Parallel Hybrids

[NeilBlanchard]

The Volt was "supposed" to be a serial hybrid - and those are a topic for another thread. The FVT eVaro and Ken Fry's 'The Zing!' are both serial hybrids, and both have threads here on EM.

The Volt is actually very similar to the Prius Plugin - both are multi-mode hybrids.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by P-Hack

]well biodiesel is in it's infancy as are other "solar to something besides electricity, hopefully with much beter energy density" options too, but thinking electricity is "pure" is part of the problem, the sort of religious aspect of electric at times. So comparing an electric motor efficiency to a liquid fueled motor borders on pointless.

The bio options for solar energy conversion are orders of magnitude less efficient than than the non bio options ... and so far the science to date shows absolutely no signs of that situation ever being able to reverse.

But ... I will agree ... a larger point of view is useful / preferred.

Originally Posted by P-hack

But use a liqud (or coal, or biomas I don't care) powered generator to drive an EV and we have a basis for comparison, i.e. how well could that fuel move the vehicle without the generator/converter/controller/motor in the way?

I would add on

+
Understanding under what situations / conditions do those additional steps actually result in a net improvement in overall vehicle operating efficiency... and is thus ... not in the way at all.

Similar to how hybrids ... be they series , parralel , electric , hydraulic , etc ... they have shown , that ... under some situations and conditions ... the path even with additional conversion steps ... can result in net improvement in vehicle operating efficiency... and performance.

- - - - - -

Understanding the pros and cons of the options ... allows one to be able to make a more informed decision about which one would be best ... for any one specific situation.

Removing the additional step path ... is not ... always ... the most efficient .. or best performing option.

[P-hack]

Originally Posted by IamIan

The bio options for solar energy conversion are orders of magnitude less efficient than than the non bio options

By magnitude, do you mean "multiple powers of 10"? If so what are you comparing?

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

The Volt was "supposed" to be a serial hybrid

You got me confused when you quote the Hondas as mild-hybrids. At least for me, every car which uses both engines for traction is a parallel hybrid, while a mild-hybrid would use the electric motor only for auxiliary functions such as power-steering pump, air-conditioner compressor, like the first generation of the Silverado Hybrid.

[NeilBlanchard]

A full or "pure" parallel hybrid can operate with either power plant on it's own, and it would be a plugin. It also would not be able to charge the battery with the ICE - because this puts it into the same category as the multi-mode hybrids along with the Prius and the Volt, etc.

A mild hybrid covers designs that only partially use the electric capabilities, and/or only use regen to charge the battery.

Please understand that all hybrids in production are either multi-mode (i.e. they can use parallel or serial mode and/or both modes at once even) - or they are mild hybrids.

The mildest hybrid I know of is the Chevy Malibu model that uses a regenerative alternator to charge the 12v battery. So it uses regen to reclaim a small amount of energy that would otherwise have to be sapped from the ICE.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by P-hack

By magnitude, do you mean "multiple powers of 10"? If so what are you comparing?

"Orders of magnitude" ... is a bit different from just "magnitude".

For "orders of magnitude" ... it is common ... but not required for it use a base 10.... Link

- - - -

As for what am I in particular was referring / comparing to.

It was in reference to the broader view of energy use for vehicle movement.

Typical Photosynthesis for corn and such is usually around ~2% energy efficient ... the very best plants ... like Sugar Cane ... max out at around ~8% energy efficient.

Of that % of solar energy it converts ... a large % is consumed by the plant itself , to respire , to grow , to reproduce , etc.

By this point ... only a tiny % of the initial solar energy is stored in the plants products ... potato starch , corn kernel , etc... about ~0.25% to ~0.5%

Link

In order to use that stored plant energy to move the vehicle down the road it has to be converted / refined into a more usable form... that process itself is less than 100% efficient ... Like the plants ... the exact % of efficiency will vary from type to type ... and how much and what type of refining will vary with the situation of the engine that will be running it.

Perhaps the least energy intense form of refining would be things like ... chopping wood to burn as wood in a heat engine ... And the higher ends would include the use of microbes and other biological organisms that can result in as little as about ~23% net energy efficiency output.

Once you have the bio-Fuel ... you still have to convert it again ... in order to move your vehicle ... even if you managed as high as a 40% efficiency for the ICE you are running the bio fuel ... the net % of solar energy input to move vehicle energy output ... is tiny.

~0.25% to ~0.5% solar input to plant output ... even if we for the moment ignore other losses like refining , transportation and such ... just to run this ~0.5% through a ~40% efficient engine ... only gives about ~0.1% to ~0.2% of the solar energy input to the drive shaft.

- - - - - -

Compared to the non-Bio options:

For example ... PV can go over ~41% ( SpectroLab in 2009 achieved 41.6% ) ... of the solar energy input to electrical energy output ... with ~95% cycle efficient batteries ... and a combined motor and controller of ~95% efficiency ... that's getting around ~37% of the solar energy to the drive shaft.

- - - - - -

~0.1% to ~0.2% vs ~37% ... is between a 370:1 ratio to a 185:1 Ratio.

Even 0.1% to 0.2% vs 18% PV ... is between 180:1 and 90:1 ratios

Even if you want to use the common base 10 for the "Orders of Magnitude" ... the bio options are currently around 2 or 3 orders of magnitude bellow that of the non-bio options ... in terms of wider energy cycle efficiency from solar input to drive shaft output... and we haven't even yet included the other losses of refining , etc.

Even lower energy efficiency if it is a fossil fuel solar energy path.

- - - - -

The exact ratios will vary of course ... among different specific bio option ... methods used ... and what specific non-bio it is being compared to ... etc.

But the bio is currently significantly less net cycle energy efficient from solar input to drive shaft output ... and there are no current scientific indications ... that I've read ... of that changing in the foreseeable future.

[P-hack]

Originally Posted by IamIan

"Orders of magnitude" ... is a bit different from just "magnitude".

It is Bullcrap to use an ambiguous phrase in the first place, then when I ask you a "YES OR NO" clarification question to sermon me on what I obviously already know from the provided context and the clarification request.

Don't be suprised if I ignore your posts when they start like this or refer to me in the third person.


Oh, and neil, please promise never to use the word "Pure" again, it is a relative term. It is like "new" in that regard. As Ian notes, even among renewables some are better than others, and "Pure hybrid" doesn't compute.

[freebeard]

Pure and Simple
I can't remember, is it: "Few things are pure and nothing is simple" OR "Nothing is pure and few things are simple"

Originally Posted by IamIan

The bio options for solar energy conversion are orders of magnitude less efficient than than the non bio options

Boy your really stepped in it there. I'm thinking Cool Planet tech with a hemp feedstock.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by P-hack

It is Bullcrap to use an ambiguous phrase in the first place, then when I ask you a "YES OR NO" clarification question to sermon me on what I obviously already know from the provided context and the clarification request.

Don't be suprised if I ignore your posts when they start like this or refer to me in the third person.

Bold added.
I did not interpret your post #93 that way ... and I did not see the "YES OR NO" you quote here appearing in that Post #93 at all.

- - - - -

It was not a sermon ... I tried to give clarification , as you requested.

I don't see how it was obvious you understood , when you were asking me for clarification ??? ... If anything the request for clarification itself would seem to indicate that you did not understand something about the post of mine you referenced.

I was not aware the 3rd person part of speech so irritating for you ??? ... news to me , first I'm reading about it ... I'm also not clear about what part of my clarification post you are referring to ???

Where specifically is it that you were offended by my use of a 3rd person pronoun ?


- - - - - -

Originally Posted by freebeard

Boy your really stepped in it there. I'm thinking Cool Planet tech with a hemp feedstock.

Seems like it ... although I honestly do not understand why ??? That is the evidence at hand about the net efficiencies of the paths ... oh well.

Cool link , by the way.

[freebeard]

Magnitude≠orderz of magnitude. Word matter.

You can eat the hemp oil, burn it in your TDI or mix paint with it. Then the Cool Planet process is a virtual circle. It spawns new farmland each time you go around.