The Practical Electric Car
Smith came round the other day and as always, we got to talking about everything.
Eventually it drifted over to oil and global markets, then eventually to electrical cars. Smith had suggested the current generation of hybrids and electrics had got it all wrong. He suggested a gasoline electric vehicle, like a train locomotive, was far more practical. We can’t get away from gasoline, he figured, it is too convenient a power storage system. But we can make a car that relies on it far less.
So over the next half-hour we hashed out what we thought would make a practical electric car and how we would sell it.
- For starters, it has to look like a car, with four seats, four doors, and a trunk. Previous electric cars, and also those Smart Car things, have had only two seats, not terribly practical for most people.
- It has to be able to do 150kph. This should be no problem – electrical motors can generate a considerable amount of torque and can rotate at very high speeds. Besides, they use them in locomotives, and they go like 150kph.
- The price tag is going to have to be somewhere under $30,000. We figured this should be doable with today’s technology. It’s not like any of the technology is all that strange.
- We figured if the sedan sold well we’d introduce a minivan version, because minivans are popular and practical in Canada. Maybe after, a sporty one with stronger motors, then eventually, as the technology catches up, an econobox one that sold for under $20,000.
- I had suggested hub-driven electric wheels, to completely eliminate transmission losses. But Smith pointed out that lowest unslung weight would probably make for better handling. Put the motors on short stub shafts above the suspension seemed like a good compromise. Electric motors on trains require only one gear, the primary reduction gear, so things like multi-gear transmissions are unneeded. This makes the powertrain system much lighter.
- Lithium-ion battery packs, tiled under the vehicle, enough to take the car maybe 100km before recharging. This should be enough for most people’s commuting needs and shopping needs. I’m guessing some 500kg of batteries are probably going to be needed, but the lack of a large internal combustion engine or gearbox sort of offsets this.
- A tiny 1000cc gasoline engine, similar to a motorcycle engine, would easily fit under the hood along with it’s gas tank. Hook it up to a generator and it turns on to start powering the vehicle and recharging the batteries when it thinks your charge is getting below maybe 40%.
- Gas tank needs not be large; enough to provide 600km of range would be more than sufficient for all but the longest of day trips.
- Although they are power suckers, A/C and heating must be included for use in North America.
- The gas motor would require no gearing; it would run at it’s most efficient rpm as often as it could. Smith suggested a tuned exhaust pipe would further increase it’s efficiency, as well as keep it very quiet.
- Regenerative braking would not only provide a small amount of recharge to the batteries, but would save on brake pads.
- Exterior hookup so you can charge the batteries off of 120VAC. A six hour charge time should be achievable with today’s battery technology. Laptops charge in around three using only a few amps, so a 15 amp circuit should be able to do this.
- Optional roof-mounted solar panels to provide further power to the vehicle on sunny days.
- If the vehicle was not hooked up to the mains, and wasn’t charging fast enough from the solar, the gas motor could allowed to run to recharge the vehicle while it was ‘off’.
This could work. It would allow Canadians the day to day car usage they need, on a tenth of the gasoline per year. Some people, living in small towns or more compact cities, might even go weeks without using the gasoline generator.
But alas, I concluded. None of the big car companies seem to be interested in this kind of thing. The last attempt to mass produce a consumer electric was the EV1 from General Motors and they totally screwed it up. Nobody wants to take the chance now.
But as it turns out, I was wrong. GM is at it again with a vehicle they call the Volt. I had never heard of it, but looking its specs over I was stunned at how close to the mark Smith and I were. Although they don’t think they can bring it in at under $40,000, technology and mass-production will slowly fix this.
Maybe there is a solution for rising oil prices — just don’t use so much of it. This Volt car seems like a practical attempt to make a (mostly) electric car.


The Toyota Prius seems to have a lot of the features you mention here except recharging on house power. Running the motor on gas power recharges the battery. Braking recharges the battery. It looks like a car and is quite roomy inside. The price tag is (I think) around $30,000 – maybe more. I don’t know all the specs but I think the technology is a step in the right direction. It uses mostly electricity in the city and mostly gas on the highway – the efficiency could likely be improved. But my dad is really happy with his and happy with the gas savings he’s getting.
Hydrogen power uses tremendous amounts of electricity and I don’t think that’s an environmental savings unless you can produce current solely through renewable energy. Ethanol and biodeisel cars are not a great idea because they take agricultural production away from producing food in countries that need food.
Consumer demand will eventually dictate that car companies get moving on this – I hate the use of “green” for marketing purposes but even if being “green” is only trendy now it’s still a step in the right direction.
Comment by Nancy — 2008/5/12 @ 06:24
Toyota proved that you could make, sell and profit from selling a hybrid. And the Prius is a very nice looking car.
Something like the Volt would be the next step. Indeed, some Prius owners today are jamming more batteries into their cars to achieve a similar result. Whole big aftermarket in it.
Hydrogen would be ideal as its only pollutant is water (drinkable water, even). But as you’ve pointed out, it takes whole bunch of energy to crack water into hydrogen and oxygen with electrolysis. So we need a way to produce a monster amount of electricity. Wind is good, solar is good, tidal and wave is good. But we need a baseload solution too, more than hydro-electric can provide. I’ve been saying it for years: humankind needs to harness the power of the stars. We need nuclear fusion. There’s enough deuterium in the ocean to power the planet for 150 billion years. We’ve figured out how to build bombs with it, now it is time to make it do something useful.
Comment by cobolhacker — 2008/5/12 @ 10:26