Alternate Energy Blog

The new Lexus premium compact hybrid CT 200h (earlier post) to be introduced next week at the Geneva Motor Show combines a 1.8-liter VVT-i gasoline, permanent magnet synchronous motor, electrically controlled continuously variable transmission (E-CVT) and NiMH battery pack.

The CT 200h. Click to enlarge.

Lexus’s first premium compact model, designed and developed with the European market in mind, offers a selectable electric mode, as well as Eco, Normal and Sport driving modes. The car is capable of running in EV mode for up to 1.2 miles at speeds up to 28 mph (45 km/h).

The CT 200h is built on a new platform with a dedicated double wishbone and trailing arm rear suspension system. It has been developed specifically to combine the ride comfort expected of a Lexus with superior driving involvement and handling agility.

The double wishbone rear suspension is exclusive to the CT 200h and incorporates a lightweight trailing arm. The springs and shocks are positioned separately to minimize intrusion into the loadspace floor.

Toda America, Inc., a subsidiary of Toda Kogyo Corp. in Japan, recently concluded a $35-million award contract with the US Department of Energy (DOE), granted under the Recovery Act – Electric Device Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative last August for the production of nickel-cobalt-metal cathode material for lithium-ion batteries. (Earlier post.)

Toda America plans to build a $70-million manufacturing plant for the cathode materials in Battle Creek, Michigan as soon as the site remediation work is completed and regulatory approvals are obtained in the next 1-2 months. Toda expects to complete Phase 1 and plans to start its operation in February, 2011.

The plant will be expanded step by step until 2013, reaching its full manufacturing capacity of 4,000 tons of finished product per year. The total sales volume based on the full capacity operation at the facility will be around $130 million.

In parallel with the Award Contract with DOE, Toda America has been working with the State of Michigan and the City of Battle Creek to finalize various agreements and financial incentives for the manufacturing plant in Battle Creek based on the planned job creation and capital investment.

Left, global light-duty fleet in the electric-favoring case; right, the hydrogen-favoring case. Top, without CCS and CSP; bottom, with CCS and CSP. In both electric- and hydrogen-favoring cases, availability of low-carbon electricity and hydrogen prolonged the use of petroleum-fueled ICE vehicles. Credit: ACS, Wallington et al. Click to enlarge.

Increased availability of low CO₂ sources of electricity and hydrogen could counter-intuitively delay, rather than accelerate, a large-scale transition to an electric and/or hydrogen vehicle fleet, according to a new study by researchers from Ford Motor Company and Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden. They reported the results of their modeling study online 26 February in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology.

For future scenarios where vehicle technology costs were sufficiently competitive
to advantage either hydrogen or electric vehicles, the increased
availability of low-cost, low-CO₂ electricity/hydrogen provided more cost-effective CO₂ mitigation opportunities in the heat and power energy sectors than in transportation. For example, the study found that the availability of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has a major impact on the lowest cost passenger vehicle fuel and technology choice.

The system dynamic at work is that CCS provides relatively
inexpensive low-CO₂ electricity and heat from coal which is
a lower cost CO₂ mitigation option than that offered by
replacement of petroleum-fueled, nonhybridized ICEVs.

…When CSP is also made available a substantial amount of CSP-generated electricity is used in the global energy system…This makes biomass, which would otherwise go to the stationary sector, available for conversion into biofuel for vehicles.

—Wallington et al.

In reporting their results, the authors emphasized that their interpretation of the results is “not that society should intentionally delay a transition to a large-scale hydrogen/electric-powered light duty vehicle fleet or that
the availability of clean electricity or hydrogen would be a
problem (far from it).”

Rather, the importance of low-CO₂ electricity and hydrogen is highlighted as having equal or greater value in other energy sectors and would beneficially affect how these sectors deal with CO₂ mitigation. The cost-effectiveness of measures to address climate change is
enhanced through a multisector perspective.

—Wallington et al.

In the study, global CO₂ emissions were constrained to achieve stabilization at
400-550 ppm by 2100 at the lowest total system cost (equivalent
to perfect CO₂ cap-and-trade regime). The increased availability of low-CO₂ electricity/hydrogen was found to delay the large-scale introduction of electric/hydrogen vehicles for all CO₂ targets considered.

The team used a model (Global Energy Transition, GET-RC 6.1) to consider combinations of five fuel options (petroleum, encompassing both gasoline and diesel; natural gas; synthetic fuels; electricity;and hydrogen); and five vehicle powertrain technologies (internal combustion engine vehicles, ICEV; hybrid-electric vehicles, HEV; plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, PHEV; battery-electric vehicles, BEV; and fuel cell vehicles, FCV).

The study considered two cases: one with vehicle technology costs that favored hydrogen vehicles and the other using vehicle technology costs that favored electric vehicles.

Primary energy sources in model include fossil fuels (crude oil, natural gas, and coal); non-renewable non-fossil sources (nuclear); and renewable sources (hydroelectric, wind, solar, and biomass). These energy sources can be converted to transportation fuels or used for generation of heat, electricity, or
both (cogeneration).

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) was included as an option to
decarbonize fuels derived from fossil sources and biomass. The model allows solar energy to be used for (i) generation of low temperature heat; (ii)
generation of hydrogen from direct solar conversion; (iii)
generation of electricity from photovoltaic technology; and
(iv) generation of electricity from concentrated solar power (CSP).

While low-CO₂ sources are required for long-term use of hydrogen and electric-powered vehicles, because of the complex
dynamics of the global energy system, they may actually delay
a transition to alternative fuel vehicles under a CO₂ cap-and-trade regulatory environment. While the model we have used is simple in some respects and has limitations, it nevertheless provides the first insight into the existence and
magnitude of this effect.

While there are important societal objectives other than
cost-effective CO₂ mitigation (e.g., energy security, rural
development), the results presented here suggest that for
the next few decades an increased availability of low-CO₂
electricity and hydrogen may delay, rather than facilitate,
the introduction of a large-scale hydrogen or electric-powered
vehicle fleet. This paradox for hydrogen- and electric-powered
vehicles in a carbon cap-and-trade world deserves further
study by the scientific community and consideration by policy
makers.

—Wallington et al.

Resources

• T. J. Wallington, M. Grahn, J. E. Anderson, S. A. Mueller, M. I. Williander and K. Lindgren (2010) Low-CO₂ Electricity and Hydrogen: A Help or Hindrance for Electric and Hydrogen Vehicles? Environ. Sci. Technol., Article ASAP
  doi: 10.1021/es902329h

Congressman Ike Skelton (D-Mo); Congressman Collin Peterson (D-Minn), and Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo) introduced a joint resolution in the House of Representatives to nullify the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) finding in December 2009 that greenhouse gases (GHG) are a threat to human health and therefore could be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Congressman Skelton is the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

US Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) earlier introduced an identical resolution, S.J. Res. 26, in the US Senate. (Earlier post.)

Under the Congressional Review Act of 1996 (CRA), Congress has 60 legislative days to review a major rule under expedited legislative procedures and consider a resolution to disapprove of the rulemaking. If a disapproval resolution is enacted, the rule may not take effect and the agency may issue no substantially similar rule without subsequent statutory authorization. If a rule is disapproved after going into effect, it is “treated as though [it] had never taken effect.”

Congress stands in the shoes of the American people. Executive branch agencies, like EPA, carry out the laws passed by Congress. When Congress passed the Clean Air Act, it never gave EPA the explicit authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions for the purpose of stopping global climate change. But, that is exactly what EPA has proposed to do.

I do not agree with the EPA or the 2007 Supreme Court ruling that gave the Agency that authority. So, today, I introduced a bipartisan joint resolution to stop EPA from implementing its proposed greenhouse gas regulations that would likely be very costly to farmers, business owners, Midwestern utilities, and consumers.

The resolution of disapproval does not stop Congress from working on important energy legislation, though I do hope it will set aside cap and trade in favor of a more scaled back bipartisan bill. My resolution does, however, keep EPA from threatening Congress with its own greenhouse gas policy as we write legislation.

—Congressman Skelton

In addition to precluding future regulation of stationary sources of greenhouse gases by the EPA under the current framework, passage of a disapproval resolution would also nullify EPA’s soon to be introduced final ruling on greenhouse gases from light duty vehicles.

Under President Obama’s national fuel policy (earlier post), the EPA and the Department of Transportation’s NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), are jointly developing a new harmonized national policy intended to reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for all new cars and trucks sold in the US.

The resulting set of new standards will cover model years 2012-2016, and will require an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 mpg in 2016 (39 mpg for cars, 30 mpg for trucks), or approximately 250 grams CO₂/mile.

In response to a query from Senator Diane Feinstein’s (D-Ca) office about the potential impact of the passage of the Murkowski amendment, O. Kevin Vincent, the Chief Counsel for NHTSA, wrote earlier in February that:

As a strictly legal matter, the Murkoswki Resolution does not directly impact NHTSA’s independent statutory authority to set fuel economy standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). However, passage of the Murkowski Amendment would have profoundly adverse effects on the national economy, national environment and energy security objectives, and the economically distressed automobile manufacturing industry. While NHTSA’s promulgation of independent, stand alone CAFE standards would make important contributions, its standards could not avoid those adverse affects.

…given EPA’s grant of the California waiver request in 2009, California and the States that adopted the California standards could move forward to enforce standards that are inconsistent with the Federal standards, thus creating confusion, encouraging renewed litigation, and driving up the cost of compliance to automobile manufacturers and consumers alike.

If the Murkowski Resolution were to be adopted, Vincent wrote, NHTSA would endeavor to fulfill its statutory obligation to finalize a CAFE rule as quickly as practicably as possible, although it would miss the 1 April deadline.

Congressman Ike Skelton (D-Mo); Congressman Collin Peterson (D-Minn), and Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo) introduced a joint resolution in the House of Representatives to nullify the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) finding in December 2009 that greenhouse gases (GHG) are a threat to human health and therefore could be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Congressman Skelton is the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

US Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) earlier introduced an identical resolution, S.J. Res. 26, in the US Senate. (Earlier post.)

Under the Congressional Review Act of 1996 (CRA), Congress has 60 legislative days to review a major rule under expedited legislative procedures and consider a resolution to disapprove of the rulemaking. If a disapproval resolution is enacted, the rule may not take effect and the agency may issue no substantially similar rule without subsequent statutory authorization. If a rule is disapproved after going into effect, it is “treated as though [it] had never taken effect.”

Congress stands in the shoes of the American people. Executive branch agencies, like EPA, carry out the laws passed by Congress. When Congress passed the Clean Air Act, it never gave EPA the explicit authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions for the purpose of stopping global climate change. But, that is exactly what EPA has proposed to do.

I do not agree with the EPA or the 2007 Supreme Court ruling that gave the Agency that authority. So, today, I introduced a bipartisan joint resolution to stop EPA from implementing its proposed greenhouse gas regulations that would likely be very costly to farmers, business owners, Midwestern utilities, and consumers.

The resolution of disapproval does not stop Congress from working on important energy legislation, though I do hope it will set aside cap and trade in favor of a more scaled back bipartisan bill. My resolution does, however, keep EPA from threatening Congress with its own greenhouse gas policy as we write legislation.

—Congressman Skelton

In addition to precluding future regulation of stationary sources of greenhouse gases by the EPA under the current framework, passage of a disapproval resolution would also nullify EPA’s soon to be introduced final ruling on greenhouse gases from light duty vehicles.

Under President Obama’s national fuel policy (earlier post), the EPA and the Department of Transportation’s NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), are jointly developing a new harmonized national policy intended to reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for all new cars and trucks sold in the US.

The resulting set of new standards will cover model years 2012-2016, and will require an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 mpg in 2016 (39 mpg for cars, 30 mpg for trucks), or approximately 250 grams CO₂/mile.

In response to a query from Senator Diane Feinstein’s (D-Ca) office about the potential impact of the passage of the Murkowski amendment, O. Kevin Vincent, the Chief Counsel for NHTSA, wrote earlier in February that:

As a strictly legal matter, the Murkoswki Resolution does not directly impact NHTSA’s independent statutory authority to set fuel economy standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). However, passage of the Murkowski Amendment would have profoundly adverse effects on the national economy, national environment and energy security objectives, and the economically distressed automobile manufacturing industry. While NHTSA’s promulgation of independent, stand alone CAFE standards would make important contributions, its standards could not avoid those adverse affects.

…given EPA’s grant of the California waiver request in 2009, California and the States that adopted the California standards could move forward to enforce standards that are inconsistent with the Federal standards, thus creating confusion, encouraging renewed litigation, and driving up the cost of compliance to automobile manufacturers and consumers alike.

If the Murkowski Resolution were to be adopted, Vincent wrote, NHTSA would endeavor to fulfill its statutory obligation to finalize a CAFE rule as quickly as practicably as possible, although it would miss the 1 April deadline.

IBM has launched a new research initiative to build personalized travel routes for commuters to avoid traffic gridlock. IBM researchers are using advanced analytics to develop adaptive traffic systems that will intuitively learn traveler patterns and behavior to provide more dynamic travel safety and route information to travelers than is available today.

According to the Texas Transportation Institute, as cited by IBM, US traffic congestion burns enough fuel every year to fill 58 supertankers and wastes enough time to consume 105 million weeks of vacation.

New models will predict the outcomes of varying transportation routes to provide a personalized recommendation that get commuters where they need to go in the fastest time. This project intends to provide information that goes well beyond traditional traffic reports, after-the fact devices that only indicate where you are already located in a traffic jam, and web-based applications that give estimated travel time in traffic.

Using new mathematical models and IBM’s predictive analytics technologies, the researchers will analyze and combine multiple possible scenarios that can affect commuters to deliver the best routes for daily travel, including many factors, such as traffic accidents; commuter’s location; current and planned road construction; most traveled days of the week; expected work start times; local events that may impact traffic; alternate options of transportation such as rail or ferries; parking availability; and weather.

Working with state and local transportation agencies, IBM plans to launch pilot projects for select sets of commuters to analyze, test and refine the new systems. IBM plans to provide program participants with the personalized commuting information via the web, through mobile voice interaction, combined with advanced mapping applications on mobile devices.

For example, combining predictive analytics with real-time information about current travel congestion from sensors and other data, the system could recommend better ways to get to a destination, such as how to get to a nearby mass transit hub, whether the train is predicted to be on time, and whether parking is predicted to be available at the train station. New systems can learn from regular travel patterns where you are likely to go and then integrate all available data and prediction models to pinpoint the best route.

Insight from IBM’s analytics and pilot programs will help transportation agencies better understand and manage traffic, increasing safety on our roads and encouraging the use of efficient public transportation which will help reduce a commuter’s overall carbon output.

The data exists to give commuters and transportation agencies a better way to manage traffic but today it’s not connected. IBM has the ability correlate all of this information to better predict demand, optimize capacity help improve traveler and highway safety as well as reduce our impact on the environment.

—Gerry Mooney, General Manager, Public Sector, IBM

Additionally, IBM is launching a new global virtual Travel and Transportation Center of Competency which will provide new solutions and deep industry expertise for air, rail, truck, and sea transportation.

IBM has launched a new research initiative to build personalized travel routes for commuters to avoid traffic gridlock. IBM researchers are using advanced analytics to develop adaptive traffic systems that will intuitively learn traveler patterns and behavior to provide more dynamic travel safety and route information to travelers than is available today.

According to the Texas Transportation Institute, as cited by IBM, US traffic congestion burns enough fuel every year to fill 58 supertankers and wastes enough time to consume 105 million weeks of vacation.

New models will predict the outcomes of varying transportation routes to provide a personalized recommendation that get commuters where they need to go in the fastest time. This project intends to provide information that goes well beyond traditional traffic reports, after-the fact devices that only indicate where you are already located in a traffic jam, and web-based applications that give estimated travel time in traffic.

Using new mathematical models and IBM’s predictive analytics technologies, the researchers will analyze and combine multiple possible scenarios that can affect commuters to deliver the best routes for daily travel, including many factors, such as traffic accidents; commuter’s location; current and planned road construction; most traveled days of the week; expected work start times; local events that may impact traffic; alternate options of transportation such as rail or ferries; parking availability; and weather.

Working with state and local transportation agencies, IBM plans to launch pilot projects for select sets of commuters to analyze, test and refine the new systems. IBM plans to provide program participants with the personalized commuting information via the web, through mobile voice interaction, combined with advanced mapping applications on mobile devices.

For example, combining predictive analytics with real-time information about current travel congestion from sensors and other data, the system could recommend better ways to get to a destination, such as how to get to a nearby mass transit hub, whether the train is predicted to be on time, and whether parking is predicted to be available at the train station. New systems can learn from regular travel patterns where you are likely to go and then integrate all available data and prediction models to pinpoint the best route.

Insight from IBM’s analytics and pilot programs will help transportation agencies better understand and manage traffic, increasing safety on our roads and encouraging the use of efficient public transportation which will help reduce a commuter’s overall carbon output.

The data exists to give commuters and transportation agencies a better way to manage traffic but today it’s not connected. IBM has the ability correlate all of this information to better predict demand, optimize capacity help improve traveler and highway safety as well as reduce our impact on the environment.

—Gerry Mooney, General Manager, Public Sector, IBM

Additionally, IBM is launching a new global virtual Travel and Transportation Center of Competency which will provide new solutions and deep industry expertise for air, rail, truck, and sea transportation.