larger solar panel/solar roof on Leaf thread

JRP3 said:

Ingineer said:

Actually, if you AREN'T using gas in your car, the Electricity saved from just Petroleum Refining and Distribution operations will power your EV and then some. The Largest single consumer of electricity California are Petroleum operations. Assuming you replace a gas car with an EV, and charge off-peak, we end up with a more stable grid, and a little less electricity use.

-Phil

Click to expand...

Somewhat true. Much refinery electricity is generated on site from petroleum and petroleum by products, a smaller percentage comes from the grid. From what I've researched by not refining oil we make up for some of the power drawn from the grid by an EV but not all. Also oil is refined into other products besides transportation fuels so not all refinery electricity goes into gasoline production. Because of that my statements remain accurate regarding grid tie solar.

Click to expand...

Whether they generate it on-site or elsewhere, if you just stopped refining and distribution for ground transportation fuels, you would have more than enough electrical energy freed to power the ground transportation system (assuming you had the batteries/lines to do it). Back in 2006, I found a Caltech doctoral thesis where this was studied carefully, I'll try to find it. A quick google found this:



Without a doubt, the largest single industrial user of Electricity and Natural Gas energy is the Petroleum industry. This is true for California, and the US as a whole. Most people don't know this, and it's a scary bit of information!

-Phil

So you are including the energy from petroleum fuels and NG if diverted to create grid electricity instead, correct? Certainly more efficient to use unrefined or lesser refined bunker fuels in large generating plants than to use additional energy to further refine them into transportation fuels for ICE's, but then we are still using petroleum for transportation, indirectly. I guess what I'm trying to figure out is say if we shut down a refinery what energy sources, other than what was used from the grid, would remain to turn into electricity. If the NG used is from petroleum drilling operations that goes away, as does any of the other petroleum fuels. I do know refineries do purchase coal as well, I assume for power generation, as well as steam.
Here's an interesting chart that shows all fuels consumed at US refineries, plus purchased electricity and purchased steam.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/PET_PNP_CAPFUEL_DCU_NUS_A.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since we aren't ever going to co "Cold Turkey" on Petroleum, it only makes sense to consider what happens as we slowly electrify transportation. The less gasoline refined (which is more energy intensive than heavier fuels, such as Diesel), then the less electricity and other sources, such as Nat Gas, that can be diverted to the grid to power the EV's. Of course, an Ideal situation is to stop those sources and make up the difference with renewable sources. There would overall be less needed, so it's a good time to phase them in.

-Phil

EVDrive said:

GaslessInSeattle said:

Without careful thought, electric cars may very well spur the next nuclear energy revolution if they become widely adopted, at least some will argue that, even though EV's stand to reduce baseload waste.

Click to expand...

abasile said:

I would like to see another nuclear energy revolution, using the latest, safest, most efficient technology, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. While I am also in favor of renewables, I feel that we need to keep nuclear on the table if we are to rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve our long-term energy security.

Click to expand...

JRP3 said:

I agree fully on LFTR's. I'm not sure how we can increase clean, reliable baseload without them.

Click to expand...

Must people degrade this thread into a ra ra session for more nukes. My friends and family suffering in Japan will slap you silly for pretending nuclear power is clean and safe. Go visit the meltdown in Japan if you are still confused and or ignorant. Maybe someday nuclear power will be truly safe and waste free but we are not there yet.

Click to expand...

What happened in Japan is a tragedy, but just as not all cars have a tailpipe not all nuclear power plants are the same. I am pretty sure that abisile, JPR3 & GaslessInSeattle were not talking about the 45+ year old 2nd generation technology that failed in Japan, but of newer 4th generation technologies that are more efficient, less radioactive (mostly), and produce waste that decays an order of magnitude faster (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor). Because these plants are 100 times more efficient, there is a fraction of the amount of radioactive fuel to deal with. Thus when unforeseen circumstances occur, the fuel is more easily cooled & contained so incidents like what happened in Japan, Chernobyl, & Three Mile Island can be avoided.

We are not far off from this technology becoming reality. However knee jerk reactions that nuclear energy is always unsafe will only delay what could be a very practical solution to our current energy problems, allowing us to produce electricity on a local level with less overall effects on the environment.

Just like we need to have an open mind on how our cars are powered, we need to have an open mind on nuclear energy.

NG in refineries is used for process heat and to make H2, .. the studies assume that the NG would otherwise be used to make electricity and that is a good assumption.

There are new cheap processes coming online to upgrade NG into useful liquids.. so the total picture is changing.

padamson1 said:

Just like we need to have an open mind on how our cars are powered, we need to have an open mind on nuclear energy.

Click to expand...

+1 Unless we discover something better soon, such as cold fusion that works, We will need Nuclear to "get us by" until we can get more renewables in place.

-Phil

Rather than a larger solar panel, I suspect one day they'll use automobile paint which has been blended with polymer solar cells or dye-sensitized solar cells. Essentially turning your whole car into a PV system. The efficiency will likely be low, but the area will be very large and it will also be cheap. By then, if the EVs are light weight enough, you might be able to get one mile of charge per hour of full sun, maybe 4 to 5 miles total per day. Instead of parking in the garage, everyone will have their EV parked on the curb. Just think, you go on a business trip for a week and return to a full battery and it's never been plugged in!

Prior to photovoltaic paint, we'll likely see photovoltaic fabrics in volume production. If that technology were cheap enough, it could be fashioned into a car cover and used to trickle charge your EV.

Herm said:

cwerdna said:

I'm sure there are far more other consequences than I've listed.

Click to expand...

Probably not, or the media would be all over it, they exaggerate enough as it is..

Click to expand...

Just because the US-centric TV news media has all but stopped reporting about it doesn't mean the problems have gone away or don't exist.

Per http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44947085/ns/today-today_news/t/fukushima-victims-are-desperate-angry-homeless/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (and many others) "about 80,000 people were forced to leave their homes by the nuclear crisis."

ENIAC said:

Prior to photovoltaic paint, we'll likely see photovoltaic fabrics in volume production. If that technology were cheap enough, it could be fashioned into a car cover and used to trickle charge your EV.

Click to expand...

Considering the limited surface area and poor angles of anything but roof, hood, and trunk, I don't think what you describe would be beneficial, especially since paint and fabrics would likely be lower efficiency than real panels. I think the answer will be affordable higher efficiency panels that can produce useable output from a smaller footprint. May never happen, but I think it will eventually. I think there are laboratory panels that hit 40% already.

nerissa said:

One main benefit of using solar energy at home is that when you use solar energy in your home, you will save money in the long run. After all, energy from the sun is free once you have purchased your solar panels or solar lights, etc.

solar panels pennsylvania

Click to expand...

I'm going to delete this spam but here are the companies contact emails. Why don't we all email them and tell them about the LEAF solar panel? :lol: Perhaps they would like some spam of their own.


[email protected]
[email protected]

To resurrect an ancient thread, I recently stumbled across https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tested-2021-hyundai-sonata-hybrid-224700735.html on the Sonata Hybrid:

Exclusive to the Limited model, the Sonata offers a feature unique in the segment: solar panels on the roof. Hyundai says that the solar roof can add up to two miles of driving range per day, and it charges both the standard 12-volt battery and the hybrid powertrain's 1.6-kWh lithium-ion battery pack

Click to expand...