only get charged to say 80% and discharged to 20%; you're leaving 40% of the battery's capacity on the table. That's to prevent catastrophic failure and preserve long-term use. But they are using computer modeling to try and monitor electrical output of the individual batteries to be able to identify problems before they become problems. That should allow them to use more of the capacity more effectively. If they can increase the range of a car battery by 20% (or more) just using a computer algorithm? That's a win.
For electrical generation, I think solar is probably the best (maybe wind). But the cheapest (and environmentally cleanest) is crystalline silica, but it has poor efficiency. The high efficiency solar cells, like Copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS), are expensive and not exactly environmentally friendly to obtain (see above). This is where the MatSci needs to keep plugging away at - get more out of crystalline silica. But science is a long, hard slog (see below). 50 years of effort just resulted in doubling efficiency from 12% to 25%.
Then, you get back to the issue of energy storage
For that, I'm a fan of hydrogen fuel cells for portable energy. Create the hydrogen by hydrolysis of water using electricity from solar cells. Use the hydrogen as the "easily" portable energy source; convert back to electricity in the vehicle using the fuel cell - it goes back to water (using oxygen from the air). That said, I worked on membranes for fuel cells as an intern at Allied-Signal (now Honeywell). The chemist I was working with said they were expecting (hoping) fuel cells to be on the road in ten years. That was in 1991. (Then Bush II proposed the same thing - ca. 2002).
Since hydrogen has it's issues - see: Hindenburg - methanol fuel cells are an interesting option as well (although it generates CO2 as a byproduct - the horror!)
I think Musk is (mostly) a con man/huckster. But, I have to give him credit for SpaceX. They really are doing some truly innovative things.
Last edited:
Sometimes I think the general population does need to be taking good doses of lithium on the daily.But then you can't eat them, so that's really not a great silver lining
Lol. Can you imagine what would happen to the electrical grid if 20% of the people were plugging their cars in. It would not be pretty. We would be paying $10.00 a kilowatt.
There's not much to disagree with, there. I kind of look at Musk as John Romero. People like that typically do have the best intentions, but work themselves up on their own marketing. They just can't help it. When it works, they look like gods. When it doesn't work, they look foolish and greedy.
They're typically nice guys, though. Musk might be a bit more aggressive, but I work with someone like him; terrible family life. The man just cannot stop proving to himself he's worthwhile. It drives him to obscene levels of success and risk; and he moves on everything quickly. I've learned a lot dealing with people like that.
Musk had it rough growing up. I can see the obsession to get to the top of a ladder that can never be truly conquered. Space is a close second, though. If he can't be the wealthiest man in the world, he can at least go out with a bang.
Of course, I've always been a fan of people many find controversial.
I like Hydrogen because the infrastructure is already here, but it needs some upgrades and testing. We can transport it everywhere already, and oil companies are in a perfect position to laterally adjust their focus. Oil will be needed for a very, very long time, but hydrogen is about the only thing that can be used soon to have a similar "eat the whole animal" industry.
BP SunEsso McShell have the space, the money, and the expertise to engage Hydrogen. Indeed, the oil and natural gas companies are in the best position to leverage it, given their unique sea facilities. People say it's not efficient and it'll cause problems... I don't think they've ever seen an off-shore drilling platform in person.
I do want to see fuel cells mature. There is a lot of potential that hasn't been tapped. I'd also like to see both hydrogen combustion and traditional, diesel-electric power plants in cars instead of the current hybrid arrangements. The Volt was supposed to give us that, but it didn't. That's proven technology that just needs to be miniaturized; and we're pretty damned good at that now.
Solar will be the answer in the future, but as you've noted, it's not there yet. We have to get back to 80% research and 20% deployment.
A while back I was working on a new panel technology for a company, in that regard; as well as mobile and static energy storage concepts. They folded due to unrelated factors, though. Then I just kind of stopped and went on to something else. I may get back on that if I can muster the time and energy.
The panel looked to end up notably efficient. There's no way for me to build it, though; same goes for the batteries. New machines need to be built to manufacture the new materials. That's tens; perhaps hundreds of millions to make it happen. Without access to a much higher horsepower level of modeling and their ability to use it efficiently, I can't do much more.
There's just no way to push feasibility without that level of technology at my mercy. The shit's just plain too small. Even the hottest rig I have would crumble the second I tried to do that. Much better gear is needed, and experts to run it.
Those panels wouldn't have been cheap, but they weren't meant for consumer deployment; they were meant to start at farms and on large oil transport vessels, and bleed down to the consumer market over time.
Cheers,
Kennith
As for the negative effects of mining...
My word, I've seen every horror you can imagine, in that regard. From human rights abuses to the pollution and negative effects on terrain over time. Fuck, I've been all up in so many strip mining operations it's disgusting, and I did my best to clean things up and reevaluate processes for them. It's a dirty, smelly, sick, bloody industry in general. As demand increases, it becomes even worse over time. The thing is, they don't see it, it's not on every celebrity's Twitter account...
I never intended to be that involved in the actual industry. The first time I was hired to smooth out some dangerous areas for transport, they just picked up on how my mind works and I ended up all over the place with that shit. Simple jobs began to nearly always involve technological and infrastructure development of some variety.
The desire to improve is out there, but it's being eclipsed and run flat over by demand that can barely be contained.
On hydrogen again, it does have more predictable containment failure characteristics than gasoline, and it can be argued that it's safer than propane. Getting that across to consumers will be tough, though. Some fuel cell vehicles have been deployed in specific markets, but I can't get one out here. I can get the hybrid version of the Clarity, but not the fuel cell version.
That's a fucking nice car, though. Hybrid or not, it's tempted me a few times, and I think it's a looker in it's own way.
Cheers,
Kennith
My word, I've seen every horror you can imagine, in that regard. From human rights abuses to the pollution and negative effects on terrain over time. Fuck, I've been all up in so many strip mining operations it's disgusting, and I did my best to clean things up and reevaluate processes for them. It's a dirty, smelly, sick, bloody industry in general. As demand increases, it becomes even worse over time. The thing is, they don't see it, it's not on every celebrity's Twitter account...
I never intended to be that involved in the actual industry. The first time I was hired to smooth out some dangerous areas for transport, they just picked up on how my mind works and I ended up all over the place with that shit. Simple jobs began to nearly always involve technological and infrastructure development of some variety.
The desire to improve is out there, but it's being eclipsed and run flat over by demand that can barely be contained.
On hydrogen again, it does have more predictable containment failure characteristics than gasoline, and it can be argued that it's safer than propane. Getting that across to consumers will be tough, though. Some fuel cell vehicles have been deployed in specific markets, but I can't get one out here. I can get the hybrid version of the Clarity, but not the fuel cell version.
That's a fucking nice car, though. Hybrid or not, it's tempted me a few times, and I think it's a looker in it's own way.
Cheers,
Kennith
You like the looks of the Clarity?
I saw one at a golf course last weekend. Those rear wheel-well covers...
I try to remain objective in regard to style, but my own preferences can be a bit quirky, at times.
Hell, you saw what I thought Land Rover should build:
I'd buy the fuck out of that, but then again I'm the one that worked it up. I should hope I like my own little attempts at automotive design.
That shit's hard to do. Yes, I forgot to center the wheels...
Cheers,
Kennith
It's open; or it's likely to be open most of the time, anyway, as it's a pickup bed. There's a lot of cleverness to how it operates (it can even become a 2+2), but in the end this is indeed a "ute". The buttresses are for unifying the suspension structure and a functional safety cage. Since they didn't need that extra material, I removed it for access and visibility. There would be Velcro in there for attaching panels.
There's a hell of a lot going on in those longitudinal ridges; one on either side. They provide some interesting functionality. The real estate was there, so it's been used.
They hide LED spot lamps up front, as well as a cargo management system with a little twist: A canvas awning rolls down like a window shade within internal tracks, with various locking positions. It also disengages for fully horizontal use, and swings out the side as well, for traditional awning use. There are quite a few features, but the list was long.
Beyond that, they're actually part of the structure. I wanted this vehicle to be able to land hard on either it's front or rear wheels without risking damage to the body structure itself. To make it bulletproof, it required some creative panel shapes. What those body lines are hiding would essentially be one giant, four-corner strut bar and stiffening/roll cage.
Regardless of it's Australian utility or dune pounding resilience, it was and is intended to be a true Land Rover GT car, and a fast one, at that.
When Porsche unveiled the Cayenne, the first thing I thought was that if they can do that... What kind of sports car would Land Rover build? It would obviously be a GT, but a GT unleashed; a car that will go anywhere a person with an ounce of sense would want to go, at any speed they choose. Subaru and Max Rokatansky's wet fucking dream.
So, I'm calling it a GT car, not a truck. It could be marketed as a vehicle designed to conquer their last frontier: The road.
In advertising, interleave the fancy new "conquer the road" footage with about a year of them stomping every major rally championship the world has to offer, and at least you get to imagine a bad-ass television commercial.
Edit: That was a bit too much exposition... I simplified it.
Cheers,
Kennith
Last edited:
I like it.......in my younger days the Subaru Brat was a popular item in our area....this reminds me of that sorta......it would be a really neat rig that could fill a lot of niches........
Yeah, and that's the trouble with it.
That level of multi-tasking confuses buyers. When the first person asks what it is, you need an identifiable answer.
It's got to be obvious, or it just won't sell here, and that means you have to tell them what they see in order for them to see it.
The first challenge they'd face is whether to brand it Range Rover, Discovery, or Defender. I don't think their brand can afford another nameplate. That determines the entire marketing strategy, and it's a difficult decision to make.
Cheers,
Kennith
Last edited:
Thanks. It was only my third attempt at putting together a concept like that, so I know it's a bit iffy. I've used the same hand full of graphic design tools since the mid '90s, so I need to learn the other features in the programs I'm using to really get it right. You can tell I sort of just got tired of it by the wheels down.
I'm still not ready to do a 3/4 view, but I'll get around to it eventually. So far, I did a Lincoln GT and a Lincoln pickup, as well as this Land Rover. They're not great, but they get the points across, and I think they can all be successfully marketed. The Land Rover is probably the riskiest model of the three.
That said, I really want that thing. There were things I'd have done for myself, but what I decided was to make sure everyone had a relatively blank canvas and that it was just easy to modify without a hassle. Any after-market manufacturer can easily integrate those hard point connections; it's all standardized.
The mouse is a highly limiting factor. I'm going to need one of those Wacom things to really improve.
Cheers,
Kennith
The Bollinger B1 is an all-electric truck with 360 horsepower and up to 200 miles of range
Built for — and in — the great outdoorswww.google.com
WOW. That might be the fugliest car I have ever scene.
Being a petrol-head, I kind of like the reciprocating-piston, internal combustion, engine.
But - that said, I am sure a 30kWH battery could last a full day of rock crawling.
The battery range figures shown everywhere assume certain highway speeds - on a freeway, the range of gasoline-powered RRC (or D1, or LR4) is about the same, four hours of driving time, give or take. On two of our recent trips across Death Valley, a tank + a 5-gallon can lasted for about 22 hours of driving time (although less in mileage than it would have been on pavement).
It shows just how useful electric power could be for a slow mover (mud, sand, and snow are notable exceptions - leaving rock crawling the only type of four-wheeling that could benefit from it).
It does not hurt that the batteries lower the C.G. It does not hurt that one could dispense with the transfer case, either in full-electric (4WD) or hybrid (RWD gasoline, FWD electric or vice versa) configuration.
So overall an electric or hybrid 4x4 is not a bad thing at all.
There's a company in San Diego that would electrify your vehicle for a price - but it calls for a lot of disposable income.
By the way, the PTO opening in the LT230 just asks for an electric motor bolted up to it.
But - that said, I am sure a 30kWH battery could last a full day of rock crawling.
The battery range figures shown everywhere assume certain highway speeds - on a freeway, the range of gasoline-powered RRC (or D1, or LR4) is about the same, four hours of driving time, give or take. On two of our recent trips across Death Valley, a tank + a 5-gallon can lasted for about 22 hours of driving time (although less in mileage than it would have been on pavement).
It shows just how useful electric power could be for a slow mover (mud, sand, and snow are notable exceptions - leaving rock crawling the only type of four-wheeling that could benefit from it).
It does not hurt that the batteries lower the C.G. It does not hurt that one could dispense with the transfer case, either in full-electric (4WD) or hybrid (RWD gasoline, FWD electric or vice versa) configuration.
So overall an electric or hybrid 4x4 is not a bad thing at all.
There's a company in San Diego that would electrify your vehicle for a price - but it calls for a lot of disposable income.
By the way, the PTO opening in the LT230 just asks for an electric motor bolted up to it.
IDK, 200 miles on a charge kind of makes it a niche vehicle. A 100k niche vehicle.
www.caranddriver.com
Electro Retro: Bollinger Motors Shows Its Super-Boxy All-Electric SUV
Bollinger Motors has revealed a prototype of its planned all-electric B1 SUV—a back-to-basics model that takes after the Defender, Wrangler, and Scout. Read more at Car and Driver.