“Gas Stations” of the Future [Old Content]

Kyle Brady — Tue, 26 May 2009 21:22:15 +0000

I recently found a NewScientist piece on "robotic battery swappers" for electric vehicles, and was highly impressed. The concept is relatively simple: pull into a computerized facility, remove the easy-access battery pack from beneath the car, replace it with an identical fully-charged pack, and let the car move on its way. This whole operation takes less than the average trip to the modern gas station for a fill-up, without all the worry of dangerous explosions.

Don't believe me? There's a video of a demo facility:

The discovery/release of this concept coincides with the passage of federal standards for higher gas mileage, because producing hydrogen-based vehicles is apparently too dangerous and full electric vehicles neither have a market nor can be cheaply produced... at least according to the oil-fed industries of the moment.

Of course, I don't buy it, because I'm too smart to be fed the company line, and the obvious next step is to question both the movement towards the future and the industry itself.

Future Gas Station

One of the many reactions to fully electric cars is "I have to ... plug it in?", which the auto industry obviously loves to hear - no matter how many miles you get per night of charging, the idea of running out of power mid-trip, without a quick recharge, is fearsome to many.

The result is the hybrid cars now on the roads, a combo electric-fuel engine, that uses the electric engine in manners ranging from under a certain velocity to all the time (using the fuel engine as a recharging system, as necessary). Imagine that these cars become immensely popular in the future... great, but we're still dependent on oil, and, by association, the Middle East and its lovely little cartel.

Having a "gas station" that will quickly swap out your entire battery assemblage provides the end-user with the immediacy of a modern tank fillup, without the need to have fuel involved whatsoever.

Hydrogen

Hydrogen should be a viable "alternative fuel" source for vehicles, since it produces no pollution as a byproduct of use, but the oil industry has successfully prevented its rise (so far). Hydrogen vehicles would require fillup stations much like the gasoline ones of today, but since hydrogen is more than abundant, the distributor would likely see very little profit... not to mention it's a naturally volatile gas.

If the past is any indication of the future, we should be expecting significant push-back from the oil industry for these "battery swap" stations, since they pose as much of a threat to their profits as hydrogen: anything that makes an alternative fuel attractive and easy to use is worrisome.

Federal Control

We have a hope, however. As anyone who paid attention to the media in the last few months knows, the Federal Government now has large stakes in the American "Big Three" auto makers, and has been exerting considerable influence. Within weeks of achieving this, higher standards for gas mileage were passed - who's to say the influence can't extend to "suggesting" a standard battery assembly on the undercarriage of the cars, and "suggesting" higher volumes of production, with more model options?

Combine these "suggestions" with some sort of incentive to companies and entrepreneurs to build these battery-swap stations, and there could be an all-electric revolution within a few short years. The technology exists for both the vehicles and the stations... they merely need to be joined together.

I would hope that the interests of the old world companies can be pushed aside (oil companies, fuel resellers, etc.) for the benefit of our future and continued innovation towards a "cleaner, better tomorrow".

The End of Democracy [Old Content]

Kyle Brady — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 16:20:59 +0000

Game over, America. As of today, American Democracy + Capitalism is over. It's been fun, it's been nice... but it's time to throw in the towel and call it it what it is.

Because you're no longer a populist democracy when you do the opposite of what most of the intelligent people in your country want, and it's not capitalism/"a free market" when you're doling out obscene amounts of money to companies that are too inept to manage themselves properly.

First was the immensely ridiculous financial bailout, which we've all seen has been used essentially for large bonuses, giant parties (or "sales meetings" as they say), and huge takeovers. And now we have the auto industry bailout.

Why did the "big three" auto makers have financial problems? Yes, the industry went down with the economy. But there's a bigger problem here: they make shoddy products, eschew innovation for excuses and size, and continue to produce products that people are not interested in purchasing.

America's supposed to be a "free market". And that means that if your company is no longer producing attractive products for purchase, or if your management is only interested in how rich they can get, your company fades quietly (or not so) into the night. There's no handouts. Maybe you get bought by another company, but you don't continue to exist on someone else's dime.

People have used the "Millions will be unemployed if they fail! They're too big to fail!" excuse in the auto industry arguments, but that's not even remotely valid. How many people have lost their jobs in the last 6 months, and they haven't even been part of a failing company? They're not getting financial handouts to be able to keep all their employees on the basis of unemployment.

The "big three" should have gone under, or at least filed for bankruptcy - which would have given them a way to operate for some time to get on their feet. Just look at the airlines. And all the unemployed could file a class action lawsuit against the Board of Directors and Executives (CEO, CFO, etc.) for inept management (or whatever the legal equivalent would be), and potentially get a cut of all those large bonuses and salaries they've been getting for years while the company failed but celebrated their corporate fatcats.

Finally, using the markets as an indicator of success is comparable to the Chinese Government saying they successfully ended pollution in Beijing- everyone knows it's a lie, because they're only acting on rose-tinted self interest. As shareholders, these people are investors in the companies, and the companies' continued existence is profitable to them, especially if the stock goes up. But since everyone has their panties in a bunch right now, the temporary relief for these companies gives a glimmer of hope to all those Wall Street suits who've been crying into their glasses of Chardonnay for the last few months.

Yes, not providing this bailout to the auto industry would have likely meant the end of the current American auto production companies. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. There are a number of small companies trying to grow into the mainstream (Tesla Motors, for example), and the foreign companies (Volkswagon, BMW, Toyota, etc.) have been selling more cars to Americans than American companies have...

We could have been on the pinhead of revolution in the auto industry, thanks to necessity, but those hopes have now been dashed.

Get ready for another 20 years of crappy American cars attempting to dominate the industry, and spending thousands of dollars on gasoline a year.

Kyle Brady: Blog » Cars

“Gas Stations” of the Future [Old Content]

The End of Democracy [Old Content]