Scuderia Ferrari 2023

The technology is there:


Electrified Roads Power Your EV While You Drive, Making Charging Pit-Stops a Thing of the Past
Inductive coils under the asphalt transfer energy to on-vehicle receivers ⚡️

On a roadtrip sometime in the near future, you can forget any concerns about your electric vehicle’s range, or about finding a high-speed charging station along the way. That is, if electrified roads become the norm, as a new pilot project in Milan, Italy demonstrates is entirely possible.

This inductive charging technology powers an electric vehicle from underneath the roadway while the vehicle is still on the move. But expanding that technology from a one-mile test track into a real-world highway won’t be a simple—or inexpensive—step. No one has a realistic roadmap in place to execute this dream project on a large scale, just yet.

That doesn’t mean companies aren’t trying to make electrified roads a reality. On June 10, Stellantis—the Amsterdam-based parent company of Fiat, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram, among other auto brands—announced a successful run of its “Arena of the Future” project just off the A35 Motorway near Milan, Italy. The company crafted a 0.65-mile loop track embedded with the inductive technology, and then successfully powered its Fiat 500, along with buses and other vehicles, while driving on the track.

In this design, a groove in the roadway is cut out to install inductive charging coils, fed by electrical power. The coils are covered in asphalt, just like a typical road, so that cars can roll on a regular driving surface. A receiver on the underside of the vehicle grabs that electromagnetic power and sends it straight to the engine, reducing (or even eliminating) reliance on an EV’s stored battery charge.

Direct current powers the Arena of the Future, which reduces power losses in energy distribution, and makes it possible to use thinner cables than an alternating current.

 

Cost, and availability will be the problems.
The fuel Porsche expected to develop in Chile would be 10 times more expensive to produce than gas at present.
Also, it couldn't be produced in huge quantity to satisfy the market. Even Porsche admitted that.

 

I'd rather have the little Ferrari 360 and not engage in ****-swinging contests.

 

Two questions::

a) how do you drive 100 miles off grid ?

b) how does the cost of fuel get billed to the consumer ??

And a third::

c) what makes the Sound of the engine intakes and exhausts ??

 

And what would the cost be of such a road? I can only imagine, astronomically high. Cost to repair? Time to repair? Time to lay the road in the first place?

What about heavy rain?

How fast was the fiat 500 driving and would it retain charge to do proper motorway speeds the whole time or are we reduced to 25 mph?

I am very hesitant about companies, which have a whole lot more to lose, claim ''successful test'' yet provide zero details whatsoever what they constitute a successful test...

 

They´ve delayed the ban of petrol engines several times, and they´ll have to do it again: the technology and infrastructure won´t be ready by... what was their last deadline? 2045? Now some are realizing that we´d need insane amounts of rare-earths, and a long etcetera of issues. Industrial vehicles will have to run on petrol for longer than regular cars, so if they make an exception for those, they can make another for small manufacturers. The big ones don´t care about a handful of Ferraris, it´s not their business anyway. And when we get hit by an economic crisis (and it happens from time to time), enviromental issues always get delayed.

So, paraphrasing Mark Twain, the rumours of the death of the internal combustion engine have been vastly exaggerated.

It´s true that, at some moment, petrol will become too expensive. There won´t be many petrol stations so travelling with a petrol car will be like travelling with an electric one now, always anxious about finding somewhere to recharge. But, although in a limited form and only for the rich and some die-hards, I think that we´ll have petrol cars for another half century.

 

It doesn't have to be the whole length of a road, just sections here and there. Or it could be sections parallel to the road that vehicles would enter like a toll road, drive at limited speed to recharge their battery. That would be certainly quicker than a stop at a charging point. That could allow cars to carry smaller batteries too. As for the risk of rain, the That electrified portion could be covered, no?
You only give objections because you don't like the idea, or you have no imagination ?
The test was considered successful, because they found that the principle works. The system works already with mobile phones you can charge in cars without plugging them; it's a bit more elaborate. Of course it need development before it's fully operational. Just get engineers on it, and they will solve the problems.

 

a) Like they do now, using batteries. Electrified roads would be for charging batteries only, not as constant source of energy

b) Registered vehicles would be recognised by their number plate like that already exists on motorway tolls.
The cost of energy purchased would be calculated, and the money taken from the owner's bank account

c) Who needs mechanical noise ?

 

I don't know where you are posting from. Here in Europe, there has been no talks about postponment of the ban on ICE sale in 2035.
I am not sure, but I think it's already in the EU statutes now. Only some details have to be finalised. In fact, the implementation of the ban on carbon emission risks to be brought sooner than expected. In some countries, they talk about 2030, to accelerate the implementation of the program of electrification. Some manufacturers talk about selling their last ICE car in 2028.
The very hot summer this year has made many people more conscious about global warming and given ammunition to the ecologists.
More important for ICE lovers is how long their USE will be allowed after the sale ban. Some politicians in Europe ask for 5 years, some 10 years maximum, which may bring us to 2045.

 

Under the skin: Can Porsche's e-fuels completely replace petrol?
E-fuels using CO2 extracted from the atmosphere are cleaner than those extracted from the ground

Under the skin: Can Porsche's e-fuels completely replace petrol? | Autocar

Two years ago, Porsche announced that it would start making almost CO2-neutral synthetic fuel, as a drop-in replacement for petrol, by 2022. Its pilot project in the Patagonia region of southern Chile is now scheduled to make a modest 130,000 litres of its ‘e-fuel’ per year, rising to 550 million litres annually by the end of the decade.
The terminology surrounding sustainable fuels can be confusing so let’s clear that up. Porsche’s e-fuel is derived from air and water; it’s not a biofuel like ethanol or rapeseed oil.
The difference is that what the engine sees is pretty much the same as it would were the tank fillled with conventional petroleum. The e-fuel is a synthetic hydrocarbon, not alcohol like ethanol (the same as in drinks).

Neither does it have anything to do with the bio-diesel made from waste cooking oil that became popular some years ago.
The site at Punta Arenas was chosen because the area is remote and extremely windy, which makes it ideal for generating wind power; Porsche reckons wind turbines can work at maximum capacity for 270 days a year in that spot.
How does it work? Turbines generate electricity that drives electrolysers to split water into hydrogen and oxygen – and it’s the hydrogen Porsche is after.
Ironically, the other component needed is CO2, which is captured from the air using a chemical process that doesn’t involve precious-metal catalytic converters. The hydrogen and CO2 is combined to make methanol (another type of alcohol) which is then synthesised into synthetic petrol.
The fuel can be formulated as an alternative to diesel or petrol and mixed with conventional fuel. Making a litre of e-fuel takes three litres of desalinated water and the CO2 extracted from 6000 cubic metres of air.
Similar synthetic fuels aren’t new. Audi, working with Joule, set up a plant in Mexico to produce synthetic fuel via ethanol produced from harmless bacteria in waste water, for instance.

Could synthetic e-fuels keep the combustion engine alive on a global scale and do away with the need to migrate to battery EVs and other alternatives? Never say never, but the amount of conventional fossil-based fuel used today is colossal. According to the US Energy Information Administration, the UK used 274,700 barrels of petrol each day last year. That’s almost 9.5 million gallons or 43 million litres – and our consumption is below average.
Put into perspective, when it reaches maximum potential, Porsche’s plant in Chile would produce enough e-fuel annually to keep the UK going for less than two weeks. On the plus side, the potential for a new enterprise based on sustainable electricity generation to make synthetic fuel is immense.
For example, 54% of the electricity produced in Scotland comes from wind power. Expansion plans under way there include generating hydrogen, one of the key components of synthetic fuel, as a storage medium for off-peak wind-generated energy.

 

Here in UK:


Sunak: Petrol and diesel car ban deadline to remain despite new ‘pro-motorist’ pledges
The Prime Minister had been under mounting pressure to row back on the ban
Sunak: Petrol and diesel car ban still in place by 2030 | The Independent

The ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 remains Government policy, the Prime Minister has said.

Rishi Sunak had been under mounting pressure to row back on the ban after more than 40 Conservative MPs and peers wrote to him calling for the deadline to be pushed back.
However, the Prime Minister said it remained part of his agenda, reiterating his commitment to transition to net zero in a “proportionate and pragmatic way”.
Echoing Mr Sunak, energy minister Andrew Bowie told Sky News “we remain committed to ensuring that more people get access to, are able to buy, are able to drive electric and hybrid cars”.
Their comments came as the Prime Minister announced at least 100 new oil and sea gas licences alongside a new carbon capture scheme in north-east Scotland.

 

I ask questions because I deem said questions pretty necessary. I have a wireless charger for my phone; if I hover it about 5mm over it, it will not even recognize the pad let alone being charged. What's the ground clearance on the average road car, 20cm?

Simply repeating that the test was successful over and over again doesn't mean anything, as we still don't know any of the parameters. It's the same as that silly Hyperloop system, they call those tests successful as well but in reality what did they do? Drive a car down a closed tube.

I have a theory I can fill a bottle of water despite it having a hole in the bottom. I've done a test and concluded it works, yet I give no details. If anyone asks, I'll just keep repeating ''guys, it works, trust me. Now where's my 85 trillion dollars so I can set this project into motion?".

In reality, the only reason I managed to fill the holey bottle of water was by increasing pressure so much that more water flowed in than was possible to flow out. I don't tell my investors this until the work has started and is along significantly that to back out is seen as a public failure and (their) heads will roll, so all they can do is support my request ofr substantially more money so I can run further tests until I get it to work.

The article linked showed nothing of substance. No distance, speed, how low the charging thing was from the car, nothing whatsoever. That's why I asked for further info, I didn't just blindly accept it as the savior of transport.

 

That's the theory.

This is the reality:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/20935992/tesla-drivers-queue-hours-wait-electric-charging-station/

 

I fully understand your skepticism. I could hardly believe myself that such system could be envisaged but it is still in its infancy as a reliable charging method, and probably needs a lot of development. I haven't found all the details you ask.

However, there is this on Wikipedia, giving an idea of the work going on.

Inductive charging
Inductive charging - Wikipedia

 

Teething troubles ?

Of course ICE owners never queued up at at filling station, right ?

 

That does not make for good reading, and I mean that from the strongest possible view point I have in a world with EV's, as despite my skepticism and extreme dislike for a 100% EV only future, I do think there is a place for them.

A perfectly placed phone charging is 39% less efficient than wired charging. Using a non standard product or placing the phone poorly, makes charging 80% less efficient. That is HUGE if you ask me...and take in mind, a poorly placed phone still is making near enough direct contact with the charge base, the only thing separating it is the phone case. A car is going to hover over the road much, much higher, leading to enormous losses surely, or power has to be cranked up so much, other components in the car (by which I mean phones for example), I doubt will live very long.

Given that everything today is global warming, including cow farts and therefore cows need to be ruthelessly slaughtered (for erm, reasons I guess), I can not see a a system where with direct contact leading to 80% loss (lets imagine that's what we'll get wireless charging for cars down to) to go down very well. The electricity required, including the massive loss, is a pill very hard to swallow.

I don't see this technology to be truly working on roads in 50 years, let alone 10.

 

For hours? Never in my country.

Just for the record, I´m not one of those reactionary Texans who enjoys smoking Priuses with their 7 liter pick ups. I´ll gladly buy an electric car when it suits me. But if politicians insist in forcing a transition without being ready for it, we´ll end with a more unequal society, where those who can´t afford a 50,000 € EV won´t have other choice than travelling by bus. For some of those politicians, that´s the ultimate goal: eliminating cars, any kind of car, electric or not, because public transport is a lot more eco-friendly.

Then the V12 sports cars... that´s just a footnote. I suppose it will be like owning a horse now.

 

I suspect those politicians really like public transport because it is collective, rather than individual, like a car.

Cheap EVs will doubtless come when the mandates kick in.
They will be from China and help further Chinese influence on client countries in the way that Russian energy exports to the EU do now, even though that particular mask has slipped.

I'll keep my horse!

 

The whole transportation system is in transition, that we like it or not.
I expect plenty of hicups and adjustments in the next 20 years.
Anything new attracts opposition, and criticism; that's healthy in an open society.
Public transport will never be an answer to every need, but in most big cities, they are miles better than individual transports.
I lived for 40 years in London, and hardly ever took a car in town, even when my employer offered free parking. I used buses, trams and trains well before the expression eco-friendly was invented. It was far more practical, quicker, cheaper, less stressful and I had time to read as I was going along.

 

France prepares $100 a month EV leasing plan
The plan for low-cost leases would help offset the high cost of EVs during the energy transition, a French minister says.
France prepares $100 a month EV leasing plan | Automotive News Europe (autonews.com)

PARIS -- France is readying a plan to subsidize electric-car leasing as part of President Emmanuel Macron’s campaign pledge to make them more affordable.

The plan will make full-electric vehicles available for 100 euros ($100) a month, Budget Minister Gabriel Attal said Sunday on LCI television, noting that the cost is less than what many people spend on gasoline. The government is working on how quickly the measure can be rolled out and the availability of EVs, he said.

Macron promised a state-sponsored leasing program for low-income households to counter criticism that even with subsidies, EVs are still out of reach for many.

The French government offers subsidies of as much as 6,000 euros for the purchase of EVs costing less than 47,000 euros, with possible additional aid under a cash-for-clunkers program for old combustion-engine vehicles. EVs represented 12 percent of new car sales in France in the first seven months of 2022.

“We know that for many French they remain very expensive,” Attal said Sunday.

Among low-cost EVs, the Dacia Spring is available for 120 euros a month in France with a long-term lease; the soon-to-be discontinued Nissan Leaf is available for 139 euros a month, as is the Fiat New 500; and the Renault Twingo for 150 euros a month.

 

I see they still like to swan around in chauffeur driven non EV cars when it suits them.

 

I agree politicians should lead by example, but not many do.
They could use chauffeur-driven EV instead, to convert the masses, and not think "Do as I say, not as I do!"

 

That's good. The problem comes when you're not offered any alternative.

And then, try to explain it to someone who lives in the middle of nowhere and has to adapt his life to the bus that goes through his town every 2 hours.

 

If this is repetitive, my apologies.

The molecule (or molecules) in a sustainable fuel are the same as in a normally blended fuel derived from crude oil. That is to say they are a hydrocarbon and when used in an ICE the tailpipe emissions are exactly the same as normal fuel.

They carry a “green” label due to the means of production. You can pyrolyse sawdust is a cat cracker, hydrotreat the resulting pyrolysis oil and end up with a regulatory compliant naphta if you have done your chemistry well. It is green as you make a scheme to plant more trees than you harvest so the carbon footprint of the entire system is “zero”.

Whatever the technical path chosen, long term pre-tax prices of 7-10 usd/gal and 30 years of refinery and related infrastructure building (at least 1 trillion USD) would begin to produce a meaningful quantity.

 

"Improvise, adapt and overcome", as usual. No solution will satisfy everybody.

When the world changes around them, people have to change too.