Filed under: Emerging Technologies, EV/Plug-in, Hybrid, MPG, AutoblogGreen Exclusive
Top ten easiest-to-implement green technologies that already exist today
LED stands for light emitting diode, and they are already common in all types of devices. One very desirable trait that they posses is that they last a very long time. They also can be quite bright. Additionally, the bulbs draw very little electricity, which paves the way for some of our other gas-saving technologies later on the list.
Next on the list are smaller wheels. With DUBS being ultra-hip these days, I'm not going to go crazy and say we should all go back to fourteen inch wheels. But, style is getting in the way of substance when our wheels get much larger than seventeen or eighteen inches. Also, consider going narrower! Wide tires convince some that the car must be faster. In reality, most of the time they are just using more gas. Keep reading after the jump for the rest of our commentary.
Number three on our list is to lighten up. Sure, cars need to be safe - nobody wants to roll up in a death trap! But, do you drive a four-door five-seater every day on your way to work? Do you carpool? No? How often could the average driver get by with only having two seats? Pretty often is the answer. The Rocky Mountain Institute has other guidelines drawn out to lighten our vehicles, but some could be cost prohibitive. We have already lightened up our rolling mass if we have chosen sixteen inch wheels over twenty inchers, so that is a start. How about using nickel metal hydride batteries instead of the big, heavy lead acid one that is under the hood of nearly every car sold today? How about lightening up under the engine compartment - which brings us to...
Number four: Consider a smaller engine. For one, if we have lightened up our car already and only have a driver plus sometimes a passenger, we could do our everyday drive with a four-cylinder instead of the six- or eight- that is more common. Really, this one is a no-brainer when it comes to saving gas. Of course, performance under acceleration would suffer, but why is everyone driving Nissan Altima's that accelerate to sixty in six seconds? Why are we commuting in 300C's that can do 150 miles per hour? Gosh, it makes you wonder how society got by having sixty horses in their VW Beetles? Or even 140 horsepower in their Ford Taurus? All right, if you must have a six-cylinder, at least be prepared to accept number five on the list.
Cylinder deactivation is popping up more and more these days. By making some mechanical changes in the valvetrain and some computer changes, manufacturers are able to stop combustion from taking place in half (or more) of the cylinders when they are not needed. This is the first item on our list that would most likely raise the cost of your car. If you just have to have "plenty" of power under the hood of your car, you'll also have to pay for it.
The next rung up the ladder is the CVT transmission. Some drivers complain that they feel slower than a conventional transmission, but this is usually just their perception. In fact, a well-done CVT is likely quicker, as it can keep the engine under optimal power under acceleration. Likewise, the transmission can keep the engine in its most economical range when just cruising, thereby saving gas. They might cost a bit more than standard geared transmission, but don't necessarily need to. They are a proven technology at this point too.
Direct injection is coming to an engine near you regardless of whether or not it saves gas... because it makes more power. Consumers are willing to pay for technology which makes their car faster, but not always greener. Direct injection kills both birds with the same stone. If we wanted to be extra green, we would apply the technology on a smaller engine and make the same amount of power as before.
Stop/Start technology is common on hybrid automobiles. BMW is bringing the technology to non-hybrid models, and with good reason. Why waste gas when you are stopped? With modern lubrication and a heavy-duty starter the wear factor is nearly zero. Some people already stop their cars from idling manually, why not have the car do it for us?
Now, let's start to talk about regenerative braking. What good is regen if there is no large battery pack to charge up for forward motion? Well, consider the alternator, which charges the battery in your car while the engine is running. By removing the drag of the alternator, we would be saving gas. Also, the power gained from not turning the alternator at all times would allow for a less powerful engine. As you can probably see by now, many of these technologies go hand-in-hand. Which brings us right into our last item on the list.
Mild hybrid systems are usually not capable of driving the car under electric power themselves. But, if your car is already sporting Stop/Start technology, it likely already has a mildly powerful electric motor as a starter. By engaging that same motor under acceleration, we can cut the amount of gasoline that the internal combustion motor requires for forward progress. Of course, we already have regenerative braking and we replaced our lead acid battery with a nickel metal hydride pack, so let's use the extra juice to save gas. Mild hybrid vehicles cost much less than their full hybrid cousins, but with the savings in gas that we have already achieved with the other nine items on our list, we are way ahead of the curve anyway.
Full hybrids just go to eleven, that's all.
To sum them all up:
- LED lighting
- Smaller wheels
- Lighten 'em up
- Smaller engines
- Cylinder deactivation
- CVT transmissions
- Direct injection
- Engine Stop\Start
- Regenerative brakes
- Mild Hybrid systems
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Anthony 6:22PM (8/08/2007)
I liked your posts, they are very interesting and should inspire us all to go green.
I think i am going to make a post about your ideas if you dont mind: my blog is at : http://autorepairing.blogspot.com/ ...You can check it out if you want, i could include green car repair...
Would you mind if i linked to your site also?
Reply
SuperQ 7:54PM (8/08/2007)
Some of the better things I've seen:
* Standardize on a 48v or higher electrical system (instead of 13.6v)
- higher voltage alternators/motors/pumps are more efficient.
- higher voltage means lower amperage for the same watts. This reduce loss in the wires.
- fewer amps means thinner wires can be used, which means less weight.
You could always install a 48->13.6 volt DC-DC convert (90+% efficiency) for the legacy power socket.
Reply
AlexP 9:03PM (8/08/2007)
However, downsizing wires usually leads to unreliability. I talked to a Nissan mech. and that's apparently one of the biggest issues they're facing with their current lineup.
Reply
rgseidl 6:37AM (8/09/2007)
The article missed two of the biggest potential fuel savers: diesel and turbocharging (when combined with reduced displacement). Neither is particularly big in the US just yet, but then again CO2 isn't a national issue. Another fuel saver, HCCI combustion, is on the horizon as well.
@ Super Q -
the main reason for going to a higher voltage would be to support higher (peak) electrical loads and, to switch certain systems (e.g. water pump, auxiliary oil pump for t/c engines, power steering, even brakes) to electric actuation. Unfortunately, a standard 12V battery and grid tops out at just 2kW.
Triple the voltage from 12V to 36V and the *same* wires can carry nine times the power for the same ohmic loss. As long as you stay well under 60V, service personnel face no risk of electrocution.
The snag is that the risk of short circuits and expecially, that of ground faults increases substantially with higher voltage. The engine compartment is exposed to the elements and even a build-up of dirt at the base of a connector can cause problems. Legacy 12V systems could be supplied via a cheap DC-DC converter as you suggest, but the portion of the gird running at the elevated voltage requires additional reliability engineering.
A few years ago, major suppliers in Germany came together to push for a new 42V standard (cp. 3 standard batteries in series, each rated at 14V) but the manufacturers nixed it, citing transition costs. The real reason, though, appears to have been a reluctance to open the door toward mild hybrids because the profits for those tend to accrue to the supply chain. However, this was before the whole issue of formal CO2 emissions regs in the EU became real so the idea may well be dusted off before long.
GM already uses 48V (cp. 4 batteries in series) in the BAS systems it uses for some gasoline engines, cp. Saturn Green Line. Unfortunately, the General does not (yet) offer the solution in Europe, because it offers no incremental customer value over a diesel. To address that, Opel had actually built a prototype diesel mild hybrid but it proved too expensive. Besides, folks back in HQ had decided to concentrate scarce hybrid R&D resources on the dual-mode transmission to compete against Toyota's full hybrids.
Reply
That dude 2:10PM (8/09/2007)
I'm sorry I have to get this out there.
Wide tires ARE THE LIFELINE for fast cars. The REALITY is that more surface area in contact with the ground allows greater levels of torque to be applied without breaking static friction with the pavement. Now what is true about your statement is that the force of friction of a wide tire will more precisely reflect jerk from the drivetrain, so in the instance of letting off the gas the car will begin to decelerate more quickly (however under constant deceleration the width of tires will no longer have an effect). Greater rotating mass will keep the car moving under deceleration but hold the car back under acceleration, limiting economy.
What I mean to say is: Don't phrase your sentence to make what is in this case a very minor influence seem more relevant than it is, especially at the expense of another cause.
Reply
Don 3:22PM (8/09/2007)
Oh, yes, for God's sake...get RID of those awful 24 inch, bling bling spinners.
Reply
beelzabush 3:29PM (8/09/2007)
the batteries in GMs mild hybrids are Nimh supplied by Cobasys. Yes there are real benefits to a 36V system. Just taking power steering and AC to electric provides significant fuel savings.
Reply
Jim 8:55PM (8/09/2007)
I suppose, this being AUTO blog, that you are limiting your top choices to cars. But I want to mention that you could save LOTS more C02 by spending $2000 on insulating your house an on buying a hybrid. But then, that won't show others how green you are, so maybe that's what's really important?
Reply
Jeremy Korzeniewski 11:10PM (8/09/2007)
That dude - I am not going to disagree with your point for high-performance cars. That is not what this list is all about, though. These are easy-to-implement technologies that already exist. If we are using a smaller engine in a smaller car, this is most likely not a high-performance car.
Also, don't be so quick to conclude that wide tires don't make that big of a difference. As a matter of fact, we are not just talking about width, we are talking about overall size and the compound of the rubber. The stickier the tire, the worse for mileage too. Also, tread and pressure have an impact on mileage. All in all, using the right wheels and tires can have a significant impact on overall fuel mileage.
Reply
DJ 9:04AM (8/13/2007)
One more: Speed limiters. It's well known that today's cars are most efficient at around 90kph. The technology is obviously cheap and already there, now implementing this is another story. In practical terms, there's no need for any vehicle, except emergency vehicles, to exceed 105kph.
Reply
Karyn 2:01AM (8/14/2007)
cool, this is what it says in a Chevrolet truck blog.
Reply
jim stack 10:24PM (9/01/2007)
light weight like my 2001 Saturn SL at 2200 lbs got 45 mpg on the highway. Noe GM improved....it and the new Satruns are heavier and get poor mpg.
The 60's VW's were 1600 lbs and got good mpg for the day, the super beetle jumped 1,00 labs and the new beetle is very heavy.
lighter is less mass ,cheaper to build and better mpg
Reply
Paul Taylor 11:10PM (2/22/2008)
My wife is American, I am English and we both live in England. Petrol (Gasoline) or Diesel costs the equivalent of $8.50/gallon here (America should brace itself for rates at this price in due course ... it will happen!) so any vehicle needs to be yielding the best mpg figures which can be achieved! The Cayenne Hybrid is a nice try to woo consumers into thinking 24mpg is good. It's not! Diesel Peugeot Estates (Stationwagons) regularly return 45mpg and British road-speeds are higher than in the States. Diesel Range-Rovers which are probably closest to the Porsche image, will achieve at least 25mpg. Diesel cars emit lower CO2 than the equivalent Petrol/Gasoline models and produce greater mpg. If you want to save money on fuel & be kinder to the environment, America needs to look to the British way & European models like Honda, Peugeot, Renault, VW, Skoda etc and move over to Diesel power in the first instance; drive manual (shift-stick) rather than automatics; be less heavy-footed on the pedal; reduce unecessary weight carried within the vehicle; seek models of 1900cc (less than 2ltr engine size) and move away from the big, SUV-type vehicles. Don't think that Biofuels will be the next big thing. The world has insufficient land mass and freshwater to produce enough biocrops for fuel AND crops for foods. America defintely needs to 'wake up & smell reality'!
Reply
George B 7:43PM (4/23/2008)
"Petrol (Gasoline) or Diesel costs the equivalent of $8.50/gallon here (America should brace itself for rates at this price in due course ... it will happen!) so any vehicle needs to be yielding the best mpg figures which can be achieved!"
Paul, both diesel cars and low-sulfur diesel fuel are relatively expensive in the United States compared to their gasoline equivalent. Checked dallasgasprices.com and the best nearby diesel price today is $4.05 per gallon vs. $3.36 per gallon for regular unleaded gasoline. In addition to the higher diesel fuel cost, diesel cars and trucks cost thousands of dollars more than their gasoline powered equivalents.
Rational Americans consumers respond to changes in the total cost of car ownership which include large fixed costs for the vehicle and insurance that used to totally dwarf the marginal extra cost for fuel. Until recently, a pickup truck or SUV with low insurance rates and high resale value cost less to own than than many fuel efficient subcompacts.
Reply