Thinking Differently about Electrical Distribution and Power Storage

Published on July 25th, 2008

Last week Al Gore challenged us to get off of carbon based fuels in 10 years, comparing the challenge to the Manhattan Project or Kennedy’s challenge to go to the moon. So I started thinking about that, wondering if it’s possible.

In comparing it to going to the moon, we are probably closer to getting off of oil than we were to going to the moon when Kennedy made his challenge. So I’m going to assume that it is doable. It’s just a matter of will, which was what Gore was trying to inspire. And I think that anyone who sees what’s going on in the world would agree that the scope of the problem makes the goal worthy.

Technology Required

Obviously, to make this happen, we have to assume that the solution will look very different than today’s power distribution. It will have to be a product of newer technology that is built on a paradigm shift and based on new existing technology as well as emerging technology. Here’s a partial list of the emerging technologies I think we need to focus on.

Super Capacitors
Advancements in High Voltage High Current Power Control Semiconductors
Development of new high voltage insulation materials
Converting the Grid to High Voltage DC
Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors
High Voltage Underground DC in the Megavolt ranges
Running Cars on Super Capacitors instead of Batteries
Capacitive energy storage in a DC grid.
Making Cars run on Super Capacitors
Using Cars to store and move Electricity

These ideas are my own. They are not complete and although I have a good understanding of a lot of the material presented here, I’m not an expert. The idea here is to present a plausible overview that the experts can get excited about then go do it right. So if I’m off track on something or have missed a better way – fine. Build on the ideas.

The Power Grid of the Future

One of the important pieces of a new energy plan is a different kind of electrical power grid. Because of the simplicity of transformers, AC power was a natural choice and, for the most part, the only choice. But now that has changed with new semiconductor and computer technology. Although DC is still more expensive than AC now, in the future that won’t be true. And here’s why …

DC has a lot of advantages over AC. DC requires only 2 conductors instead of 6 or 7 as in 6 phase AC. DC also doesn’t have the inductive and capacitive losses that AC does. And this is especially important when you go underground.

I think underground DC is the future of the gird. Underground has several important advantages. It’s protected from the weather; ice, wind, rain, hurricanes, tornadoes and solar mass ejections. In the future, solar flares are going to be a major problem as Earth is starting to go through magnetic reversal, so if power is already underground, then that will reduce the problems. Underground uses less real estate and looks better.

DC also doesn’t have the problem of having to match phase and frequency in order to interconnect systems the way AC does. That allows for better control of energy distribution and of power.

If we can also develop new high voltage insulating materials, we can increase the voltage, reduce the cost and move more power further. The new grid is going to need to be higher capacity to be able to move energy from where it is to where it needs to be.

What I see happening is that a hybrid grid is formed with the addition of a high voltage DC backbone added to the AC grid with parts of the high voltage AC grid being replaced with underground DC. AC would be used for regional distribution as it is now. The grid will also connect continents eventually allowing power to be moved from the parts of the world with power to the parts of the world that need power. More on that soon.

Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistors

One of the things that makes the DC grid possible are advances in semiconductor technology. A new device called an insulated gate bipolar transistor allows high voltage DC to be converted to AC very efficiently. This is a revolution in the way we should be thinking about the grid. In the past AC has been popular because of the ability to use low tech transformers to step voltages up and down. DC couldn’t be converted efficiently, but now it can and we should be thinking in terms of a new grid based on direct current.

Super Capacitors

Super capacitors from companies like EEstor and Maxwell are capacitors with storage capacities thousands of times the energy capacity of today’s capacitor. Super capacitors are very new and still in development but because of their capacity, it changes the entire electrical paradigm. Super capacitors can be used to be the batteries of electric cars and they can be used to add an energy storage component to the energy grid.

Super Capacitor Powered Electric Cars

Not just because of the high capacities being achieved, but also because of the far faster charging rate, super capacitors are what I think is the future of electric powered vehicles. Super capacitors can be recharged in 5 minutes at special charging stations. Zenn Motor Company in Canada is going to have (as they claim) an electric car out in 2009 that goes 280 miles on a charge and has a top speed of 80mph.

In the next 10 years we need to switch to electric powered cars. Bio fuels are still carbon based. It’s liquid that has to be hauled in. Electricity can be moved all over the world through wires rather than pipes and trucks. And you can move it at the speed of light. It allows wind blowing in Texas to power cars in California.

Super Capacitors and Grid Energy Storage

The current power grid is for the most part a real time system where power generated is used immediately. This requires that power generation match power consumption. But with super capacitors, electricity can be generated and stored for later use. This allows power to be generated at night, for example, in Texas wind farms and then be shipped over the DC grid to power charging stations for cars at night so that in the daytime when cars “fill up,” they can use nighttime wind energy.

Super capacitors can also be used to move electricity into areas where it is anticipated that it is going to be needed. For example, the weather forecast predicts a heat wave in Atlanta and electricity use for air conditioning is going to be high. With an energy storage grid, power generated the night before can be moved to the area and pre-positioned for use the next day. Energy storage would allow a whole new way of thinking about electricity distribution.

Using Cars as Grid Storage

The car of the future might become part of the electricity grid. As the capacities of super capacitors increase, cars will be able to store far more electricity than they need. Most cars are driving less than 2 hours a day which means that the car sits parked for 22 hours a day. And with tens of millions of cars just sitting there, they could be configured to provide power back to the grid when parked.

Not all cars would be part of the system, however people can have charging units in their garage or car port that automatically connect to the car when at home, parked at work or parked at public transit parking garages. These connection would allow power to be transferred in both directions. It can fill the car with power or tap power from the car to help the grid meet the energy needs of the local grid. Thus the car can be charged at night when the grid load is low and the power used in the daytime when the grid load is high.

The fully charged car is driven to work where it is again connected to the grid. While the car sits there, it is either charged or discharged depending on the needs of the grid. Each car would have a computer with a setting as to how much power the car is willing to share so that the grid doesn’t take too much power. The system would make sure that the car has plenty of power left over to get home or wherever the car needs to go later.

Cars that share power in this way would get energy credits for being allowed to be used to power the grid. So if a car is charged at night and gives back power in the day, the owner might get enough energy credit to get free power making their commute to work at virtually no cost. Cars that are constantly on the road during peak power times would pay a higher rate for electricity.

In Conclusion

If we are going to solve the energy problem sooner rather than later, we have to change our way of thinking from what we are doing now to what we will be doing 20 years from now. That is going to take new thinking and vision; thinking in revolutionary terms rather than evolutionary terms.

The suggestions here aren’t perfect, have mistakes and can be improved upon. It is also just one piece of the energy puzzle, but it is the core of energy distribution. Electricity is one of the most efficient means of energy distribution. It doesn’t require energy to be hauled on trucks, trains or through pipes. It is a universal interface connection – generation of power with the consumer of power.

The new elements in this paradigm is the energy storage part. Super capacitors are an emerging technology. High voltage DC is also fairly new, not that it hasn’t been tried, but new technology is making it more cost effective. As inverter technology improves, DC power will become more affordable. As new materials for insulators becomes available, the voltages can be increased and the cost of underground cables will decrease. As more cars convert to super capacitors, the grid will adapt to using them as mobile batteries to power the electricity infrastructure.

There are other technologies on the horizon as well. If we invent high temperature superconductors we can store power in magnetic fields and create magnetic bearings for flywheel storage of power. Carbon nanotubes will also play an important part in the future as well as other types of nano-technology used in advanced materials to create technologies that we haven’t yet though of.

So I invite readers of this to spread the word and use this article as an example of using new ideas and new thinking to achieve Al Gore’s challenge of getting off of carbon based fuels in 10 years. And if someone has a better idea – go for it.

67 users responded in " Thinking Differently about Electrical Distribution and Power Storage "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Paddy-O said, on July 25th, 2008 at 11:39 am

It is possible in 10 years but, not using the mix of power sources Gore wants.

# 2 RogerDucky said, on July 25th, 2008 at 11:39 am

What? No getting the government to set up giant Tesla-coil based electrical distribution systems?

I mean, he pretty much succeeded on a small scale, but just ran out of money, no?

# 3 moss said, on July 25th, 2008 at 11:43 am

DC doesn’t suffer from voltage drop problems over distance like AC either. It will the means of choice, for example, for offshore tide/wind/wave-based generation.

# 4 deowll said, on July 25th, 2008 at 11:48 am

Using cars as grid storage is a bad idea unless you can be sure that you will leave the car parked.

I don’t know what tech will work and neither does anyone else. Spending more money on finding out may be a good idea but sometimes breakthroughes come at their own pace.

The worst thing that could happen is a go to the moon a bomb type project. Those were do it a few times at any cost and we need to do it millions of times a day at low cost. The money needs to be spread out a lot more with a lot more ideas tested.

# 5 Jim said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:16 pm

I disagree, deowll. We need a way to push the public into accepting and converting in a short time frame to a new transportation system. Historically if you don’t have that large push by the government and private individuals to prime the pump, inertia keeps corporations and individuals from working on the big ideals because of the scope of change required. And smaller governments’ unwillingness to take a chance (how many muni-wifi cities and towns do we have?)

There has to be someone(s) willing to envision and then to guide or do the actions needed. Though we Americans tend to like our individualist “I’ll do it my way” attitudes, we do great things as a country with a guided goal.

That being said, I have to say the idea of cars holding extra power for the grid wouldn’t work very well for the individual case. However, FLEET and GOVERNMENT vehicles could do this. The Government could mandate that all government vehicles be electric and grid-linked, and that no further gas/diesel vehicles would be purchased. That right there is a huge chunk of the market. Larger businesses (car rentals, some companies) could do the same and get free access to the government’s power grid stations for the effort.

I also think converting our long-haul transport trucks to heavy electric vehicles would help immensely.

DC longhaul wiring would be more efficient, but require a huge initial investment by private and government agencies. Probably in the 50-100 billion range. Government HAS to spearhead such an effort, otherwise you’ll get a mishmash of different standards, non linkable, arguing about who is better and unwilling to select anything not patented by the individual companies.

Perhaps have the government and industry pool applicable patents into a single group agency or company, give the owners free access to the grid for their giving up their patent rights for the country.

At least we’d have a path to work on, rather than right now , which is a hodgepodge of random attempts at change without any real backing by the populace.

# 6 MikeN said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:39 pm

How about more nuclear power plants? Isn’t that doable in ten years?

I don’t understand the fixation on cars providing energy back to the grid. They presumably drew power in the first place, so you’re just shuffling some energy around. Any place that needs the energy could just have its own storage capacitor.

# 7 Gary said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:42 pm

If it does not make sense to move energy around in trucks, then it does not make sense to move energy around in cars. A better idea is to make the charging stations into storage facilities.

It’s my understanding the DC power can only be transmitted about 50 miles. And it’s one of the reasons power is transmitted as AC power.

# 8 MikeN said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

Generating power at night isn’t cheaper if you are using wind and solar energy…

# 9 MikeN said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:45 pm

http://tinyurl.com/grsnid

# 10 Marc Perkel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:48 pm

It isn’t that DC is limited in distance. The issue has been that AC can be raised to high voltage which allows for greater distances.

What has changed is that DC can now be converted to high voltage and back again. And DC doesn’t have the problems that AC does with regard to capacitive and inductive losses.

# 11 MikeN said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:48 pm

50 miles can cover some pretty large areas.

# 12 Marc Perkel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

MikeN

This is just an article about new ways to move power, not where the power comes from. Nuclear would be able to be moved and stored as well. Nuclear could charge cars at night that would allow the grid to meet peak power demands in the daytime.

The main point of this article is to talk about a DC grid with electrical storage. That’s good for all power sources, including nuclear.

# 13 ArianeB said, on July 25th, 2008 at 12:54 pm

This sounds like a typical discussion at http://theoildrum.com

No one has mentioned the use of trains. Modern locomotives are already electric (with diesel generators) and rails can be electrified, eliminating the need for the diesel.

Trains are also far and away the most fuel efficient transportation available (except river barges, but they don’t go everywhere). In the not too distant future, trains are going to be the only long distance freight hauling method available, with trucks just going the last few miles.

# 14 Ah_Yea said, on July 25th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Perkel has put a lot of thought into this and has some excellent ideas.

My caveat to this would be: Build up the system using what we have today with an upgrade path for HVDC and supercapacitors which can be brought online as the technology and manufacturing makes it feasible.

Today we have reasonable battery technology for electric cars, to be replaced with supercapacitors when they become available. I bet they could even be designed as a drop-in replacement!

Start with AC for now but replace sections of the grid with supercapacitors running HVDC with powered by wind, solar, and even nuclear as needs and the situation dictate.

In other words, it would be perfectly reasonable to have an end game plan such as Perkel outlined, with an upgrade path on how to get there which would make going carbon free both affordable and reasonably painless.

# 15 Ron Larson said, on July 25th, 2008 at 1:18 pm

Create a standard, small, reliable, pebble bed nuclear reactor that be mass produced and implemented all over the grid.

Just like Southwest Air only fly’s Boeing 737’s. It allows them to swap parts and keep training, operations, and maintenance expenses to a minimum. PBR’s use gas instead of water for cooling. No corrosive oxygen in in the cooling loop.

Then spend all the money on figuring out ways to dispose of the nuke waste by hauling it to space and shooting it into the sun. Burying it under a mountain for 10k years is stupid.

These changes should make electricity cheap enough to make people buy electric for their next car.

Also, buy biofuel from the hot, wet, tropical nations, Brazil, Vietnam, Congo for home heating in the cold northern states.

# 16 MikeN said, on July 25th, 2008 at 1:20 pm

>There has to be someone(s) willing to envision and then to guide or do the actions needed. Though we Americans tend to like our individualist “I’ll do it my way” attitudes, we do great things as a country with a guided goal.

Liberal fascism you can believe in.

# 17 MikeN said, on July 25th, 2008 at 1:22 pm

#12, OK I got thrown off when you started with Al Gore’s challenge. I still don’t get the fixation on cars as the storage mechanism.

# 18 Marc Perkel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 1:42 pm

The reason is cars as storage is that they will all have large capacitors capable of driving a car hundreds of miles on a charge. Because they are just sitting there 22 hours a day they become a huge resource for storing energy to be used for peak demand periods and to preposition power regionally in anticipation of demand.

We could also buy the same number of capacitors as in 100 million cars to do the same thing but why bother when they are already there and connected to the grid.

The idea being that people will want to do this because they can save on power costs by participating in the storage grid.

Storage allows power to be generated and held till it’s needed. It would change everything.

# 19 MikeN said, on July 25th, 2008 at 1:58 pm

But the cars aren’t generating any extra energy. They have to go somewhere to be filled up. Unless you are anticipating that people drive somewhere to get there home energy charges, I don’t see a benefit. If you drain the car, you just have to fill it up that much sooner.

# 20 Marc Perkel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

They would fill up at home at night and fill up in the parking garage at work or the parking garage at the electric train stations. And when they are connected to the grid they will be able to take a charge or give power back as needed.

I’m not talking about these cars producing power – just storing it. Storage is the key concept here in that it allows electricity to be used at a different time and place than it is produced.

# 21 Marc Perkel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Also keep in mind that capacitors can be charged much faster than batteries. And I’m envisioning that these capacitors will be able to eventually store far more power than a car would use in a day. Maybe over 500 miles worth of power.

# 22 Marc Perkel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

If it’s done right your car might be able to power your house if there is a local power failure.

# 23 hhopper said, on July 25th, 2008 at 2:17 pm

I hate to be a spoilsport but I can’t see any of this happening as long as the giant, greedy corporations are running this country.

# 24 btolle said, on July 25th, 2008 at 2:48 pm

All the push for electric cars is fine but don’t electric cars need to be charged and that requires electricity? And every time you convert energy from one form to another there is an efficiency factor to consider.

That means that you lose a given amount of energy when you convert any fuel to electricity, then you lose a little more when you transmit that energy over any distance, and you lose a little more when you convert the voltage down from the high voltage transmission line to a lower voltage that is safe for Mr. Everyday User. And guess what the lost energy is converted to? Heat. So what do we do about all the heat that is generated by the losses?

Electric cars are not a ‘new’ idea. If you study history you know that electric cars were tried 100 years ago. And Thomas Edison tried to convince us to use DC power over 100 years ago, how far did that idea go?

We talk like cars are the only energy users. What about the lighting, cooling, heating, etc. in our homes and businesses? Heaven forbid that anyone might actually sweat a little in July or put on a jacket in December.

The idea that wind is a limitless source of power is also flawed. Every time the wind passes through a wind turbine the wind has to give up some energy to turn the generator. Put up enough wind generators in Kansas and the wind will stop blowing in Texas.

When will we learn that there is no free lunch?

I am all for finding some really new solutions but it really does not matter whether it is a gasoline powered pig or an electric powered pig, putting lipstick on a pig ain’t going to make it pretty.

Sorry folks, all I see so far is a lot of lipstick and no really new ideas.

# 25 Uncle Patso said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:04 pm

# 3 moss said:

“DC doesn’t suffer from voltage drop problems over distance like AC either.”

Sorry to quibble, but that is incorrect. Remember the old equation (Ohm’s Law): E=IR. E is Electromotive Force, measured in volts. I is current, measured in amperes. R is Resistance, measured in ohms. Power is measured in watts and is calculated as volts times current. Transmission losses are calculated from the resistance times the _square_ of the current, I^2R. This is why the power is stepped up to high voltages for transmission. You can send the same amount of power at a lower current. Since the losses mount as the _square_ of the current, great savings are made.

That said, DC current suffers the exact same losses as AC going through the same transmission lines. Resistance is resistance, whether for AC or DC.

/quibble

# 26 user999 said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:07 pm

# 22 – Marc Perkel

If it’s done right your car might be able to power your house if there is a local power failure.

Would it be sufficient to power a web site? If so, I volunteer my old truck to power dvorak.org.

# 27 Hyperkinetic said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:11 pm

RogerDucky re Tesla: “he pretty much succeeded on a small scale, but just ran out of money, no?”

No. He didn’t. That claim is nothing more than urban myth coming from ignorant Tesla deists with zero understanding of the physical world.

Tesla’s “wireless power” experiment involved high frequency AC (read: RF) exciting fluorescent lamps at a modest distance. His notes document the same phenomenon we know know as the inverse square law. It works close up, but the farther you get away from the source, the quicker the power drops to nothing. No amount of money can change the laws of physics.

If Tesla had really discovered a way to beat physics using 19th century technology, it certainly would have been rediscovered a dozen time over by now.

# 28 Chris Mac said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

7. Running Cars on Super Capacitors instead of Batteries
9. Making Cars run on Super Capacitors

wtf

# 29 Darrel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:22 pm

DAR
I used to own an EV store (electric scooters) and have been watching the EV industry for some time. I would be VERY skeptical of claims regarding fantastic ranges “in the future.” We have over 100 years of such claims and 99% of the time they have been false. The current Zenn car referred to above uses lead acid batteries, has a pitiful 35 mile range and only gets that while going at a limited snail speed of 25 mph. Going faster uses vastly more energy and drops range quickly. Going faster also brings in a whole host of other regulations (air-bags, crash tests etc.) and it is not clear a little company like Zenn could even get through those hurdles even if they could get their car up to speed for a useful range.
The capacitor idea may be useful but we may not want them in the hands of consumers. I suspect they would make abosolutely fantastic bombs if you short them out (which would be incredibly easy to do, even by accident).
Toyota has talked about their plug in hybrids being able to provide back up power for a house but I don’t see this happening en mass as mentioned above. EV’s will inevitably have some kind of (chemical base) battery technology and you always lose when you transfer energy in or out. Smarter to put the energy in a car and use it rather than move it around.

# 30 B. Dog said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:32 pm

The fascists seem to be toying with the idea of attacking Iran. They never seem to mention the way the old Persian technology can reduce our air conditioning costs. I do not hate the Persians. In fact, I find their eco-friendly cooling systems quite admirable.

# 31 bobbo said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:55 pm

A few months ago I posted a web site regarding (from memory) the advantages of a “plug-in hybrid to grid” energy system that read word for word as your post except you added the capacitor issue and the DC issue. Many fine websites discuss this and related issues. I don’t recall capacitor issue but assume a quite google will reveal the drawbacks/challenges?

One idea I added is to have recharging strips/induction coils laid down under the road surface. Like toll roads, electrics could get on these for long trips or even local trips and actually be charged while driving. There are lots of solutions once we finally decide energy inedependence is important.

Several experts on TV said that it is impossible to get off oil in 10 years as all the plans call for technology that is not available.

So–I too like the idea of distributed generation and storage AND if we don’t set a goal, we will never make progress. So, lets go find our boots and get going.

# 32 Holden said, on July 25th, 2008 at 3:57 pm

Why bother doing or thinking anything based on what Al Gore says? I’m all for alternative/experimental energy sources, but please lets not let Al Gore spread his propaganda. His interests are in the business of “green”. Look at the timeline and you’ll see that everything from An Inconvenient Truth up to this point is really designed as PR for Generation Investment Management. He’s all about green, only it’s the kind of green you see on dollar bills.

# 33 George Greek said, on July 25th, 2008 at 5:01 pm

PLEASE get your hands on the January 2008 issue of ‘Scientific American’. There is an excellent article on how it is currently viable to meet most of our energy needs with SOLAR energy, that is stored underground in pressurized cells!!! A relatively small area in the Arizona desert would supply our total energy needs, and supposedly, the technology EXISTS TODAY. Get your hands on this article… copy it, and distribute it to friends and family.

# 34 Daav0 said, on July 25th, 2008 at 5:21 pm

cars cars cars your car my car mine mine mine me me me me me me me me me

bleeeeeeyech (the sound of vomiting)

cars are the problem. get out of denial.

# 35 Darrel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 5:24 pm

Holden says regarding Gore: “He’s all about green, only it’s the kind of green you see on dollar bills.”

DAR
Good point. Al Gore puts together a best selling book, stars in the 4th highest grossing documentary of all time, earning $49 million, and what does he do with his earnings?

To quote:

“Tipper and I are devoting 100 percent of the profits from the book and the movie to a new bipartisan educational campaign to further spread the message about global warming.”

Now there is a guy that is “all about making money.”

What a load.

D.
source:
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2006_4128989

# 36 Holden said, on July 25th, 2008 at 5:40 pm

Darrel,
I think you missed my point. Gore is involved in “green” investment firms, Generation Investment Management and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, both of which benefit from the “green” industry. Take a look at those 2 companies, and how Al Gore is tied into both, then rethink why he’s taking his profits from An Inconvenient Truth and giving it away.

I’m not questioning whether or not he is for the environment. I just hope that people get all the facts and then make up their mind.

# 37 Marc Perkel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 5:57 pm

#25 Dvorak.org runs on the methane coming from dead kittens.

# 38 Darrel said, on July 25th, 2008 at 6:33 pm

HOLDEN
“Gore is involved in “green” investment firms…”

DAR
Good. I hope they do well. Green industry needs investment, a lot of it, and the sooner the better. You say he is “involved” with them but you don’t show how this is bad or in anyway improper or that he is doing anything inconsistent by his involvement with this green investment firm. It’s just a cheap attempt to smear him with guilt by association with nothing backing it up. As if “involvement” with a green investment firm is a bad thing, or something we should even be surprised to see Gore involved with. Certainly he knows the green industry needs massive investment. It makes perfect sense that he would want to lend his celebrity status to push more green investment.
He’s also an adviser with Google and on the board of Apple, so he’s making big change (pun intended). Good for him. Did he ever claim to not be a capitalist? If he did, then you got him. Is making money some how inconsistent with the coming growth of green industry? Hardly. In fact it is what will drive it.

# 39 DavidC said, on July 25th, 2008 at 6:33 pm

I think the issue with the cars is that in a typical power grid, the problem is demand and load on the connecting lines. Therefore, having literally a million points of input of power (stored all night and waiting for peaks in key times) in which a power company could pull out closer to demand, and without bottleneck worries, the power companies would be delighted.

To compare, wind and solar is now mandatorily accepted by US law into the grid. The power companies have no problem with this, because it usually comes in from a distant point from a power generating station.

Think of it like water. There is a big water tower, and if you are on the end of a line, the pressure may be very low because of all the thousands of people between you and the resource. If your neighbor put high pressure water into the system, it would greatly help you. That is the idea of cars being a holding place for extra energy. They get closer to the peak needs, and eliminate the bottleneck problems.

Frankly I think a system of some kind of insertion device, (say a box that is the size of a lunch box that would plug into a special slot in your car) would be better than a charging station. This would solve the distance problem (only so many miles on a charge). You want to go from Altanta to LA, you could do it without ever plugging in and having to recharge the car. Gas stations could handle an energy pack something like gas LP tanks, and they would simply have a high power DC link to recharge them as they come in.

The idea of having a plug or something at home and at work would probably work if it would automatically connect once you are in the parking slot.

Another issue I think is missing here is a more efficient solar system that would literally become a standard building material (all buildings, roofs, and car bodies would be made of this) and it would charge constantly. With this, each house would use this for its roof, and perhaps a family’s total energy use may become null (they generate equal to what they use, or at least close to that).

The objection I would see to all of this is that the utilities companies would have to really put up the front money, and change the entire system, and as long as they are not forced to do so, and if they sense somehow they lose revenue or control, they simply will stay with the status quo.

# 40 Mr. Fusion said, on July 25th, 2008 at 7:47 pm

#24, btolle,

Put up enough wind generators in Kansas and the wind will stop blowing in Texas.

Your reasoning is missing something. This comment is just totally off the end.

Sorry folks, all I see so far is a lot of lipstick and no really new ideas.

Then try reading Marc’s article.

Currently, the best value in gasoline and diesel fuel is their portability and firm infrastructure support. Other fuels, such as propane or natural gas have only a few filling stations in a few areas. Electricity can not be bought by the gallon or other transportable unit, it may only be purchased as current or small batteries.

Marc’s idea, as I read it, is to make electricity more portable by filling a capacitor with electricity. This storage could then used is any of several ways. To power the car, power a house during a blackout, and to store power during low demand times to be used during high demand times. All ideas very worthy of consideration.

The infrastructure is mostly there. Every house is wired already and could accept AC or DC. The bonus comes when the demand is low, such as at night and during temperate day time temperatures, excess produced power could be stored in capacitors, including plugged in cars. You would NOT be billed for the amount of power in the capacitor in the car, but for the amount of power actually used.

It is a great idea, quite doable with minimal infrastructure changes, and relatively inexpensive. We will never kick out oil addiction if we keep saying “it can’t be done”. I always knew Marc was more than a pretty face.

# 41 efil said, on July 25th, 2008 at 8:17 pm

Lots of discussion about how, completely ignoring the larger question, Why? Let it alone. Fuel prices will rise, people will change their habits, needs will be filled by whatever is most economical.

Or we could try the government run solution. Ask the Russians how well that works.

# 42 ECA said, on July 25th, 2008 at 8:57 pm

Until the power industry LOOSENS the strings to CONTROL power production…
you wont be allowed to create anything.
they want a commerce market.
that can be PLAYED with.

Think of what could be done with copper strips in the highway, and a small magnet under most cars..

# 43 ArianeB said, on July 25th, 2008 at 8:58 pm

#24
Yes the law of thermodynamics applies both ways. Fuel has to be burned and the heat energy has to be converted to mechanical energy to move the car, all of that is academic.

Electric cars have been around longer than gas powered cars. Until recently we preferred gas to electricity, because gas was cheaper.

Oil is in decline, it will never be cheap again. There is no “fuel” that can replace it.

Hydrogen fuel and “shale oil” require more energy to produce than the energy you get out. It is far more efficient to just use the electricity needed to generate the fuel directly, and skip the whole “fuel” step.

Bottom line, we are witnessing the end of the internal combustion engine. Solar and wind power have their drawbacks, but they are renewable.

Nuclear is NOT renewable, and uses lots of water. I would support expanding nuclear power in the eastern US to replace oil and coal burning plants.

The western US does not have the spare water to support a lot of new nuclear plants, but has tons of sunny places and windy places, and geothermal hot spots, and stronger waves for wave power. The western US is already powered heavily by hydroelectric sources.

All of these sources generate electricity, not fuel. That means transportation has to convert to electricity, not fuel.

There is no ONE answer, there are lots of little answers. Travel is going to get hard and unrealiable no matter what

# 44 KD Martin said, on July 25th, 2008 at 9:05 pm

#15, Ron Larson, “Then spend all the money on figuring out ways to dispose of the nuke waste by hauling it to space and shooting it into the sun.”

Nice proposition, but because of the finite odds for mission failure and total catastrophe, it will never happen. “Challenger, go at throttle up.” Shipping and storing waste is still a huge problem.

Nuclear power is a good solution, but because of the waste disposal problem, perhaps not the best solution at this time. Darn!

Whoever comes up with an environmentally safe solution will have more money than Bill Gates.

# 45 KD Martin said, on July 25th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

Forgot to say, nice article, Marc!

# 46 travel by car - Nepon said, on July 25th, 2008 at 11:20 pm

Its amazing how al gore has all these ideas and comments for the average person yet travels around in a most fuel inefficient , wasteful corporate jet going

# 47 Mr. Fusion said, on July 26th, 2008 at 3:21 am

#46, Nepon,

This article is about an alternative to using rapidly depleting hydrocarbons as an energy source. So what is your suggestion we do to replace our energy need?

# 48 jescott418 said, on July 26th, 2008 at 3:47 am

It really great to make statements like Al Gore and T. Pickens about all these great things we should do to stop our dependance on oil.
But who’s gonna finance it?? We talk about electrifying large trucks but they drive 600 plus miles a day at 80,000 lbs gross. How is it that a electric motor will pull that? Let’s face facts that we have made some pretty good choices in how we have powered our vehicles and homes.
All of a sudden we are paying for gas what the rest of the world has been paying for a long time and we are crying foul and demanding change?
We have already made poor choices about alternative fuels such as ethanol which has drove up the price of corn. Now what’s going to happen to our already stressed power grid if we get people and businesses to power vehicles with electric cars? I really don’t see anyone talking about a well rounded solution that does not put stress on another part of our power system.

# 49 BigCarbonFoot said, on July 26th, 2008 at 4:19 am

I used to think Algore was in it for the money, but I don’t anymore. I’m pretty sure it’s all about revenge. He’s out to destroy the economy and the lives of everyone to get back at them for not voting for him.

There’s not really a problem, but any new energy sources are good. Anything that allows more cars, more roads and more urban sprawl would be a good thing. I think it’s a crime that we’re not breaking ground on 250 new nuclear plants right now this instant. No wasted time planning, doing environmental impact studies, etc. Pick a standard design and build identical plants everywhere. 250 ow, 250 more as soon as the first batch is done.

On top of that, drill here, drill there, start drilling everywhere. There’s plenty of oil. Take the evil pricks in Congress that are blocking drilling, shoot them for treason and start drilling.

Hell, If Al were really into saving mankind, he’d volunteer to have himself rendered into biodiesel.

# 50 adri3nn3 said, on July 26th, 2008 at 4:39 am

#30
Evaporative cooling, while effective in an arid climate, isn’t exacly useful as a cooling method in humid subtropical areas. A large chunk of the southern United States,for instance, where the low end of average humidity is around 75%.

# 51 Smartalix said, on July 26th, 2008 at 4:41 am

the only problem with switching to a DC grid is the infrastructure needed to implement. Digitizing the current grid would save a tremendous amount of energy because it would allow for better monitoring and control with the existing infrastructure. We can save so much just by eliminating and reducing inefficiencies in the system.

# 52 Mr. Fusion said, on July 26th, 2008 at 5:15 am

#51, Alix,

I don’t think Marc is suggesting this could be done overnight or for free. This is an idea that is workable AND an inexpensive adjunct.

Yes, curing inefficiencies will save a lot of power. BUT, if we could save half of our current hydrocarbon usage by converting cars only to capacitor electric, and increasing alternative energy sources such as algae diesel we could eliminate all oil imports.

Whatever the solution it will only come if something is started.

# 53 MikeN said, on July 26th, 2008 at 7:22 am

Yes nice article Mark. The detail about cars just irritates me for some reason. I see no advantage, yet so many are pushing it. A cost benefit analysis of putting in 2 way capability would show it’s not worth it I think.
Ignoring that, just consider the cost of a single capacitor for a car. If it is very high, then it is not worth putting it in a car. If not, then you can build extra ones cheaply and just use those.

# 54 Marc Perkel said, on July 26th, 2008 at 8:04 am

MikeN,

True if they get really cheap then we don’t need to use car storage. I’m thinking that the price will come down to where they are still expensive, yet cost effective enough to put in cars. And the idea is that car would already be plugged in most of the time charging so that are already there. Why buy more capacitors when you already have them connected to the grid when cars aren’t being driven?

Obviously power charging stations, hospitals, data centers, and other high priority users would have their own capacitors.

And – I might be dead wrong about cars as batteries for the grid. But the concept of electrical grid storage I think is the important point.

# 55 Ron Larson said, on July 26th, 2008 at 8:04 am

Regarding disposal of nuclear waste. I want to see more creative solutions to get the waste off the planet. Strapping it to a rocket is not an option. As mentioned, rockets and Shuttles can and do fail.

I was thinking that the savings could build a space elevator. Then material could slowly and safely be lifted to low orbit, then moved to high orbit for staging to inter-solar transport.

# 56 Rich said, on July 26th, 2008 at 9:30 am

The diagram of the capacitors said 31 Farad!!! Jeeee-zus!!!

# 57 Marc Perkel said, on July 26th, 2008 at 10:13 am

Go to maxwell.com and you’ll see 3600 farad caps.

# 58 ECA said, on July 26th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

1 more thing…
IF YOU DONT INSTALL IT…
the CORPS and GOV will…
If the Gov installs it, the CORPS get to rent/run/sell it TO YOU.
IF the CORPS do it, they get to run/SELL it to you.

you will have NO choice in what you are going to pay.

REason for price increases…
Is that WHEN they CHANGE OVER…
They want the SAMe profit nargin that they have NOW…

# 59 fred said, on July 26th, 2008 at 12:51 pm

#48
“All of a sudden we are paying for gas what the rest of the world has been paying for a long time”.
Just as a point of information, this statement is, unfortunately, inaccurate by a factor of about two. Where I live, we have to pay almost exactly twice the current US price for gas – and this is relatively inexpensive compared with prices in most neighboring countries.

People in the US have not yet begun to understand what expensive gas really means and that is precisely why the current discussion is so important and why Mark’s views should be discussed seriously.

# 60 gadgetenvy said, on July 26th, 2008 at 6:12 pm

I have been telling my husband for years we need super capacitors. If you think of the electricity we generate now with solar or wind like water falling over a dam, the problem is when that water is gone, we lose the use of it. With super capacitors, we can save energy produced during slack times for peak demand.
The car idea is genius. The car capacitors would also spread out demand on the grid, meaning we don’t have to transmit power so far and lose so much energy in the process.

I too would like to compliment Marc on the great thought provoking article.
-Carrie

# 61 Glenn E. said, on July 27th, 2008 at 2:45 am

Well the Supercapacitors sounded promising. But I wondered who controlled their use. It turns that that the patent is assigned to the Diamond Shamrock Corporation. I quote a google search.

“Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corporation (UDS), based in San Antonio, Texas, is the second largest independent oil refining and marketing company in the United States.

So once again, a new energy technology is in the hands of Big Oil. Kiss it ever being used to power cars, GOODBYE!

I think Al Gore doesn’t just want us to stop using foreign oil, or even domestic oil. But also coal and oil shale from Canada. It’s all part of his crusade against all carbon based energy commodities. Probably because, they’re considerably cheaper than the alternatives, he hopes to profit from.

Demonizing CO2 as something destroying the earth climate (which has not been proven), is just an excuse for keeping this country (and third world nations) from exploiting its own coal and oil reserves. Ultimately, he want it all Nuclear! Because that’s the only source we know of that’s consistant in power generation. And it’s also great for escalating the arms race all over again. Because when we’re lousy with nuclear byproducts. We’re just going to have to do something useful with it. Like make more bombs.

Well you can’t make a nuclear bomb from a lump or coal, or barrel crude of oil. And neither produces waste that’s radioactive for 999 years. So what are we going to do when we’re hip deep in spent rods and yellow cake? Ship it off to the moon?! Nice! Then maybe someday that will blow up, like in “Space: 1999″. Only it will crash big chunks into the earth. All that, just to avoid a little harmless CO2 (which plants give off every day). Gore needs to stop being the Carrie Nation fanatic of CO2. He’s only going to end up causing a world wide depression, and/or carbon blackmarket. I’ll bet his clan is poised to be the top smugglers, someday. That’s how fortunes are made.

# 62 Glenn E. said, on July 27th, 2008 at 2:56 am

BTW, I’m all for adding alternatives to the power grid. Just don’t exclude the old standbys until they’re truly scarce. An idea of mine was to build ocean current power generators off the coast of Brazil and Guiana, to tap some of the currents flowing from the equator toward the Gulf. The bonus might be taking some of the heat energy out of this current, that’s responsible for fueling the Atlantic hurricanes. Maybe knock them down a category or two. I think the Caribbean system would be ideal for this. But I’m somebody will claim it’ll screw up the weather. Yeah, for the better! Who needs all them damn hurricanes?

# 63 Glenn E. said, on July 27th, 2008 at 3:26 am

I think the only non-polluting energy sources we can count on, will be Geothermal and Wave/Tidal. Everything else has too much seasonal variability to generate power at consistent levels, to pay for its upkeep. Earth’s deep underground heat is constant. And ocean currents and tides are near constant in some places, off coastlines. Wind and Solar takes a lot of acreage to harvest, and is subject to the weather changes. Another possibility, related to Wind power, would harvesting the atmosphere’s electrostatic potential. Take a bit of the punch out of both electrical storms and tornadoes. Unless electric charge is somehow key to rain droplet formation or dispersal.

# 64 Darrel said, on July 29th, 2008 at 5:46 pm

jescott418 said:
“We talk about electrifying large trucks but they drive 600 plus miles a day at 80,000 lbs gross. How is it that a electric motor will pull that?”

DAR
This is not a problem. Trains are diesel electric. The diesel generates electricity to drive a really big electric motor. We also have a lot of experience with electric buses. Energy storage is the problem.
A barrel of oil holds 5.8 million btu, a tremendous amount of energy and very dense. There will not be an easy replacement for transportation. Natural may be the best hope, short term but it’s limited as well.
Regarding nuke: about 90% of the energy is left in current nuke waste. We can use it in breeder plants but those are politically difficult because of the plutonium they create. Nothing is going to be “shot into the sun.”

Nepon, another knee jerk anti-Gore bot says: “[Gore] travels around in a most fuel inefficient , wasteful corporate jet going.”

When you have a full roster of important lectures in Europe it is best to fly. Boat is too slow and riding a bike is not an option. To counter the carbon created he pays money to offset his carbon usage, making him carbon neutral. If you don’t understand what this means, look it up.

# 65 Gordon Clark said, on August 1st, 2008 at 7:55 am

I recommend a look at this site: http://www.beaconpower.com/ Grid energy storage in the form of flywheels in vacuum containers with magnetic bearings is happening NOW. What these do is similar to the idea of using electric cars as 2-way power sources while charging.
Utilities have to keep some generators spinning at low output to be able to adjust for sudden load or supply changes. Alternative sources such as wind need more of this leveling. Spinning reserves use fuel and are inefficient, running at low capacity. Also they take some time to respond. A huge load change can make an AC generator slow down or speed up so that the 60 Hz (50 in Europe) output shifts in frequency. A small shift makes the output buck the rest of the grid, so protective relays kick the generator off line.
Small localized storage, like flywheels or car batteries, can quickly make up for these instantaneous load shifts, without burning fuel. This is worth money to the utility, and a reason that a computerized 2-way power controller in the car chargers would be ideal, as it could ensure full charging overnight while minimizing line voltage fluctuations. A built-in real-time metering system could allow for crediting the customer for providing the load leveling service. It is a win-win situation.
High voltage direct current’s main advantage is that it does not require synchronizing AC with the grid. This is good for tieing grids together, or sourcing wind and solar power. It has been done in Scandinavia for decades, and there are HVDC lines in my region (New England) that import power from Hydro Quebec.
Certainly Al Gore’s challenge is doable and should happen. There is no need for any more nukes. The waste is deadly for far longer than 999 years!
Here’s something else: http://www.lipower.org/newscenter/pr/2006/080206_cable.html A superconducting 138 kV transmission line in Long Island has been running for 2 years now.
People, we have the technology. Not in ten years, or 40. NOW. Let’s do it!

# 66 Meridian Electric said, on September 9th, 2008 at 12:16 am

Meridian Electric is an international electrical, lighting, industrial supplies and spare parts distributor. We have access to many electrical and lighting products include GE Lamps, Electrical Distributor, GE Authorized Distributor, Hubbell Killark, and GE Lighting Fixtures.

# 67 Electric cars said, on January 12th, 2009 at 1:47 am

It such a nice guide line on electric distribution and power storage.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!