Roads that charge your car as you drive

[Fungus]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/12/worlds-first-electrified-road-for-charging-vehicles-opens-in-sweden

[Fungus]

Maybe they don't need to electrify the whole system, maybe they could create drive-through charging stations so you don't have to stop or get out of your car to charge it. All you do is drive through them slowly for a few minutes and they charge your car.

(the "slow driving" part can be done automatically by the car while you eat drive-thru pie+chips, obviously)

[DC1MC]

Woah, they've reinvented the trolley bus or tramway or bump cars , because if they somehow expose the live rails as in the subway it will smell fried soon.

This shit will cost the taxpayers 20 million and will offer some minimal increase in range, also on the first real snow or rain it will get defective, completely canceling any advantage whatsoever.

Really this electrical roads crap, either producing or charging, makes the snake oil a respectable product, just with marketing problems.

 DC1MC

[Fungus]

This shit will cost the taxpayers 20 million and will offer some minimal increase in range, also on the first real snow or rain it will get defective, completely canceling any advantage whatsoever.

The video shows it in the snow - the Swedes know a thing or two about snow.



I admit there's a few technical challenges to overcome (eg. I'd probably put the rails further apart than that), but... it would be convenient.

(and it's not completely ludicrous - trolley buses and bumper cars work!)

[DC1MC]

I cold think of some more impractical and cumbersome solutions, but it will be difficult  .
If you limit the speed and path of the vehicle, then you've got railways, that are working very well, and they can use the clumsy electro trucks and van to transport the wares from the train station.

Also, the tones of copper buried in the streets will not be a magnet for thieves, no sir.

Let's admit it, is one of these projects specially made to look good on paper and suck subsidies for the "clean transportation" budget.

In Germany they've had another hare brained idea to store energy in some kind of stupid concrete spheres submerged in the sea, the most idiotic, fully financed by the government, project ever  .

  DC1MC

[metrologist]

Why not charge wirelessly? It works on my phone.

[nali]

We've had buses wirelessly charged from the road for a few years now

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25621426

Well OK not quite the same thing... 

[Fungus]

Why not charge wirelessly? It works on my phone.

Might work, too. It certainly solves the "snow" problem.

What's the likely efficiency of that @ kW power levels?

[helius]

Those electric rails are not on the surface, they use a pickup in a buried conduit which the pickup goes into. That means the vehicle cannot attach or detach from the power rail unless there is a door for them to do so. Overall it's a useless boondoggle.

[Fungus]

Those electric rails are not on the surface, they use a pickup in a buried conduit which the pickup goes into. That means the vehicle cannot attach or detach from the power rail unless there is a door for them to do so. Overall it's a useless boondoggle.

OK, but... that's only that one.

What if we admit there's a few technical challenges to overcome, what about the overall concept?

[helius]

The same technical challenges that have existed for 120 years? This is literally 1890s technology. https://books.google.com/books?id=JgwAAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA484&lpg=PA484#v=onepage&q=conduit&f=false

But sex it up with "green" PR and you've got somebody a nice income for as long as they can keep the hype train going.

[Fungus]

The same technical challenges that have existed for 120 years? This is literally 1890s technology. https://books.google.com/books?id=JgwAAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA484&lpg=PA484#v=onepage&q=conduit&f=false

But sex it up with "green" PR and you've got somebody a nice income for as long as they can keep the hype train going.

You still haven't said why it won't/can't work.

[metrologist]

Why not charge wirelessly? It works on my phone.

Might work, too. It certainly solves the "snow" problem.

What's the likely efficiency of that @ kW power levels?

What, it's not linear? I'm glad you mentioned it, because how does the efficiency of the entire concept (electric vehicles) compare to the existing alternative (and also consider the true net impact to the environment). I feel good about my eBike because I use a solar charging system, I'm not sure a Tesla is any better than a 40+ year old VW Rabbit that gets close to 60mpg... I guess it depends on your grid.

[palpurul]

Am I missing something? Isn't this just a "fancy" way to charge an electric car. What's so special about this? What's the news value in this?

[nctnico]

The same technical challenges that have existed for 120 years? This is literally 1890s technology. https://books.google.com/books?id=JgwAAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA484&lpg=PA484#v=onepage&q=conduit&f=false

But sex it up with "green" PR and you've got somebody a nice income for as long as they can keep the hype train going.

You still haven't said why it won't/can't work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-level_power_supply

[metrologist]

Am I missing something? Isn't this just a "fancy" way to charge an electric car. What's so special about this? What's the news value in this?

One big drawback with electric vehicles is their limited range and recharging time. This is a fundamental usability problem.

[Fungus]

Am I missing something? Isn't this just a "fancy" way to charge an electric car. What's so special about this? What's the news value in this?

What's the advantage of in-flight refuelling for fighter planes? 

[gregariz]

The same technical challenges that have existed for 120 years? This is literally 1890s technology. https://books.google.com/books?id=JgwAAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA484&lpg=PA484#v=onepage&q=conduit&f=false

But sex it up with "green" PR and you've got somebody a nice income for as long as they can keep the hype train going.

You still haven't said why it won't/can't work.

There are a bunch of challenges, like what voltage are you going to run it at to keep the copper losses low? Same problem as with power lines. It ain't 12v. So your friendly critter better not run across the road, and if you are drunk you better not wander outside for a wizz.

Beyond that is the sheer infrastructure cost of installing this everywhere - something that still plagues the very existence of both electric cars and self driving cars. Imagine cars running around shooting sparks out under the bottom of their chassis. Its just like a scaled up racing car toy set.

[palpurul]

Am I missing something? Isn't this just a "fancy" way to charge an electric car. What's so special about this? What's the news value in this?

What's the advantage of in-flight refuelling for fighter planes? 

Convenience . But the level of convenience in in-flight refuelling and road charging are completely different. Road charging is convenient, but it's just a tiny more convenient than stopping by a charging station in my opinion.

Am I missing something? Isn't this just a "fancy" way to charge an electric car. What's so special about this? What's the news value in this?

One big drawback with electric vehicles is their limited range and recharging time. This is a fundamental usability problem.

How is it better or environmentally friendly than building more charging stations? They are probably not more cost effective, safer or reliable than charging stations. Why go through the trouble of building miles and miles and charging roads that is going to cost loads of money just for convenience.

[DC1MC]

Just the fact that we're discussing this as a possible working solution and not a some kind of failed novelty slash snake oil slash "green" money waster, it scare me to death  .

I mean it takes something like 30 seconds for an average person with electrical knowledge to see that this is trash, the proponents of this "solution" should be laughed out of the room and barred for requesting grants like for ever, much less to get financing for a pilot project.

Because this is my last post on this theme, let me highlight some of the "minor issues" that are obvious, and that's it:

 - Road surface quality: you need perfect roads, not good, not average, perfect, practically flat, or else the trolley will jump out of the rail, ask a subway engineer about it.
 - Dirt and oxidation: the rail will have to be made of some kind of unobtanium material to be even moderately resistant to oxidation, but you still have dust and leaves and other dirt, in 2-3 months this will need very expensive maintenance or it will be dead, the moving contacts will push crap into the rail. Oh, did I mention dilatation issues in the summer, this is difficult to segment  .
 - Average speed: this dragging contact will reduce the maximum speed to 4-60Km/h at best, or else the mechanical stuff will blow away.
 - Avoiding obstacles while dragging this shit around, or overpassing ? Not really possible, less one destroys the contact and/or the rail.
 - Unavoidable pollution: the "evil" diesels with high efficiency engines were accused of producing ozone and nitrous oxide, along with toxic particles, much more than producing CO2 "greenhouse gas", you know what else produces ozone and nitrous oxide, in even larger quantities, that's right, high power electrical sparks, and this dangling contacts, boy, will they spark. Toxic particle you say ? We have these as well: copper/whatever metal oxide + organic residues + high energy sparks and ozone = soluble compounds that will be washed and pollute the surroundings, and heavy metal pollution is almost impossible to get rid of it. Tens of years after the gasoline switched to lead-free, there are laws in Germany to not wash your car around the house due to lead contamination.
 - Costs: 10Kg Cu/m x 10000KM = enormous.

 So in the end this pathetic replacement of an electrical railway should have been some kind of joking matter, seeing that there are people with higher education in the subject, including doctoral candidate, trying to defend or sustain this thing, depresses me to no end, even for some kind of free discussion, so good bye to this topic forever.

 DC1MC

[Fungus]

Am I missing something? Isn't this just a "fancy" way to charge an electric car. What's so special about this? What's the news value in this?

What's the advantage of in-flight refuelling for fighter planes? 

Convenience . But the level of convenience in in-flight refuelling and road charging are completely different.

Says who? I bet there's a ton of people out there who's be happy to be recharging during the daily commute, where traffic goes slowly anyway.

How is it better or environmentally friendly than building more charging stations? They are probably not more cost effective, safer or reliable than charging stations. Why go through the trouble of building miles and miles and charging roads that is going to cost loads of money just for convenience.

Where does money enter into it?

'Convenience' sells, people are willing to pay for it. I bet lots of people would like to steer their car into a special lane and take their hands off the wheel for 20 minutes.

By your reasoning we shouldn't have mobile phones due to the cost of the infrastructure needed.

(or even a power grid at all - what was wrong with candles?)

[Fungus]

Because this is my last post on this theme, let me highlight some of the "minor issues" that are obvious, and that's it:

 - Road surface quality: you need perfect roads, not good, not average, perfect, practically flat, or else the trolley will jump out of the rail, ask a subway engineer about it.

Sure, unless you do it with inductors.

- Dirt and oxidation: the rail will have to be made of some kind of unobtanium material to be even moderately resistant to oxidation, but you still have dust and leaves and other dirt, in 2-3 months this will need very expensive maintenance or it will be dead, the moving contacts will push crap into the rail. Oh, did I mention dilatation issues in the summer, this is difficult to segment  .

...unless you do it with inductors.

- Average speed: this dragging contact will reduce the maximum speed to 4-60Km/h at best, or else the mechanical stuff will blow away.
 - Avoiding obstacles while dragging this shit around, or overpassing ? Not really possible, less one destroys the contact and/or the rail.

...unless you do it with inductors.

All you see is a photo of a rail, not the idea of a 'recharge as you drive' system.

This isn't breaking the laws of physics like uBeam or Batteriser and I'm not imagining it would be on every road in the country, it's a system that could be useful in some places, eg. entrances/exits in big cities with lots of commuters, at strategic places along major motorways, etc.

It's really more of a marketing problem: How many people out there would pay to be able to take their hands off the wheel during a few miles of their daily commute and get their car charged at the same time?

[palpurul]

Am I missing something? Isn't this just a "fancy" way to charge an electric car. What's so special about this? What's the news value in this?

What's the advantage of in-flight refuelling for fighter planes? 

Convenience . But the level of convenience in in-flight refuelling and road charging are completely different.

Says who? I bet there's a ton of people out there who's be happy to be recharging during the daily commute, where traffic goes slowly anyway.

How is it better or environmentally friendly than building more charging stations? They are probably not more cost effective, safer or reliable than charging stations. Why go through the trouble of building miles and miles and charging roads that is going to cost loads of money just for convenience.

Where does money enter into it?

'Convenience' sells, people are willing to pay for it. I bet lots of people would like to steer their car into a special lane and take their hands off the wheel for 20 minutes.

By your reasoning we shouldn't have mobile phones due to the cost of the infrastructure needed.

(or even a power grid at all - what was wrong with candles?)

My point was these costly "charger roads" are not a lot more convenient than existing solutions to the charging problem. Since it's costly and impractical at some point people should use the existing solution until someone comes up with a better, practical and cost effective solution instead of implementing this.

People implemented infrastructure for cell phones because cell phones offer huge (not little) convenience over normal phones. I don't think this is the case here.

[nctnico]

- Dirt and oxidation: the rail will have to be made of some kind of unobtanium material to be even moderately resistant to oxidation, but you still have dust and leaves and other dirt, in 2-3 months this will need very expensive maintenance or it will be dead, the moving contacts will push crap into the rail. Oh, did I mention dilatation issues in the summer, this is difficult to segment  .
 - Average speed: this dragging contact will reduce the maximum speed to 4-60Km/h at best, or else the mechanical stuff will blow away.

Reading this I very much wonder how electric trains work (either with overhead power, centre or side rails). I think these go faster than 60km/h.

[DC1MC]

- Dirt and oxidation: the rail will have to be made of some kind of unobtanium material to be even moderately resistant to oxidation, but you still have dust and leaves and other dirt, in 2-3 months this will need very expensive maintenance or it will be dead, the moving contacts will push crap into the rail. Oh, did I mention dilatation issues in the summer, this is difficult to segment  .
 - Average speed: this dragging contact will reduce the maximum speed to 4-60Km/h at best, or else the mechanical stuff will blow away.

Reading this I very much wonder how electric trains work (either with overhead power, centre or side rails). I think these go faster than 60km/h.

Post like this make me go against my promise, they go faster because they travel on rails, not wobbling with a steering wheel, rails on which if there is a level shift of more than 10cm the whole rail goes under maintenance. Not to mention HUGE curve radius. Also they are using a very high voltage that makes having a relatively low current contact, you can't do this in ground level, exposed rails.
If you want comparable speeds, think about tramways or trolley buses.

And to the poster above, saying "inductors, inductors and more inductors...", for your 10Kw inductive charger you lose 10% efficiency per cm, how close to the ground needs to be your "inductor" ?


 Have fun,
 DC1MC

[Fungus]

My point was these costly "charger roads" are not a lot more convenient than existing solutions to the charging problem.

And my point is that that's only your opinion.

There might be thousands of people who think it's a good idea and are willing to pay for it. Only a marketing study will tell the truth.

Trucking companies would almost certainly pay for something that extends the range of electric trucks. Every minute they aren't trucking costs them money.

Politics/opinions aside: Could it be made practical?

Induction is obviously better than rails and the receiver coil can be very close to the road surface. There's no reason why roads can't be built that extend the range of all vehicles that drive along them. Maybe even single lanes of multi-lane roads.

[Fungus]

And to the poster above, saying "inductors, inductors and more inductors...", for your 10Kw inductive charger you lose 10% efficiency per cm, how close to the ground needs to be your "inductor" ?

We have sensors and servos. There's no reason it can't be 0.5cm above the road surface.

[b_force]

Don't get some comments here.
What's wrong with using an old idea with more modern technology?
Most of the things we use today are exactly made that way.

Personally I would be only able to judge if there is actual data available how bad/good it works.

[helius]

What's wrong is forgetting the lessons of the past: that the idea being discussed was inferior in every way to overhead wires and trolley poles. "Modern technology" isn't going to change that.

[b_force]

What's wrong is forgetting the lessons of the past: that the idea being discussed was inferior in every way to overhead wires and trolley poles. "Modern technology" isn't going to change that.

I find that a bit fast way to judge something.

Electric cars were also terrible, yet invented around 1900.
Nowadays they perform a hell of a lot better.

Also, many train networks work on a very similar way every day, except that the system is above the train, not underneath.
So apparently it isn't "that bad"?

[apis]

I haven't seen that one before but I have seen another idea tested closer to where I live:

Supposedly it works well in rain (don't know about snow) since rain will flow off/under the rail. There are mosfets in the rails that only switch on the power when a car is above it, so it can be used somewhat safely in cities or on country roads. Also has the advantage that you can install it on existing roads easily.

Any sort of rail/wire system requires huge investments in infrastructure though, and no one is usually willing to take the risk (neither manufacturers nor road maintainers) unless it is already established proven technology so I doubt much will come off it.

[nctnico]

- Dirt and oxidation: the rail will have to be made of some kind of unobtanium material to be even moderately resistant to oxidation, but you still have dust and leaves and other dirt, in 2-3 months this will need very expensive maintenance or it will be dead, the moving contacts will push crap into the rail. Oh, did I mention dilatation issues in the summer, this is difficult to segment  .
 - Average speed: this dragging contact will reduce the maximum speed to 4-60Km/h at best, or else the mechanical stuff will blow away.

Reading this I very much wonder how electric trains work (either with overhead power, centre or side rails). I think these go faster than 60km/h.

Post like this make me go against my promise, they go faster because they travel on rails, not wobbling with a steering wheel, rails on which if there is a level shift of more than 10cm the whole rail goes under maintenance. Not to mention HUGE curve radius. Also they are using a very high voltage that makes having a relatively low current contact, you can't do this in ground level, exposed rails.
If you want comparable speeds, think about tramways or trolley buses.

But surely trams and trolley busses should be able to move faster than 60km? I've seen 80km/h being quoted for a trolley bus. After all a bunch of contacts on an arm which has some degree of movement (and can detach if necessary) should allow for higher speeds. Still I agree that too much (lateral) movement is probably going to kill this idea if there is a human behind the wheel. Perhaps this idea is more suitable for self driving vehicles together with a seperate charging lane parallel to the normal road. That way you can charge without loosing too much time. However for a charge time of 15 minutes while travelling at 100km/h the charge lane would need to be 25km long. That doesn't sound very feasible to me one way or another (for example if the charge lane is cut into sections of 5km each).

[f4eru]

Hello
This kind of solution is in use in trams already : only the rail segment directly under the tram is energized.
http://www.alstom.com/products-services/product-catalogue/rail-systems/Infrastructures/products/aps-ground-level-power-supply/

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alimentation_par_le_sol
I saw the deployment of this tech in Bordeaux, the first city to use it.

It had many many problems at first :
- failures of the isolation slots between segments ( the rails have 30cm of isolated part between segments) those wore out too fast
- water ingress in the switching boxes
- premature failures of the isolation slots again after changing the material
- System too costly : a dual solution was deployed, only the historic centrum was equipped with the APS
- premature failures of the isolation slots after changing the material again
...

2 Years after the deployment of the APS, the bordeaux city transportation company was mastering the art of replacement busses as a side effect of this.
But now it's quite reliable.

Concerning cars, I don't think it's a good solution, because the rumbling of the contacts over the segment boundaties every 20m will be disturbing for people, and also economics are not very good for that kind of system, compared to a simple plug charger. EVs have sufficient range now, and you need to stop on long trips for pauses anyway. There's no real point for consumers, I think.
But perhaps for some niche application, especially trucks on some high frequentation roads, it could be a thing.

Concerning costs :

Le surcout de la solution APS, d'alimentation par le sol, serait de l'ordre de 2,5 millions d’euros par kilomètre et de 50 000 € par rame

2.5 million/km and 50k per vehicle. That's the additionnal cost compared to a classical overhead line solution.

[apis]

The best proposed solution to the range/charging problem that I have seen is to use standardised batteries which you can replace (quickly and automatically) at the "gas station". But that would require the EV-manufacturers to settle on some battery standard.

[JacobPilsen]

That rail bring to mind: Jurassic Park.

[DougSpindler]

What prevents a little kid from poking a large paperclip in the outlet in the street and getting "charged" or should I say charred.

[helius]

80 km/h is completely reasonable for a trolley bus. But there is a big difference in the length of the trolley pole and its ability to swing to maneuver around obstacles. If the pickup is centered in the center of the traffic lane it will be all but useless in a situation where any maneuvering takes place.

Trolley busses not infrequently do come off the wires, and this is something that needs to be taken into account when planning traffic patterns. At least they can be safely reattached by the operator, since the control ropes are insulating and they can simply be pulled into position. I think everybody knows there is no way to safely adjust a ground-level pickup while the path is energized.

[DougSpindler]

What if a vehicle becomes disabled on the track?  Is there anyway to move it and get it out of the way? 

My wife has an electric car and once an airbag deploys the car can’t be moved.  My wife was on the freeway when this happened.  The car could have under it’s own power be driven 30 feet or rolled the 20 feet to get it out of the middle of the road.  But nope, once on of the car’s airbags deploys the car can only be moved by dragging it.

[Fungus]

What if a vehicle becomes disabled on the track?  Is there anyway to move it and get it out of the way? 

My wife has an electric car and once an airbag deploys the car can’t be moved.  My wife was on the freeway when this happened.  The car could have under it’s own power be driven 30 feet or rolled the 20 feet to get it out of the middle of the road.  But nope, once on of the car’s airbags deploys the car can only be moved by dragging it.

Yep. They disconnect the batteries internally for safety reasons. You want to place a load on a possibly damaged lithium battery? One with hundreds of other batteries around it?

[metrologist]

  I thought these things were so safe that people build their home walls with them...