16-year-old converts gas truck to electric, reminds us of our wasted youth
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted January 27th 2008 5:24PM
posted January 27th 2008 5:24PM
[Via Digg]
posted January 27th 2008 5:24PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Thump. Joe's argument is dead. Good job cornelius
JOE patents are what makes this so bad. you see until the patent expires you CAN NOT build an EV Nimh LFF battery pack without explicit permission from Chevron. SO how do they sit on it? Easy. They refuse to give you permission. DONE. could you use the patent information to "make it anyway" ? sure Could Chevron then sue you into non existence and OWN every battery you make? NO they answer is not could they. They definitely WOULD in a heart beat and they have way more dollars and way more lawyers than you do. Unless something changes you can not TOUCH that patent till 2017. All you can do is exactly what you mentioned. LOOK at it and dream.
THATS how you "sit" on a technology. You just refuse to license it. Unlike Trademarks etc.. you are under NO obligation to actually USE a patent you own. Thats part of the problem.
And yet large format NiMH batteries are quite clearly available:
http://www.saftbatteries.com/120-Techno/10-10_produit.asp?paramtechno=Nickel+systems&Intitule_Produit=NHE
http://www.saftbatteries.com/130-Catalogue/PDF/NHE_en.pdf
Patents are a lot more specific then you guys seem to think.
Good Luck buying those batteries. They are likely arrays of smaller batteries inside. I gave up looking for LFF Nimhs some time ago. I always get taking no more orders OR ultra expensive multi cell arrays to make the "large" nimh battery.
@Chris:
Did you read my other post? Of course they're multi-cell arrays- by the voltage, they have to be. You can't make a 6/12 volt NiMH cell.
but if I could buy 100amp hour NIMHS I would only need 80 cells total to get a 96v 100amp hour battery pack. That should be enough to get me some 200+ miles on a charge. The larger cells are also more durable IE they last lot longer with far lower "loss" over time. Some of the original LFF nimhs have over 150,000 miles on them and still retain 95% or more of there original capacity!! Reduce that to 48v and use a reduction drive to get your needed speed (lower acceleration but thats ok with me) and now you only need 40 cells!!! Much easier to manage charge and maintain. also its a lot easier to manage a cell that is 10% off match to the rest of the cells when your talking 100amp batteries than it is when your talking 10amp batteries.
For me to replicate that pack would require 800 cells with the currently "permissable" nimhs. which is why you don't see it being done.
Tough crowd. How about looking at it as an achievement? Sure it's not perfect but the first airplane only flew about a foot off the ground.
I give a standing ovation (from my computer at home) to him. clap clap clap...
You better not be sitting down, because that's just digusting :D
You might want to look at this article if you want to know "Who killed the electric car" http://depletedcranium.com/?p=305
The answer is that it's the laws of physics. It takes a certain amount of energy to propel a car at a reasonable speed and to operate the systems. It turns out that hydrocarbon fuel provides plenty of energy in a convent and easy to transfer package. It has not been replicated by any purely electric system.
At the moment the best we can hope to do is to create an electric car that is capable of fulfilling most people's driving needs, but only if we resort to the most highly effecient batteries and motors we have in existance and use exotic materials to keep it light. And once we cram it with as many of the best batteries as we have in existance it still only barely cuts it. And of course, filling a car with all the bleeding-edge lithium ion polymer batteries you can fit is going to be way beyond the budget of most drivers.
sure, Hydrocarbons have a huge energy density. Hydrocarbons used in an ICE to directly power a crankshaft? HA. You'd be lucky to get 10% of the energy from gasoline onto your wheels. That's a load of shit. The best option is still a hybrid diesel-electric car that has a small diesel engine connected to a generator that recharges the batteries for the times you need longer range than what the home-charged battery pack will supply by itself.
Yes those Highly advanced technologies and materials. Extruded Aluminum Frames MAgnesium Seats Traction Control Plastic Paneling. OH wait your describing any $10,000 saturn or Kia ? Interesting how the "most advanced" technologies become GOD DAMNED COMMON PLACE a decade after there created. Everything in the EV1 is over a DECADE OLD and its still better than anything we have today. Just imagine WHAT we would be calling "advanced technology" today if that car had not been KILLED 10 years ago. We would be talking about the conspiracy of governments hiding the 5,000 mile range battery packs while we suffer with our measly 1,000 mile range batteries. Remember everything you read or see about the EV1 is over a DECADE OLD !!! This is NOT NEW TECH here folks. its downright OLD TECH. its just buried right in plain site. We own the patent and we are not going to let you use it. Plain and Simple.
First of all, gas doesn't explode unless it's vaporized first. Second, hybrids and electric cars don't use lead acid batteries.
how about:
good job kid.
(other than the fact that this doesn't deserve to be on engadget.)
Perhaps autobloggreen should be credited for this rather than digg. An article on this was posted there on Jan 17 and again on Jan 22.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/01/17/update-on-teens-all-electric-1988-mazda-pickup-truck/
People are forgetting that even if/when it does become cheap to make an electronic car with state of the art batteries AND solar panels, that every working person could afford.
OIL COMPANY'S WONT BE HAPPY!!!
But is that kid a lv. 55 prestige lv. 10 on CoD4? I think not!
*cries a little on the inside, goes back to playing Xbox*
If physics killed the EV1 than why where so many people happy to have them? Don't be a jackass. The global economy is based on oil. If you devalue oil you devalue the entire global economy. Don't make up lies and excuses.
You don't need an EV that'll do 0-60 in
Actually I did a case study on the EV-1 in business school. It was a brilliant bit of marketing and a wonderful way around the incredible expense of meeting the new EPA requirements, but it wasn't physics that killed the EV-1 (they're a lot of fun to drive, I have ridden in one). It was basic economics. The thing cost nearly $85,000 to build, and was primarily used as a PR piece and a way to lower the "average fleet emissions" of GM. Selling that car at $85k puts it right about in line with current all-electric cars, like say...the Tesla?
Scream conspiracy all you want, but no matter how great the conspiracy, how come no one has been able to make a cost effective and practical electric car? Sticking a bunch of lead-acid batteries (or NiMH if you're Toyota, Li-Ion if you're Honda) doesn't make for a cost-effective fuel storage system.
Why the lack of plug-in hybrids? That's a much better question I think...
I don't claim conspiracy. It's all right out in the open. The most profitable companies in the world, year after years, are the oil companies. Since they're making their profit selling gasoline (et al.) they have no reason to support battery technology. I think it's pretty straight forward. If Exxon decided right now to dump their R and D into battery tech. then we would have an amazing battery soon. This is not a big oil thing, it would be true for any huge company. If Google or Microsoft decided to develop a better battery, it would be done.
The fact of the matter is that no one is dumping substantial money into batteries. R and D can take billions, no one is shelling out the billions right now. As oil gets more and more expensive, the likelihood of someone deciding to spend that much money increases.
In my opinion cars like Chevy's Volt are the most practical design. It works something like this: an electric motor turns the transmission. Batteries (the type doesn't matter) power the electric motor. A generator powers recharges the batteries (or directly powers the electric motor). The generator can be turned by a verity of things such as an efficient gasoline engine, a diesel engine, a liquid natural gas combusting engine, or even hydrogen (as a combustible).
This allows Joe-driver to pull up to a gas station to power his generator (which chargers the batteries which drive the car) if he needs the 300-400 mile range. He can also plug in at home to charge his battery at home. Where he to have a short drive, he could be electric only.
As far as range on electric only, that depends on specific design. Should he decided, he could sacrifice electric range for performance or vica verse.
Moreover, at one point Chevy's Volt, which was a concept car, was actually modular so that if 5 years later you decided you where sick of the gasoline-powered generator, you could swap it out for a diesel or what have you. In my mind this is a perfect solution until Super Capacitors or lithium nickel manganese oxide batteries are perfected. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2006/battery-hybrid.html
Brad - Please tell me you FAILED that class. You clearly have no idea what Economies of SCALE are.
What does it cost to make ONE car JUST one car. Well an example it costs a million dollars to make a Hydrogen Fuel Cell car.
NOW what does it cost to make 8 million cars. Cluing in yet?
GM estimated (THERE NUMBERS) that it cost them about 80 grand to make each EV1. (pretty close to your 85k)
NOW did you happen to note in your research HOW MANY EV1's they made? Let me help you here. its about 800 of them.
I don;t know whate conomics class YOU took but in my book 80grand for a brand new bleeding edge (back in 1997) technology hand made prototype car is FANTASTIC !!! you DO realize the cost to go from prototype to full production is usually 1/10 the cost. SO an $80,000 would cost about $8,000 mass produced (LESS in the case of an EV since it uses FAR fewer parts)
you do realize all that BLEEDING edge tech is now common on $10,000 kia's and saturns right?
YOU DO realize I can buy a motor controller and charger SUPERIOR in every way to what was in the EV1 for under $6 grand (and these are specialty parts NOT mass produced)
SO you say well the cost is in the battery. Hmm GM told us what that battery cost them TEN GOD DAMNED YEARS AGO. the GM QUOTED PRICE was $4500
SO tell me where is this ultra expensive car cost now?
PLEASE tell me you FAILED that econ class if not your teacher should be fired.
THE ONLY reason we do not have EV's RIGHT NOW is because we are forbidden from having the only battery tech that works. NOW we are on the verge of NEW battery tech with these new supercap batteries and lithium phosphate batteries. but its still a few years off. Without the budget of a mega corp like GM we take a bit longer than 3 years to develop new technologies.
@Chris:
You're right in that the problem is due to economy of scale. However, you're wrong about why this is. It IS basic economics - supply and demand. If more people wanted electric cars then more companies would make them, in larger numbers, and they'd get cheaper.
The reason people don't want them, and this doesn't happen, is twofold. No, it's not because of some secret conspiracy from the oil companies. The first reason is cost vs performance. Unfortunately this is rather circular - because electric cars aren't popular, they cost more to build by economy of scale and hence represent worse value to consumers compared to more established mass-produced "ordinary" cars. Hence they remain so. This is a problem with ANY new technology, not just cars.
The second reason is infrastructure. For electric cars to approach the convenience of "filling up" ordinary cars would require substantial investment in charging stations and the electricity grid. Again, this is circular- with the current limited demand for electric cars, there is little incentive to do this, and thus this remains a disadvantage to the electric car.
That's my take on it as an engineer. Believe it's a conspiracy if you want, but really it's no different to any other major new technology. The technology is all there - there are plenty of ways of making a battery - but achieving market acceptance takes time.
Also, something I forgot to make clear earlier - you do realise that regardless of the size of a battery, the cell voltage is limited by the chemistry? That's what I was going for when I mentioned that lead-acid batteries are made up of cells in series. It's not that they're just made like that because they always have been - they HAVE TO be, as the cell voltage is 2v, and this is fixed by the chemistry. NiMH have an even lower cell voltage of 1.2v, lithium around 4v. This is a FIXED quantity, regardless of the size of the cell. Hence higher voltage batteries are ALWAYS made up from smaller cells. The size of the cell only affects the capacity, and it may be cheaper to use a lot of common SMALL batteries than it'd be to develop your own large ones. That's the reason the Tesla Roadster uses around 6000 little lithium batteries (about the size of an AA) - not because of some secret conspiracy. You can read about it here: http://www.teslamotors.com/display_data/TeslaRoadsterBatterySystem.pdf
Both your circular arguments don't hold water though.
In order for there to be DEMAND for something there has to be KNOWLEDGE that something exists to desire.
People do not demand electric cars because they are unaware that they SHOULD be demanding electric cars. The propaganda says EV's are slow expensive unsafe glorified golf carts. SO OFF COURSE with that perception there is no demand for EV's (and you wonder why they crushed them)
Tell me Engineer Tree Trunk. If you an build 800 GROUND UP high tech bleeding edge advanced electric cars for $80k a pop. WHAT do you think it would cost you per to build 8 million of them?
People in the industry tell me that if the prototype on that small a scale HAND MADE costs $80k a pop the cost to produce in full mass production IE millions of them would be around 1/10th that. Or about $8k which means they could sell them for $10-$12k for a nice profit.
Now instead of telling your customers these are slow the technology is not there yet. Range is too short to replace your car. Let me give you the sales pitch.
Good afternoon sir. I would like to take some time to describe this new car we have here. Its not to replace the car you have now but to supplement the car you have now. A 2nd car.
It won't go as far as your gas car there but it will go much further than your daily commute will take you. Its faster than your current car. It has better acceleration than your current car. Its silent. Its clean. It produces almost no pollution (zero with solar but lets forget that for now)
This car is so simple that it requires almost no maintenance and will almost never break down on you. For that commute back and forth to work. For that trip to the grocery store or the bank or the mall. Basically for 95% of your travels every year this car is perfect. Oh and that commute to work and back? It will cost you about 25 cents. (average commute is 10-15 miles each way so 20-30 miles meaning 20-30 cents in electricity)
Compared with your gas car which will run you about $3-$6 each trip depending on your MPG
You never need to stop at a gas station. Just plug it into your household outlet and it recharges its batteries automatically. Its ready to go whenever you need it. No more oil changes. No more expensive mechanics bills for worn moving parts. Only the most basic maintenenace is needed.
It will only set you back (insert price figure $10k to $15k) It could save you $2000 a year just in gasoline costs. Add in Repair costs for worn parts on a Gas car and this car would pay for itself in 2-4 years time. That battery will easily last 10+ years or more and only costs $4500 to replace. Reasonably cared for and the rest of the car will never wear out beyond basic repairs. (aluminum frame and plastic body would last longer than most people will ever keep a car for) The EV Motor is not likely to ever wear out in any time period relevant to a buyer.
NOW put THAT image on an EV from automakers and they would never be able to keep up with demand!
In a few short years your R&D and Economy of Scale problem would be solved.
I mean come on man do the math!!! this kid converted a gas car to EV for under 6 grand and that was with NICHE cottage industry small production run parts and his ONLY problem is the limited battery technology available to him!
I mean if we can do it for 6k imagine what an automaker could do with just a years run on these things and access to the "forbidden" batteries.!!
I think even a run of a few hundred thousand cars and they could easily have the price under $20k All the work and R&D dollars are DONE already payed for thanks to GM from ten years ago.
You can not proclaim the reason something does not exist is because of lack of demand when the REASON for the lack of demand has nothing to do with the product but the lack of knowledge about the product.
People do not demand EV's for ONE reason and ONE reason only. They have NO IDEA they should be demanding them.
The automakers very much prefer it that way.
Its not a conspiracy. its just greed. Pure and Simple greed.
They make ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more money selling gas car than they will with electric cars.
If you would just stop for a moment. Open your eyes and RESEARCH this stuff. Its right there in the open. Nothings hidden. There is no conspiracy. People are simply unaware. Its really that simple.
NORMALLY the easy solution to this "awareness" problem is to simply "show" them.
Well NOW you get into the "intent" game. I can not SHOW anyone because its not yet possible to MAKE ONE without using technology that is illegal for me to have. IE I need that battery from ovonics. THATS IT. Thats all I need. but to get that I need someone to MAKE THEM for me. And for someone to make them for me they need PERMISSION to do so. Thats because its patented. Its a controlling patent. This means it is so far not possible to design a similar battery that does not conflict with the patent.
They have made it pretty clear that they are not going to give permission to license this technology. SO for the last ten years MINIMAL effort has been put into finding ANOTHER tech because those that DO KNOW that ARE AWARE do not have the kind of resources that an automaker has for the R&D needed. its starting to happen. We have some promising battery tech coming but most of those are still a decade away. heck in 7 years the patent will expire and we could see a surge in EV's but I am not sure I can afford to wait 7+ years....
Please just look into it with some open mindedness. I think you will be quite shocked at what is quite possible but simply "forbidden" by things as simple as its patented and the owner of the patent has denied you a license to it. Not to hide the technology. Not as a conspiracy but because it would ruin there current business model so they have a good reason from a business stand point to deny you that patent license.
Its just greed.
Here's a novel idea. Get a job that's close to home and bike to work. Think about how much money and time you save. If it takes 10-20 minutes to ride to work, that's your daily exercise, so you don't need to go sit on a bike at the gym. I live in a suburb of Tampa, and it takes almost as long to drive as it does to ride because of traffic. As an engineer who spent two years developing hybrid vehicle technology for SUVs, I can tell you that it's not the lack of technology that causes our country to use so much oil. It's our frivolous waste of resources. Next time you're driving to work, count the number of vehicles you see with a single occupant. Don't forget to count yourself.
I actually ride my bike to school. Like you mentioned it provides your daily dose of exercise. Unfortunately when you arrive at your destination you are covered in sweat. It is very cold in the winter, especially going downhill. Finaly trucking luggage is difficult.
Because of course everyone has a veritable cornucopia of decent, well-paying jobs in their career field with the benefits that they need to support their families within biking distance of their house!
Your idea isn't novel at all. Your idea is great provided:
1) You work within biking distance of your job. A four-hour bike ride each day does not make effective use of your time.
2) You are in good physical shape (or wish to be). This precludes the majority of Americans.
3) You own a bike, or wish to invest in one when you already own a vehicle.
4) You live in an area where it is safe to bike to work (light traffic, safe neighborhoods, bike-friendly roads and laws)
5) You have a place to store your bike at work, and a place to change in to work attire once you arrive (possibly shower, as well).
6) You live in an area where weather is mild enough to permit biking in the early morning and in the evening on a regular basis
7) You work in the same location day to day
8) You need to bring little to nothing to work with you
...
And the list goes on. Laziness is but a small factor. You really think I'm going to bike down a freeway, or take surface streets (on a bike, following all vehicle safety laws) 26 miles each way to work? Fat fucking chance, my spoiled friend. Enjoy your bike riding, I'll take my small efficient car and still feel okay about going to the gym after work.
@Brad
1. I specifically moved after I got my job, so that I would be within 5 miles of the office.
2. Circular argument. Americans are out of shape in part because they are out of shape. What I mean is that many people seem to say that they can't go to the gym because they feel like they look fat. This provides a solution. No one cares how fat you look when you're riding your bike to work. Besides, you won't be fat for long if you do this.
3. A bike costs a small fraction of what a car costs.
4. All traffic laws apply to cyclists and motorists alike. Over 50% of accidents involving cyclists are due to the cyclist's disobeying the traffic laws.
5. Lock your bike to a tree or a sign post or railing. If you're not cranking hard, you won't break a sweat, so you won't need to change.
6. Fair enough. I live in Tampa, FL. I wouldn't want to bike in the snow either. :)
7. Agreed. For some jobs, this solution is not viable.
8. I've never had a job that involved bringing things with me to work.
My father is a construction contractor. He would not be able to bike to work. Certainly, not everyone can do this. My point is that many people could benefit from this solution.
Take a look, guys... beacause our kids will probably end up being just like him. He is the first of the new generation of electric tuners. Maybe Fast and the Furious 20: Electric... I don't know. I thoguht of a few titles but fear they are too lame to post.
That kid is certainly a good engineer, but when his dad gets home and sees that truck parked on the front lawn, he's getting a fanny whacking!
Ok. for the posters that are not yet 16 this is to you. what were you doing when you were 16? anything innovative? finding new hiding places for your porn? this kid deserves kudos. just for the fact he didnt spend his money on sneakers or junk. dang! there are haters everywhere you go!
When I was 16 I worked on a robotics team and competed in FIRST - like many tens of thousands of students across the US. We designed, tested, built and competed a 130lb, semi-autonomous robot in six weeks. What did YOU do?
@Brad
Another former FIRST student then mentor here from team 21. Those were the good ole days. :) I've sort of moved on to trying to work on an "Electrathon" style car now. Although I don't have the space to do the welding and grinding I need to do to complete the frame, not to mention the time/money right now to work on it either, but I'm going to try and do what I can when I have some time. Anyway what this kid did/is doing I think is great. He's learning a lot of things by converting a car from gas to electric. Skills that can be used later on in life when he moves on to college and then a career. For all we know he may end up working for a company that builds electric cars, when the technology becomes more widely accepted and more efficient, both economically and with the energy used.
Bridge design competition - only got 4th place, though.
Look, this is neat, but an electric conversion is not particularly innovative.
Plenty of hobbyists doing this already.
And unless he babies those batteries, making sure not to discharge them beyond 50% at most, they'll be trashed in short order.
That's the limitation of lead-acid, and why we're all waiting for new, improved lithium-based batteries (non-cobalt!)
I was about as industrious as this kid at 16. me and a friend started an oil recycling business. the smaller no-name garages in town paid us to cart off their waste oil and anti-freeze. my buddy's folks had 4 acres, so by recycling it into a hole we dug on the back of their property, except for travel costs, it was pure profit. towards the end of the summer, we converted an old compressor tank and added R12 Freon to our list, and charged twice as much (not to mention it took up no space back at the hole). we stood to make a boat load the next summer, but my buddy got arrested for selling grass second semester, and then his folks sold their house. as sort of our Chief Operating Officer, the business pretty much shut down. but we still made $5,200 that year. almost as impressive as this kid.
Kudos to you bill. the point i was trying to make was for the people that were finding every little fault about what the kid has done. so what if it wont last long or whatever. im glad to see any young person doing something positive. im glad you did something positive. and your yearly wage probably reflects your dedication and determination to innovation. hats off to you guys. screw the haters!
I'm not 16 yet. any suggestions?
OK, if I had an old car that would take the mods, access to the parts, and cash sitting around to make this I would. Unfortunately, there aren't any instructions on how to do this here, so fail.
Anyways, patents are awarded to companies that capitalize on the patent. If they aren't the patent could be released to the public. Unfortunately, the oil companies control the government, so no one is calling them on it. Stupid corrupted government. Well, we can always wait until the patents expire...I wonder how long that would take. (Never...stupid corrupted government)
I made $30k after tax last year part-time. People can work part-time but make a good hourly wage you know.
Next up a Tercel! That kid's got balls. He must be aiming to make the ultimate granola chick magnet.
Very cool of that kid
It is not the same to wash dishes or to work in a store, that making adjustments in a car engine. Congratulations boy, follows thus.
Also, the price of the fuel is so high...
Credit to this 16 year old. I wish I could of done that when I was his age.
One thing strikes me over and over when I read the comments on this blog: Even most so-called tech savvy people know nothing about efficiencies and the laws of thermo-dynamics.
Those that do will see how simple the arguments proposed here are – from the obvious battery and solar technology arguments, to the more subtle quality and production arguments.
Bone up on thermodynamics and throw in some knowledge on diminishing returns and you will see that all of these “black and white” arguments are not even close to valid.
GMack,
Logic is nice, but boring.
Sadly, your right. It's much more fun to argue blindly, then deal with the truth that nothing is as simple as people would like.
i'm just kidding. plus I didn't have any friends.
I think all that money would have been better spent buying Chris Taylor a girlfriend from overseas or something...
Also, great job to the kid!
Ok, i would like to say, most of you are stupid for arguing. I took the time to read all your comments and seriously....are you arguing about this? First off, i would like to congratulate the kid, keep up the innovation.
Stop trying to put eachother down. If you dont like the electric car idea, dont buy into it, but dont put others down. What happens if you wake up tomorrow, and Toyota releases a car based on the ideas you are saying are inpossible? How are you going to feel then? The reason why this society is struggling, is because people dont know when to stop their criticism. Don't try to hold innovation back, let it happen. We have all heard about Thomas Edison's quote, saying that he has not failed 1,000 times, but has successfully found 1,000 ways not to make a light bulb, (something along those lines) yet he still invented one didn't he? So what if people try to make electric cars, eventually, someone is going to get it right, and revolutionize the way we see transportation. Its not like they are coming to you for the money to do it. People learn through mistakes, everyone does, and we have benefited off of so many trial and error scenarios. Just let it happen. offer suggestions then if you dont believe in their ideas, but suggestions to help them improve, not toss out ideas.
oh, yea, someone mentioned something about how it would take the top of the line technology that we have to make the proper car or what not....so? what's wrong with that? isn't the whole point to make better technology, and then use it? Why advance our technology, and not use it to make better technology?
I look forward to hearing back from you all, as i am sure I am going to be subject to lots of criticism, but hey, maybe i got through to someone, and hey, maybe that someone will make a difference. =P
Later all