Fast charging system for electric bus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 17, 2006
Messages
19,528
Location
Lake Forest, CA
Quote:
As Tesla and its Supercharger network have demonstrated, it's a lot easier for people to make the switch to electric vehicles if there's a robust and rapid charging infrastructure in place. But we have to electrify more than just passenger vehicles if we want to get serious about reducing emissions. EV manufacturer Proterra certainly thinks so, which is why it just opened up the patents for a new fast-charging system it has developed for electric buses.


Quote:
Proterra's high-voltage overhead charging system uses robotic control (and some autonomous software on the bus) to replenish bus batteries in as little as 10 minutes, depending on the size of the battery pack. Charging at 250-1000V (DC) and up to 1400A, the system is eight times faster than the CHAdeMO fast-charging standard and between three and four times faster than Tesla's Superchargers. And unlike the old-fashioned pantograph, which needs to cover the vehicle's entire route, Proterra's system is static. This means bus operators can install them in terminals or at the same locations they use to refill their diesel tanks.

"The interesting thing is these diesel buses have such massive fuel tanks—given how inefficient they are—that it takes longer to completely refill an 80- or 120-gallon diesel bus system than it does to recharge our electric vehicles," explains Proterra CEO Ryan Popple. "So we're actually getting to the point where the vehicles that are configured for fast charge can be replenished faster than you can stick a hose in the side of a diesel bus and fill it with fuel."


Quote:
According to Popple, Proterra's fast-charger can recharge a 100kWh electric bus in just ten minutes, sufficient for a circulator bus route of 30 (48km) miles or less. That's better than diesel or even natural gas, he told us: "We've gone from something that would have been considered a negative for EVs—slow overnight charging—and now we've gone to the point where EVs are advantaged relative to combustion in terms of speed and ease of refueling." (Recharging the 400kWh batteries of a longer-range electric bus would obviously take longer.)



http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/07/proterra-develops-fast-charging-for-buses-opens-up-the-patents/

Since the distance of most bus stops are within 2-3 miles if this fast chargers are installed at all bus stops, it can charge a bus while it stops to let passengers in and out. Since most stops will be about 1 minutes or a little longer, the fast charger can add 3 miles(or more) of juice to the battery and this is enough for the bus to get to the next stop. This will enable the battery bus to run all day without stopping for hours to recharge its' battery. Please note that this fast charger is for city bus, not long distance bus.

Some will say that since electric can be generated from a dirty coal power plant, this battery bus or any other BEV will pollute the air more than an ICE vehicle(and diesel bus), a cheated diesel from VW will be better for environment.

Please, this thread isn't about dirty coal power plant or some other dirty power plant somewhere in the world, this thread is about the convenience and fast of a new super-fast charger for battery electric bus.

NOTE: Proterra is an American company with headquarter in California, not in China. They have manufacturing plants in So Cal and in South Carolina, none in China.
 
Now, electric vehicles for city use, that I can understand. Especially for places like california where smog and other nasty stuff could linger a bit longer.

but there's a lot of bus stops in a city, the infrastructure cost will be significant.
 
We got about about 8 mpg out of our regular city busses, but they also went outside of town to connect some villages. The harmonica busses got about 5 mpg.

Coaches for long distance did way better, around 10-11 mpg...

Garbage trucks, which use drivetrains similar to the city busses, got about 2 mpg.

What it's about though, in my opinion, is keeping the air as clean as possible in high population areas. They're experimenting with hybrid busses for that reason here.
 
Quote:
Just about the dumbest idea I have ever heard. I continue to be amazed.

Why ?

At least one European country trying a network of chargers for battery electric truck on highway.

What are bad about this super fast chargers for battery electric bus ?

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
What kind of a bus goes 30 miles on 120 gallons of fuel? More smoke and mirrors nothing else can be expected from those tax money seeking parasites.

Kris, you are having a very serious reading problem, or you like to make up story to fit your agenda. What is it ?

Where in the linked article or where did I quoted that says "a bus goes 30 miles on 120 gallons of fuel" ???

This is what I quoted from the linked article:
"The interesting thing is these diesel buses have such massive fuel tanks—given how inefficient they are—that it takes longer to completely refill an 80- or 120-gallon diesel bus system than it does to recharge our electric vehicles,"

The way I see it is the battery bus doesn't need large battery pack, 100 KWh is more than sufficient if they have charger at every stop. They don't even need a bunch of chargers at the overnight parking structure. If it is needed a bus can stop at few stations a little longer than 1-2 minutes to fully charge its battery.

The initial investment will need a lot of money but the saving overtime will offset the initial investment somewhat, the main benefit is cleaner air in larger cities, especially for Los Angeles city.

If 1 minute charge time can give the bus 3 miles, and if distance of bus stops are less than 1.5-2.0 miles then not all stops are needed to have charger.

There are a lot more details in implementing these type of chargers, a lot more studies are needed, but initially it looks very promising.
 
Last edited:
What is the infrastructure cost per mile of public transportation mile? It's a ridiculous idea. Hopefully our tax payer money doesn't go to such ideas.
 
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
What is the infrastructure cost per mile of public transportation mile? It's a ridiculous idea. Hopefully our tax payer money doesn't go to such ideas.

I don't know the cost. This cost is needed to be carefully considered by authorities.

Remember, the extravagant cost of high speed rail from LA to San Fransisco, I believe it is more than $100 billions to build and billions more in annual maintenance, for how many passenger a day ? Probably no more than 3-5k a day.

How many chargers are needed for Los Angeles ? I don't know, I make a wild guess: about 500-1000 chargers, at what cost ? probably between $500 millions to $1 billion, assume it costs $1 million per charger installed.

As I said, the initial cost can be very high but long term benefit might offset the cost somewhat. It is hard to put the actual benefit in term of Dollar of cleaner air for people who live in larger city like Los Angeles.
 
Quote:
"The interesting thing is these diesel buses have such massive fuel tanks—given how inefficient they are—that it takes longer to completely refill an 80- or 120-gallon diesel bus system than it does to recharge our electric vehicles," explains Proterra CEO Ryan Popple. "So we're actually getting to the point where the vehicles that are configured for fast charge can be replenished faster than you can stick a hose in the side of a diesel bus and fill it with fuel."


They say it themselves that those diesel busses are super inefficient and need 80-120 gallon fuel tanks. To me it implies that their electric bus has the battery of equivalent energy content. And then they say it's actually quicker to recharge than refuel, implying time savings.
What they fail to mention is that their bus will need to be recharged about 10 times a day, where a diesel bus is usually refueled once a day.

The agenda is on the side pushing their electric garbage at the expense of the taxpayers.
 
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
They say it themselves that those diesel busses are super inefficient and need 80-120 gallon fuel tanks. To me it implies that their electric bus has the battery of equivalent energy content. And then they say it's actually quicker to recharge than refuel, implying time savings.
What they fail to mention is that their bus will need to be recharged about 10 times a day, where a diesel bus is usually refueled once a day.

The agenda is on the side pushing their electric garbage at the expense of the taxpayers.

As I said above, there are only few thousands people travel between LA and San Fransisco a distance of 400 miles, currently Amtrak train take about 5 hours.

They build a high speed train that will cost $65 billions, but more likely it will cost more just like any government project. Plus hundreds millions more for maintenance a year.

Quote:
Officials have broken ground on California's high-speed rail project – a $68bnn network that could zip passengers from San Francisco to Los Angeles in less than three hours.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...rs-9961697.html

This high speed train project will save those thousands passengers about 2-3 hours a day.

Now compares with the possible cost of these fast chargers at $1 billion for 1,000 bus stops plus cost of electric buses at $1 billion. The total cost of $2 billion for roughly 100,000 to 200,000 riders a day plus clean the air for millions living in the area. Do you like 1,000 bus spewing diesel fume at you ?

Didn't you see the money well spent for the electric bus with this super fast chargers ?

Did you ever see the pollution in LA basin in summer of 70's - 80's ?

Do you know what a giant dark brown umbrella looks like ? An umbrella with a width of approximately 50-60 miles and high of about 3-4 miles over the LA basin almost every summer day ?

Do we like to live under that umbrella again ? Absolutely NO

You have to see it and you have to smell it to appreciate the clean air in your area now. You didn't so you don't know why we don't mind spending few bucks for the clean air we are enjoy now.

Another money well spent in California: We have special gasoline that costs about 15-20 cent more a gallon compares with standard formula. Multiply that few pennies to tens of billions gallons of gas we use a year the total extra cost is few billions US Dollar a year.

Just take a look at gasbuddy.com US gas map, you will see the whole California state has higher gas price than national average about $0.7 to $1 a gallon.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
[They say it themselves that those diesel busses are super inefficient and need 80-120 gallon fuel tanks. To me it implies that their electric bus has the battery of equivalent energy content. And then they say it's actually quicker to recharge than refuel, implying time savings.
What they fail to mention is that their bus will need to be recharged about 10 times a day, where a diesel bus is usually refueled once a day.


The batteries stated in the article are 100kWh, that's 360MJ of stored energy...that's almost exactly 10 litres worth of diesel...2.65 gallons of diesel.

Give them the benefit of the doubt, and say that their battery and electric system is 100% efficient, and the diesel is getting 30%, that's 8.9 gallons diesel equivalent...Soooo...

The electric busses would have to be "filled up"10 or 12 times as frequently as the diesel ones.

Doesn't matter how quick ONE fill is compared to a bowser, but do it ten times and it costs time, and time is money/services.

As to their filling time,
250V*1,000A for 10 minutes is 150MJ, not quite half a tank.
1,000V*1,000A for 10 minutes is 600MJ

As to your last line, yep, that's it.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
The way I see it is the battery bus doesn't need large battery pack, 100 KWh is more than sufficient if they have charger at every stop. They don't even need a bunch of chargers at the overnight parking structure. If it is needed a bus can stop at few stations a little longer than 1-2 minutes to fully charge its battery.


OK, that's a little sillier than the initial proposal...that's the worst thing that you can do to your VERY EXPENSIVE batteries...slam the power into them, drain them, then slam some more into them.

Look at my levelised cost of storage thread, the cost of doing exactly that with wind and batteries is expressed there versus minimising the number of cycles with solar charging.

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Just about the dumbest idea I have ever heard. I continue to be amazed.


There are worse out there...

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Did you ever see the pollution in LA basin in summer of 70's - 80's ?

Do you know what a giant dark brown umbrella looks like ? An umbrella with a width of approximately 50-60 miles and high of about 3-4 miles over the LA basin almost every summer day ?

Do we like to live under that umbrella again ? Absolutely NO


What on earth are you talking about ?

If they DON'T build these busses, then WHY ON EARTH would you be going back to the brown umbrella ?

Are they going to reintroduce carbs, and take off cat converters because an electric bus didn't get built ?

But again, it reintroduces the NIMBY aspect of all of these dreams...move the problem to someone else's back yard, and feel all smug as you petition to close down the power stations.
 
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Quote:
Officials have broken ground on California's high-speed rail project – a $68bnn network that could zip passengers from San Francisco to Los Angeles in less than three hours.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...rs-9961697.html

This high speed train project will save those thousands passengers about 2-3 hours a day.


I'm not sure what you are getting at by bringing the high speed train into your thread.

Are you saying that there's thousands in L.A. who don't have a bus, and that these electric ones are going to make their life easier ?

Like the NEW high speed train is making others' lives easier ?

If there's no busses, then it really needs to be fixed, and in the most cost effective way.

If there's already busses, and alreadt no brown umbrella, then the high speed rail is probably more justifiable.
 
HTSS_TR, why do you bring California's hopes and dreams, electric trains, gas prices and what Californians are willing to pay for things? What does the title "Fast charging system for electric bus" mean to you? Isn't that what you told me in the American made index thread?
wink.gif


You posted a link to some CEO making all sorts o wonderful claims about their electric buses, implying that they solved the battery charging time problems, making claims that diesel busses are inefficient and by implication claiming their electric bus is more efficient.
I'm simply pointing out that these claims are not true. Why do you have a problem with me pointing out these flawed claims? Did I make any untrue statements, if so prove me wrong and don't change the subject.
Or am I simply rocking the "emission free" boat with these pesky little details and it somehow spoils your electric dream?
 
Last edited:
Oh, an there is an electric bus system that has been working great around the world for ages now, but it had overhead lines. They are very unsightly though, so I fully understand that you would not implement it and live under the brown mushroom, waiting for that magical battery operated bus and willing to spend billions for it.
You gotta have priorities.
 
Quote:
OK, that's a little sillier than the initial proposal...that's the worst thing that you can do to your VERY EXPENSIVE batteries...slam the power into them, drain them, then slam some more into them.


Thanks for pointing this out. Reduced battery life is another aspect of fast charging and in this particular case, it would be done at least a dozen times per day, every day.
Oops, rocking the boat again...lol
 
I had the high speed train in this discussion to show that we are willing to spend that much of money to benefit the few, we are willing to spent less than 5% of that money to benefit many more people who live in LA basin.

You guys don't live here so that you don't understand the problems with pollution we are facing.

The overall air quality is much better than 30-40 years ago, but still not as good as just say in Oceanside about 65-70 miles south of LA. LA basin still is 1 of 2 or 3 worst cities in US in term of pollution.

We spent billions a year but the air quality still bad. If you take an air simple in Oceanside city compares with Riverside city about 35-40 miles east of LA, you can see the big difference.

As soon as I get out of my car when I went to Pomona city to visit my friends, I can smell the air and I started to have slight problem with breathing, people who live in Inland Empire are having more problem with asthma then elsewhere.

Why did we spent more money for special gasoline formula ? Why did we spent more money for special catalytic converter ? We we spent billion a year for smog test ?

I will not be surprise to see no diesel of heavy transportation vehicles allowed in So Cal within 10-15 years. Electric bus will replace polluting diesel bus in less than 10 years.

The question is how to charge these buses, a fast charger at every stop or larger battery pack for full day service and charged at home base overnight.

I think fast chargers at bus stops are much better. The so called quick death with charging so often is more or less a scare tactic.

As I said, if you guys think that polluting diesel engine is a good idea, why don't you keep driving behind diesel truck to breath in diesel fume, after few year of doing this you will have super clean lungs to show.

Do you guys know where we Californian like to vacation the most ? Hawaii is where we go. Why ? because of clean air that is why.

We have beach here within 15-20 minutes drive and ample parking all day, why don't we stay here where millions people around the world come every year ? Because we like clean air in Hawaii.

The air quality in LA and Orange Counties are not as dirty as 30-40 years ago, but I still can't see true blue sky on sunny days, I only can see true blue sky after a good rain, and it is only blue for a day or two, after 2 days it becomes light gray-blue.

I can smell the difference in the air where I live and at restaurants on lake Elsinore about 1 hour drive from home. Only when you live here you will understand why we spend the money for battling air quality in So Cal.
 
California has most cities in the worst 10 cities in US in term of pollution, 6 of the top 7 are California cities in 2016, according to Webmd.com
No. 7: Modesto-Merced, CA
No. 6: Sacramento-Roseville, CA
No. 5: Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ
No. 4: Fresno-Madera, CA
No. 3: Visalia, CA
No. 2: Bakersfield, CA
No. 1: Los Angeles, CA

http://www.webmd.com/asthma/ss/slideshow-worst-smog-cities

You guys are saying that is the way it is, we should not do anything to combat the problem ? Electric bus is a bad solution, diesel engines are better for Californian ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top