Kawasaki Heavy Industries to unveil NiMH-powered SWIMO

It's no secret that the engineering minds of the world are developing new ways to get you (and all your co-workers) around without making a pit stop at the fuel station. Joining the growing list of battery-powered cars, supercars, and even scooters, the SWIMO streetcar is set to make mass transit a greener endeavor. Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI) is making the wires most typically associated with trolley cars a non-issue with its "giga cell-powered" SWIMO. Rather than relying on fancy fuel cells, the juice is delivered from those tried and true nickle metal hydride batteries we've been using for years in less demanding applications. While you won't be going far on a single charge (about 6 miles, maybe a tad more going downhill), recharging stations at various subway stops could keep the wheels turning 'round the clock without a drop of gasoline. Slated to hit the streets of Japan sometime in 2007, the SWIMO transporter should make the daily commute a bit gentler on mother Earth, and we can imagine KHI getting some serious tax credits if these things ever show up on American soil.

[Via MobileMag]

[Jon B @ Sep 7th 2006 10:59AM]

Let's hope Sony doesn't supply the batteries.

[Alex @ Sep 7th 2006 11:01AM]

Cool 6 miles.

[Dan @ Sep 7th 2006 11:04AM]

Beautifully. And what speed will he have?

[Wonderboy @ Sep 7th 2006 11:11AM]

That's all well and good for Japan seeing as how only about 30% of their electrical power is from oil/coal... but here where 75-80% of our electricity is based on oil/coal, switching over to electric doesn't do quite as much good. Instead of our buses producing emissions, our power plants will produce more emissions and use hardly any less resources. It's green for Japan, it'd be a waste for us (until we get our act together and get more nuclear/renewable energies in place.

[oshean @ Sep 7th 2006 11:14AM]

A Streercar Named High-rate Discharge.

[Egfrow @ Sep 7th 2006 11:49AM]

Something still has be be burned or consumed in order to produce the electricity.

[roxallot @ Sep 7th 2006 12:05PM]

"Something still has be be burned or consumed in order to produce the electricity. " Never heard about hydroplants, did u? you know, those dams in rivers... what r they burning/consuming??
Here in Brazil 80% of eletricity comes from the rivers.
and we have the wind and the tides too. clean eletricity.

[Ryan @ Sep 7th 2006 1:19PM]

What happens to all those batteries when they die? Maybe they get thrown into a river in Brazil.

[Mike Glenn @ Sep 7th 2006 2:23PM]

"recharging stations at various subway stops could keep the wheels turning 'round the clock without a drop of gasoline"

This statement is wildly misleading and I am disappointed in engadget for publishing it. "Gasoline", maybe not a drop, but where does this electricity from the "recharging stations" come from? My presumption is oil, unless you happen to live in Portland Oregon or another natural-energy city, which are EXTRODINARILY rare.

The bottom line is that until an energy source can be produced using nothing but its own fuel to power the plant producing the energy, we all still rely on oil as our energy source, no matter how many times we may repackage it and try to fool ourselves by putting it through an engine in an out-of-site-out-of-mind place, storing it in a battery, and then using it somewhere else and claiming that we dont use any gasoline to get energy out of batteries.

Come on engadget. You know better.

[DrunkenMessiah @ Sep 7th 2006 2:27PM]

Yea, I love how americans go "oh boy, its electric, its clean!" Wonderboy is right on the money about america's electricity. On top of the fact that it comes mostly from coal/oil you must consider the tremendous loss and innificiency associated with power plants. Only about a quarter of the energy from fossil fuels makes it out of the steam turbines, and on top of that you have to figure loss from electrical resistance in all of the power lines. A well designed gas/electric hybrid car (especially the new designs with the intagrated engine/wheel components) actually makes far better use of fossil fuels than an entirely electric one.

[mike @ Sep 7th 2006 2:48PM]

"This statement is wildly misleading and I am disappointed in engadget for publishing it. "Gasoline", maybe not a drop, but where does this electricity from the "recharging stations" come from? My presumption is oil, ..."

I feel your pain, but you're wrong. In the US only about 3% is generated by oil and 19% from natural gas (in '04, probably much less now); The majority is from coal (50%). As with any other technology this needs to be applied appropriately (e.g. where hydro and nuclear are plentiful). Given the trend towards nuclear (3 new plants planned in Texas) this probably starts to make more sense over time.

[stan lee @ Sep 7th 2006 3:50PM]

"A well designed gas/electric hybrid car (especially the new designs with the intagrated engine/wheel components) actually makes far better use of fossil fuels than an entirely electric one."

Possibly. The Toyota Prius is approximately 30% efficent in typical operation. A coal power plant is 25-30%; Combined-cycle power plants up that to about 60%. The types of hybrid engines you describe may be competitive with combined-cycle plants but, unlike these power plants, have not been commercialized. There is also the issue of pollution. New electric power plants (where incremental capacity for large-scale deployment of any electric transportation would have to come from) are, over time, substantially cleaner than poorly maintained point-sources such as individual automobiles.

[Andrew @ Sep 7th 2006 7:42PM]

I think I'm missing something here... We have the same deal here in Perth, Australia except instead of batteries we have wires overhead to power the trains. Wouldn't that be even more efficient than wasting electricity charging and lugging around batteries all day?

At first I was confused why anyone thought this was good for the environment (how many charge cycles can you expect before the battery needs replacement?) But now I wonder, are most city-based rail systems still on diesel are they?

[DR BUZZ0 @ Sep 7th 2006 10:34PM]

It seems like something of a useless idea. If you simply provide the power from overhead wiring or a third rail, you don't have to lug around all those heavy batteries, you don't have to replace the batteries, and you have greater effeciency. (charging a battery is a less than 100% effecient process. Some of the energy is lost in the process).

Result: A simplier system without all the damn batteries voltage regulators and chargers and whatnot that you'd need with them.

I suppose it does give you the advantage of not having to install the wiring to power the train. However, if you're going to be putting in rails, stations and a system of automatic chargers at each station, it doesn't seem like all that much of a savings.