Automotive World reports that European demand for Alternative Fuel Vehicles (AFVs) has risen rapidly in the first quarter of 2015, with plug-in electric vehicles leading the charge with a rate of increase of 117.9%. While the USA leads in total numbers of EVs registered, its rate of growth is slightly lower at 69%. Interestingly, the UK was responsible for the greatest increase in Alternative Fuel Vehicle purchases in Europe (64.2%), with the most popular vehicles being the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, followed by Nissan's Leaf, and the BMW i3.
Now that ACEA has discharged these numbers, it's clear that resistance to electric vehicles is falling, and there's solidly grounded potential for better AFVs to galvanize buyers off their current fossil fueled cars. Regulators are doing their part to overcome reluctance, and to prove EVs have the capacity to operate on all roads and open circuits.
(Score: 5, Funny) by lentilla on Saturday May 02 2015, @11:59AM
Kudos to the submitter for those neat electrical engineering puns in the summary! [dis]charged / resistance / grounded / potential / galvanize / reluctance / open circuits. Made my day :-)
(Score: 2) by slash2phar on Saturday May 02 2015, @12:10PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @12:34PM
And even has, these, it's, that, to, is, for, are, on and all! That's brilliant! Great show, sigma!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @12:46PM
When will poopoo (aka kaka) be an alternative fuel? As the saying goes, everybody poops. That means that everybody could potentially fuel their own cars with their own waste. It would save me a lot of money if, every morning, I could go out into my garage, poop into the fuel tank of my car, and then drive to work on this fill up of poopoo. If I need to make the kaka at work then I can just go out into the parking lot, and fill up my car's fuel tank once more with some poopoo. Then I would be able to drive home at night.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @12:48PM
It's called "Bio Mass" and it exists. It's just too bad that people like you ruin it for everyone by flinging it at passers-by otherwise we'd be driving Bio Mass vehicles for ages already.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @12:55PM
No, biomass is different. It requires processing at centralized facilities and it can consume more energy to make and transport than it provides. I'm talking about pooping directly into the fuel tank of the car. The poopoo won't get flung at anyone because it's in the fuel tank, and there's a tight fitting cap on it to make sure that the poopoo doesn't come out. I know I wouldn't want to be driving behind somebody with a loose fuel tank cap, with their poopoo coming out and getting on my windshield! That's why the cap will be very tight fitting.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @01:00PM
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @01:22PM
You don't think that poopoo on your windshield would be a big deal? I think it would be. That's why caution is needed. Please make sure your fuel tank cap is tightened properly.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @01:41PM
You don't want it to hit the radiator fan.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday May 02 2015, @02:08PM
The question then becomes what kind of processing would you need locally for the biomass (poo) ? what will the cost and efficiency be? in car or stationary at your property?
The methane gas that will leave the biomass is an obvious energy source. But the question is then, how much will gas will one get per kilogram of biomass in the form of human poo?
And then, is there more to be had by other processes? perhaps nitrates (pee?) can be exploited for energy too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @01:56PM
I don't think there's so much resistance for electric vehicles, it's that there's very little infrastructure, the cars are still lacking in drivable distance, charging is slow, and they are expenssive. Once that has been solved (especially being affordable), and laws make it possible, i'll swap the V8 for an electric engine. I'm not giving up the Buick for any reason, not safety, not because it uses gasoline. Give me a real chance to use alternative fuel with the Buick body, and i'll do it.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday May 02 2015, @03:47PM
Have a look at the supercapacitor break through [soylentnews.org]. I suspect capacitor technology will be the technology of the feature. It can be charged fast and is essentially temperature resistant.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @04:00PM
Yes, super capasitors are the future. Hopefully it really can be made into a real, affordable product for vehicles. Until then it's not an option.
(Score: 2) by TrumpetPower! on Saturday May 02 2015, @08:33PM
Actually, batteries currently lead supercapacitors in terms of charging / discharging rates and internal resistance, the thing that supercapcitors are supposed to be good at. And batteries don't suffer significant rates of self-discharge, have much better power:weight and power:volume ratios, and significantly better performance:price ratios, and on and on and on.
Granted, the batteries that outperform supercapacitors aren't cheap...but they're cheaper than the supercapacitors.
Check out A123 for a good example. There are, for example, street-legal drag race cars with batteries that can output a megawatt (roughly 1,000 HP) and only weigh a couple/few hundred pounds yet still have about as much range as a Chevy Volt in electric mode.
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday May 02 2015, @09:00PM
You have to separate technology implementation from the physical possibilities involved. It's like telling the steam manager at the local electricity plant that nuclear power is way more powerful. Only to get the answer that steam works and they have never heard of something so ridiculous that small atoms has any power inside them.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by TrumpetPower! on Saturday May 02 2015, @09:55PM
In this case, the way it's playing out is more like the fusion folks telling the fission plant operators that they'll be obsolete in fifteen to twenty years -- same as they have been for the past century.
Besides, supercapacitors are always going to have that pesky self-discharge problem. And their discharge voltage profile isn't all that great, either.
The best-case theoretical automotive scenario for supercapacitors is for regenerative breaking, with the surge being captured and fed back to the batteries...but today's batteries already outperform supercapacitors for that and are as good as you'd ever need. Adding a supercapacitor, even an hypothetical doesn't-yet-exist awesome one, would just add unnecessary weight and complexity and cost to the system.
For better or worse, lithium has won the electrical energy storage prize, at least for the next few generations of products. Especially with Tesla's Gigafactory coming online soon, the economies of scale are such that nothing else can compete, even when lithium is technologically inferior.
Perfect example: nothing can beat an Edison-style nickel-iron battery when it comes to stationary storage requirements that need to last forever with minimal service. You can't kill them, and, if you do manage to somehow kill them, they're pretty easy to resurrect. Thing is...Tesla is already taking pre-orders for batteries that you can hang on your wall for a fraction of the price you'd pay for a nickel-iron battery that would need to be put on a concrete-supported floor. So what if the Tesla battery is probably only going to be at 80% capacity in 30 years while the nickel-iron battery will still be at full capacity? That Tesla battery is still going to be "good enough," and, by then, if you really need it, you'll be able to supplement it with something much cheaper still.
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 02 2015, @06:12PM
how about a electrical bicycle? with regenerative breaking magnets! (i know i'm lazy)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by TrumpetPower! on Saturday May 02 2015, @10:51PM
There're lots of electric bicycles -- both electric assist models primarily designed for starting and going up hills as well as electric mopeds that are as much at home in all-electric mode as in hybrid mode. And, for that matter, electric motorcycles are some of the fastest ones out there...the land speed record for a sidecar motorcycle, for example, currently belongs to an electric.
People have investigated regen for electric bicycles...and the math just doesn't add up. You only gain a tiny fraction of the total energy expended in the form of increased system efficiency...and, at the same time, you take a really big hit in decreased efficiency with the mechanisms needed to support regen.
Cars have sufficient mass and velocity for the math to work out differently, but not bicycles.
If we ever get a generator => battery => motor system with efficiency approaching that of a chain drive, some interesting opportunities start to develop; you could decouple pedaling from motion, and keep pedaling at a stop (obviously, in a three-wheel system) or maintain a constant speed over hills (boost going up and regen back down) or take a break without slowing down or sprint without extra effort and so on. But a well-maintained chain is as close to 100% efficient as makes no difference, and we're a long ways from that with the electronics....
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.