On December 27, 2016 at 12:37, Fins said...
I thought you described something in the road originally. If not, I misunderstood. But putting something above seems like it would be harder to make work.
now we are getting somewhere.
But I am not saying it should be up above. To put it simply I think details are beyond the discussion and I see land transport falling into 4 families of technological solutions with all the members in a family having more or less the same big issues and benefits.
biomechanical: walking, bike, horse..... anything that uses a living beings power for motion
environmental cost: what goes in (feed) and out
other issues:
------ speed: takes too long
------ endurance: there is only so far before needing to rest
there are differences between all those solutions, for example I have a sister that lives 10 minutes walking distance so I can walk there and often do, my other sister lives roughly/guessing 20 miles away and so walking is not realistic but if I could take the direct path (highways/bridge for cars only) biking could be but for my third sister that lives over 150 miles away none of the techs in this family would do an acceptable job
combustion+: gas, diesel, biodiesel, propane, traditional steam engine... anything that burns something
environmental cost: pollution and human health
other issues:
----- limited/finite supply
stored power: battery, fuel cell, compressed air.... anything that uses the grid to fill up but does not burn the consumable it is full of.
environmental cost: storage material and its life expectancy
other issues:
---- fill up time (how long to fill up)
---- distance (how often you need to stop)
---- cost (the more energy it can store the more expensive the vehicle)
grid power electric trams, trolleys streetcars and trains, as well as maglev trains and moving sidewalks (like in many modern airports), solar
environmental cost: almost none directly
other issues
---- greed
---- infrastructure+
---- what happens when there is no power
---- bill
grid powered vehicles have existed as public transportation for over a century. some with direct current above and others below and more recently some that use induction. So I don't see making it work as being an issue.
The issues are greed, for example Montreal used to have electric trams, eventually the tram companies where bought out by the guy running a bus company and he eliminated the trams because he had shares in oil companies and he could double dip with gas. Look at Tesla you add bigger and bigger batteries and now the guy is building a plant to make and sell large batteries that cost a lot that will charge at his stations. He can't make as much selling a car that uses a normal size battery whose electricity I buy directly from the utility.
infrastructure : you need a common standard for all of a continent if not the world, it is useless if I can't no longer "plug in" once I've driven a few miles.
what happens when there is no power: which is why I think a hybrid is needed
how do you bill: this is why grid powered vehicles were relegated to public transportation. 100 years ago it was easy for the utility to say "MTC" you owe us X$ for the electricity used by your trams this month since they where the only ones using that electricity but almost impossible (tolls?) for private vehicles all using the same roadway and syphoning electricity at the same time in a 100% cash society. But I think today it should be less of an issue, no one uses exclusively cash any more, people use their cell phones, credit cards or bank cards for micro transactions all the time.
Our roads are paid for by taxes on gas. Every gallon has 18.4 cents of federal tax, then each state has their own tax too. The state tax varies from about 12 cents to 50 cents per gallon.
true same here( actually in the greater Montreal area Quebec has a 3 cent/litre surtax on gas that goes to Montreal supposedly for roads) but in the end that does not cover everything and it does not change the main point that roads are cost centre.
