R & D (Research and Duplicate) - Why don't we do it?

[niky]

The difference is that the overall sunk cost is huge. We already did a profit analysis of the e-Jeep versus a traditional Jeep, and the case is marginal. And the price of the e-Jeep is less than a brand new Jeep.

For buses, an e-Bus costs three to four million more. And realistically, you'd be trying to sell a bus worth 5-7m to operators who usually buy secondhand buses, e-Buses which still cost money to juice up and with the uncomfortable probability of battery failure within a year due to our weather.

There is a business case for it if you can do the accounting properly. But most companies don't balance the expense sheets on such long time scales... Hell, hard to get them to set aside contingency funds for proper maintenance! So it'd be a hard sell.

Just look at the decrepit condition of our buses, million peos secondhand units with bald recapped tires, blown suspensions, wonky brakes and engines 200,000 kilometers overdue for an overhaul...those are the people you're trying to sell an e-Bus to.

[ghosthunter]

A bus will practically use as much fuel as its worth within a little over a year.

All these are about business cases.

If for instance fuel prices double, then its pretty easy to justify an E-bus that needs to replace its batteries every 2 years.

Depends on the cost of the batteries. With current technology, the cost of replacement batteries plus the total cost of electric consumed will either roughly equal or exceed the equivalent amount of fuel (diesel) needed to fuel the bus to travel the same route (over the same amount of time, example two years).

Considering the system losses with generating electricity, plus the fact that the majority of our power still comes from coal and oil fired powerplants, it might be more efficient to use either diesel or natural gas fueled buses than try to push for electric buses.

If our country's power base has a bigger share into renewable sources of power (like hydro, wind, geothermal, etc) or have a bigger non-polluting power stations (nuclear), then going for electric transport will have a better environmental impact. As it is, we are just burning more coal/oil to recharge a bunch of batteries and at every step in the process, we loose some of that electricity to "system losses".

[A121]

The difference is that the overall sunk cost is huge. We already did a profit analysis of the e-Jeep versus a traditional Jeep, and the case is marginal. And the price of the e-Jeep is less than a brand new Jeep.

For buses, an e-Bus costs three to four million more. And realistically, you'd be trying to sell a bus worth 5-7m to operators who usually buy secondhand buses, e-Buses which still cost money to juice up and with the uncomfortable probability of battery failure within a year due to our weather.

There is a business case for it if you can do the accounting properly. But most companies don't balance the expense sheets on such long time scales... Hell, hard to get them to set aside contingency funds for proper maintenance! So it'd be a hard sell.

Just look at the decrepit condition of our buses, million peos secondhand units with bald recapped tires, blown suspensions, wonky brakes and engines 200,000 kilometers overdue for an overhaul...those are the people you're trying to sell an e-Bus to.

Another problem would be the setup of our the local public transport sector. LTFRB should just cancel all franchises and grant it to a large company. But, there's a legal implication to it. Plus baka 1 linggo magrarally yang mga operator at driver. hehe.

Anyway, what I am thinking is pushing CNG/Diesel powered buses in lieu of trains for longer routes. A BRT setup on C5 might be good. For shorter routes like UP-Ikot, an electric jeep setup 'might' be a good setup.

And yes, small operators will have trouble with their financial statements. They don't do capital budgeting shiz.

[EVO-V]

If you're aiming for diminished environmental impact, electric vehicles are the worse examples of it. The rare earth metals alone required to produce one Prius will make you cringe on the equivalent toxic refuse that's ejected into the environment.

Carbon neutrality is a funny concept at times, but if that is the aim, our power sources mix, especially with the increased demand from e-vehicles will not get there any time soon.

We exist in a world where the economics of exacting power from hydrocarbons is still more economically viable than anything else. That said we need to re-assess how we use hydrocarbons better rather than shift to currently economically infeasible alternatives.

Stringent environmental standards and strict enforcement will weed out the unfit.

It is no longer an excuse for these operators, considering their access to capital and the profits they make, to not spend for their right to earn their money. If they don't want to comply then they can get out of the industry.

[niky]

Actually, the Prius batteries are recyclable. Studies on the effects of nickel mining also often ignore the fact that all those American SUVs use tons of nickel for wheels, grilles, chrome trim and interiors.

And it's not like the rest of the metals included in every single car on the road, steel, aluminum, magnesium and lead, have zero environmental impact, either.

[EVO-V]

Actually, the Prius batteries are recyclable. Studies on the effects of nickel mining also often ignore the fact that all those American SUVs use tons of nickel for wheels, grilles, chrome trim and interiors.

And it's not like the rest of the metals included in every single car on the road, steel, aluminum, magnesium and lead, have zero environmental impact, either.

The batteries on the Prius are the least of the problems. The rare earth elements used in the drive and recharging systems make it particularly less green.

[niky]

It's also possible to make motors without rare earths. Rare earths just make better motors.

Besides... it's not much per car. And you will only ever have to acquire those metals once, and when the hybrid is disposed, they can be recycled. A Prius is touted to be over 85% recyclable. Which is well above par for automobiles, since many cars are merely 75% recyclable.

Some of the headaches included in recycling cars are the glass (mixed laminate... cannot be easily recycled without burning the plastic off) and the plastics, which are usually not the type recyclers take. This is probably what is pushing the move to more hard plastics in the cabin...

[uls]

they should use one of these nalang to replace UP ikot jeeps



it's more fun in the U of the Phils.

[EVO-V]

It's also possible to make motors without rare earths. Rare earths just make better motors.

Besides... it's not much per car. And you will only ever have to acquire those metals once, and when the hybrid is disposed, they can be recycled. A Prius is touted to be over 85% recyclable. Which is well above par for automobiles, since many cars are merely 75% recyclable.

Some of the headaches included in recycling cars are the glass (mixed laminate... cannot be easily recycled without burning the plastic off) and the plastics, which are usually not the type recyclers take. This is probably what is pushing the move to more hard plastics in the cabin...

Just saying if the goal is neutrality and minimal impact on the environment, hybrids aren't the best thing out there. Induction motors are not quite there yet in terms of usability and efficiency for high performance drive trains. Semiconductor controls can only go so far before cost barriers become an issue.

I'd put my money on diesel first, then hydrogen after.

I actually think a tram system might actually be better and cheaper to develop for a place like UP than an overhead monorail.

[niky]

Diesel has the particulate problem. Though personally, the fact that diesels burn less overall makes them a good candidate. And biodiesel and WVO sweeten the deal.

Hydrogen is always going to be a no-go. The upfront cost of fuel cells or ultra-high pressure hydrogen storage, as well as the HUGE cost of hydrogen production and compression for use in high pressure storage make it a very marginal return... even if you get your hydrogen "free" via solar-power.

Electric cars could become mainstream long before hydrogen due to the huge investment requirements. Manufacturers have been making hydrogen cars for decades. It's actually ont difficult to do so. But it's nowhere near cheap. On the other hand, electrics have gotten to the point where they're only twice the price of gasoline cars. A price point hydrogen will take another few decades to reach.

And in e meantime, hydrogen vehicles will still cost more per kilometer to fuel than electrics or gasoline cars...