Automotive diatribe #3810...

I was thinking about something on the commute this morning, I wonder if I can remember what it was about...

I wanted to pull over and take some notes, because it was a really great idea.

Right, now I recall... design philosophy for a new car.

One of the worlds great automakers should begin designing a car (or two, or four) with the following attributes:
1) All materials used should be recycled or renewable
2) The vehicle should be designed to be recycled at end of life
3) The vehicle should employ current/near future tech for motive power

None of this is "new" thinking, however, let me expand on my thoughts for a few minutes and be a little more detailed... As there are many more details that should be taken into consideration in the vehicles I am thinking about.

Materials:
Many of a cars components can be made from recycled steel, aluminum, etc. rather than being from freshly mined ore. I don't know the current process for this, but I do know that there is a lot of scrap metal that appears to be under-utilized. It would be nice if that could all be accounted for, and tracked. If automakers are currently using recycled materials, it would be nice to know what percentage of the whole this was done for. For interior materials, some plastics would be fine where they needed to be formed, but since almost everything is gray or black, why not make it from recycled materials? Other trim materials for "extra" bits could be made from bamboo or other renewable resources. Natural fiber or recycled plastic carpeting. Kapok filled cushions in the seats. Leather upholstery - face it, the world eats beef, so we might as well use everything available. Alternatives could be organic cotton or wool. Sheepskin makes a wonderful seat cover, why not actually make the seat from it? My point is that with almost any level of interior trim there are renewable materials that can be utilized to meet or exceed current styles.

End of life:
Let's face it, currently there are a lot of cars that aren't designed to be torn down - they are designed to be crushed and melted down as a single piece, burning off any "impurities" that may be contained within the block (plastics, wires, etc.) While I know that tearing a car down takes time, if the larger assemblies were designed to be removed a little more efficiently, they could be processed separately from each other. For instance, in my car, built in 1991, many of the electrical components are routed through body cavities, and mounted to the body itself. A different method of design might make it so that all those capacitors, relays, and switches that are hidden in every little crevice and hole in the body where mounted to a dash subassembly that could be pulled as a unit. The wires running through the body could have connectors to plug into the subassembly in one location. Rather than having a master harness through the entire car, plugged into various components mounted in various locations, centralize the connections. Make it so that when the main cage is crushed, that's all that is getting crushed. Make it easy to remove as much non-metal as possible.

Motive power:
We know have quite a few options for various forms of efficient generation of power. We have electric motors, hybrid-power, hydrogen, fuel-cell, engines that run on petrol, regular oil (diesel), natural gas, and biofuels like ethanol, biodiesel, and biogas. There are a lot of options, lets make use of them where they make sense. Vehicles for more specific purposes, fueled by the most efficient method for that purpose. Vehicles where the power plant can be selected based on best availability depending on where it will be used. For instance, a truck at a dairy farm could be the same as a truck at a farm growing soybeans, only the engine for the dairy truck would burn biogas, which could be processed at the dairy. A vehicle for a daily commute specializing in making a 100 mile round trip with amenities for comfort of the passenger, and would be able to recharge or refuel quickly. A luxury limousine built with a hybrid system would enable "on a whim" destinations without concern for distance. Even now there are efficient race cars that are winning every event they enter, specializing in long distance endurance racing, and running on biofuel. These cars are also quieter, faster, and more reliable than their "traditional" counterparts. If it's being done on the racetrack, can we bring it to the streets? Please?

So, to the manufacturers, I say this: Give us something that we can use, something comfortable, and something that looks nice. Make it something that doesn't make a huge carbon footprint. It doesn't have to be faster than everything else. It doesn't have to be bigger than everything else. It doesn't have to be the smallest. It doesn't need EVERY gadget on the planet. Let me have choices in how much engine I want, not what you think I want, or what "market research shows 70% think" - let me make my own decision. In Europe, there are four models of the BMW 1 series, with seven choices of engines. The 3 series has eight engine selections. Here in the US we get... two models, two engines in the 1 series, all four models of 3 series, but again only two engines. Give us a choice. Let us make the decision for ourselves. I'd love a 118d M Sport 3-door hatchback. Rated at close to 63 MPG, it almost feels criminal that it isn't offered here in the US. It's past time to be making cars based on what can be sold off the show room floor, and give people the ability to buy the car they need, rather than giving them what you think they want. It's past time to stop thinking that gasoline is going to last forever. It's time to start making cars for tomorrow rather than for yesterday.

BMW information source: http://www.bmw.co.uk

Update: Just received the new issue of Winding Road, which mentions a new design from Mercedes Benz. Will be interesting to see where this leads.

Thinking about "Power"

I was reading an article in the Seattle Times about harnessing the power of tidal energy to generate electricity this morning and had a sudden flash of realization. Let me begin by saying that I'm by no means perfect. I'm sitting here in my car that gets an average of about 27MPG, waiting for the beginning of a group drive in which about 20-30 cars are going to run hard for 100 miles or so. So I say again, I'm by no means perfect...

The thing that I realized this moring was that in all our interest in "Green Power" what we really want is "more power, just cleaner". I keep reading about all of these various new energy schemes, ways to harness energy without burning oil, hybrid powered vehicles, and the like. What I don't seem to see very much is any technologies that are substantially reducing the amount of energy being used.

A few years ago, the first really big way to save energy for a long time was introduced: the compact fourescent bulb. It has some issues, based on the technology, but under many situations can show a great deal os energy savings. We need more of this type of advance. Things that use less energy in everyday use.

Laptops are a good example of energy saving devices compared to a full desktop system. For most users, a basic middle tier laptop has more than enough horsepower to anything that user would need. But, of course, every user wants the latest, fastest processor, video card, and the biggest screen they can get. All that power uses a lot of energy, converting quite a bit into heat in the process.

I remember reading something in the last couple years about how large office buildings no longer are concerned so much with being able to heat the spaces, but to effectively keep them cool. They expend great amounts of energy on cooling the interiors, why hasn't someone thought of a way to harness all thay energy?

In the article I was reading this morning, they are now setting their sites on harnessing wave power. I wonder what kind of effect this is going to have on the already slightly stressed ocean environment?

Even Scott Adams (Dilbert) in his blog states that green energy is one of the highest priority tasks for our society. However, he also states it as such: "... coming up with green and economical alternative sources of energy would virtually solve all the other problems, either directly or by boosting the economy." I again have to say that coming up with alternative sources doesn't do much. We really need to alter our framework and focus on reducing the amount of energy that we (waste)/use in our daily life.

Edit: Here's what I posted to Scott's blog...
Which is more important to the long term health of the planet? Finding a way to replace the current energy sources, or finding ways of reducing the amount of energy we use in our everyday lives?

Think of it this way: If we keep using the same basic oh, call it an "energy signature" regardless of the source, our needs will increase continuously along with our population. However, if we can find more ways of conserving energy (by creating devices that perform the same or nearly the same with a lower "signature") then we can reduce the overall impact on the planet.