Author Topic: More electrical lorries  (Read 3186 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jeroen3

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4078
  • Country: nl
  • Embedded Engineer
    • jeroen3.nl
Re: More electrical lorries
« Reply #25 on: December 16, 2017, 09:53:59 pm »
Perhaps they can even use the overhead hvdc power lines available in many places. By the way, passenger trains do already carry massive batteries to not smoke out the stations.
 

Offline mc172

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 489
  • Country: gb
Re: More electrical lorries
« Reply #26 on: December 16, 2017, 11:04:43 pm »
Perhaps they can even use the overhead hvdc power lines available in many places. By the way, passenger trains do already carry massive batteries to not smoke out the stations.

This is the trouble with living in a place such as The Netherlands. ;) I've been on your trains and they are very nice. Especially the blue and yellow double-decker ones. Feels weird to be so high up whilst on a train.
Most of America (from what I've seen) doesn't have an electrified rail system. This compared to your country which is probably all electrified. Even the UK doesn't even have full electrification - perhaps only half is electrified, hence the need for diesel-hydraulic and diesel-electric passenger trains, even at my local train station which has a third rail (20 minutes outside of Brighton) because onward destinations aren't electrified.
 

Offline IanMacdonald

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 943
  • Country: gb
    • IWR Consultancy
Re: More electrical lorries
« Reply #27 on: December 16, 2017, 11:14:53 pm »
Would be more sensible to develop synthetic fuels in the short term, and fuel cell drive in the longer term. That allows for a  gradual changeover, with current engines being able to run on lower pollution fuels in the intermediate stages.

Meanwhile cancel all wind turbine funding and transfer it to fusion and thorium LFTR development  Better still, transfer ALL climate change funding to those projects. With £1.5 trillion USD a year for research we'd soon have those technologies working.

ITER for example will cost only $18 billion, or a scant few day's worth of climate change funding. Yet at the current trickle of funding it gets, it won't be ready until 2017.

Clean nuclear -> Synthetic fuels -> fuel cells or IC engines.

No range limit, short refueling time, low capital cost,  reasonable running costs, no need to scrap existing vehicles.

The Greens see humanity's glass as half empty. I see it as half full. Do we go  back to the Middle Ages  :( or  forward to the Space Age  8) ?

I say go  forward.  :-+
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf