The cityZenn - Dream Electric Car
Till now we have battery operated cars or hybrid cars. Hybrid cars reduce your gas consumption and air pollution. If you are using battery operated cars, you can’t drive on the spur of a moment. You have to PLAN and recharge the batteries. Otherwise your vehicle will carry you for a few miles and then it will stop and you will be stuck somewhere you don’t want to. You also have to compromise on the size, space and speed of the car. And since you are using a storage device in the car, you have to fear and respect that too.
Can’t we have a car that goes 250 miles on a single charge? Can’t we recharge it in five minutes? And drive it at 80 M.P.H.? Don’t dismiss it as wishful thinking! A Toronto-based firm ZENN Motors promises such a highway capable model in near future with no gasoline engine, no batteries, and no emissions!
The following video gives an overview of a current ZENN Car (not the cityZENN)
YouTube: Zenn Car | More Videos
“cityZENN” model will use “Electrical Energy Storage Units” (EESUs), containing ultracapacitors, also known as supercapacitors. These capacitors use barium tinanate coated with aluminum oxide and glass which will help in conquering the disadvantages of chemical batteries. They are more powerful than basic capacitors. Ultracapacitors can absorb power or send a charge faster than chemical batteries because of activated carbon at their cores. They also score over durability and have better tolerance for extreme temperatures.
Safety is a serious concern for vehicles whether powered by petrol, diesel, batteries or ultracapacitors. The storage devices shouldn’t burst into flames under extreme conditions. The new ultracapacitors are supposed to instantly discharge to the ground in case of a crash.
Many have cast doubts over “cityZENN” claims and apprehensive about its deliverables but the analysts and researchers are hesitant to dismiss the possibility of “cityZENN” entirely. Joel Schindall, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor who is using nanotechnology to improve ultracapacitors, says “I don’t doubt that they have built a device on a small scale that does store the amounts of energy they are talking about. I just don’t know if they can manage the process of scaling it up … for commercial applications.”
Related posts:
- New Battery Technology for Hybrid Vehicles
- Nanotech Batteries - A New Energy Future
- New Battery Technology Charges in Seconds
- Energy Storage for Hybrid Vehicles
- Air-fueled Battery for Electric Cars
Interested in writing news articles about alternative energy? Contact Us
July 6th, 2008
Yes,
You don’t any longer have the safe feeling that 10 to 25 gallons of a high vapor pressure explosive gives you.
And you’ll have to contend with the 500 to 1600 mile driving range that an EEStor energy unit will give you.
Or, if GM’s gift to Exxon (the patent for the large format Lithium Hydride Battery) is allowed to happen you’ll only have 250 to 300 mile range.
Yes, its a dangerous breed of golf cart.
July 18th, 2008
Electric cars are not emission free cars. The batteries must be charged and that requires energy that is generated somewhere. That somewhere could be using dirty coal fired power stations, hydro electricity that interferes with the environment and nuclear reactors that produce dangerous waste products that finish up being disposed in someone’s land. Such emissions problem can only improve when electricity is mostly generated by emission free means.
July 31st, 2008
Wayne, not true. Electric cars WILL improve emissions, even if all the power was from coal burning plants. Thankfully its not, but much of it is, and what isn’t is oil or nuclear, very little is renewable and earth friendly. BUT Coal and oil burning power plants are still WAY more efficient and producing power than internal combustion engines. And even after the losses through power generation, transmission, and battery efficiency it is STILL more efficient to drive off the grid then off the pump.
As for your beef with nuclear power your points are true but out of scale. Compared to all other forms of non-renewable energy Nuclear is the most environmental friendly. It produces no green house gases, and if only outdated legislation could be lifted to allow plants to re-process used fuel rods it would have 99% less nuclear waste. Even without repossessing fuel Nuclear power is the cleanest forum of generating electricity that can be widely scaled, and probably our only hope for stopping green house gas emission until wide spread renewable power sources(solar, geothermal, tidal and wind)can be implemented on a large enough scale.
If we could replace all the coal plants with nuclear ones mother earth would be much better off.
August 4th, 2008
I can’t stand the person who’s always posting that “Electric cars are not emissions free” - Hey dude… stop looking at the glass-half-empty side of life and start seeing a shift in peoples use of alternative vehicles (which will get charged in the night time when it’s cheaper and currently wasted!).
This is a peoples movement. The government has too much easy tax money coming in with every gallon of gasoline… so we must be positive and start helping people to use emissions free vehicles! Once we are a strong enough movement, we can cause change in our government to create clean power plants like Solar-Thermal and Wind Power Plants… But we must first start by creating a large grassroots community of like minded people. If you keep pointing out negatives (which there will always be) and at-the-same-time, not praise people for doing the right thing (which is all you’re doing)…
August 5th, 2008
George, you missed my point. The claim is that the electric car is emissions free. A reasonable interpretation of “emissions free” means no emissions which neither you nor Chris has demonstrated in your posts.
On a lighter note, I once heard that “emissions free” means the pollutants are discharged elswhere rather than where the car is run.
The electric car virtues expressed in these posts indicate that we can expect a lowering of emissions. I will not dispute that, but I can’t stand the person who claims “no emissions” to beef up the claim of how good the vehicle is when what they really mean is “less or improved emissions”. Promote the vehicle for what it is (a reduced emissions vehicle, etc.) and on merits that can be demonstrated.
August 23rd, 2008
We have solar electric panels. I also have a pool that uses half of the electricity for the pump. If I fill the pool, I will have enough “emission free” electricity to power an electric car. I’m considering doing this when the right car comes out.
September 16th, 2008
The cityZenn will cost between $25,000 and $30,000. Here is a great article on a cost comparison between a cityZenn and a regular combustion vehicle. http://www.zenncarblog.com/zenn-car/how-much-will-the-cityzenn-zenn-car-cost-me-a-cost-comparison
October 7th, 2008
I had solar panels installed on my roof and so far they have generated an excess of 200 kw’s. When the electric/solar/wind? generated car of my dreams is available at a reasonable price I’m selling my HYundai and will be a bit freer of the internal combustion engine. How many kw’s does it take to charge a battery? Is my dream car available? 20′000-30,000 If so I’m ready to buy.
Thanks
October 7th, 2008
Don:
Long answer:
A good benchmark on electric cars is 250 Watt*hours per mile. The actual energy consumption will very depending on the cars weight, driving conditions and speed. For example driving 70 MPH on level ground with no wind might take 250 Wh per mile while driving 40 in the same conditions would put you around 150Wh. The first Estor power systems are suppose to have a 15Kwatt*Hour capacity. Assuming a charging efficiency off 80% and you would need to supply 18KWh of power to the car to fully charge. Now your probably not going to fully charge the car every day. How large is your Solar system in Watts and how many hours of direct sunlight do they get on average? If you have like a 1.5Kw system that gets 6 hours of sun a day you’d be able to charge the car about half the way every day. Of course that leaves no power for your house. It Total charge the car every day your probably looking at more like a 3 Kw system with an average of 6 hours good sunlight a day. Thats 3 KW’s to your house, not from the PV panels, since you will have some loss through your inverter and PV control system.
Short Answer:
Not yet. Unless your PV system is one of the very high end 4.5-5 Kw systems you wouldn’t be guaranteed to be able to completely charge a 15KWh battery system every day and still power your house. Thats not to say getting 20-30% of your driving power from the Sun wouldn’t be an admirable achievement.
November 29th, 2008
Be prepared for the major vehicle manufactures to do everything that they can to obstruct a viable electric vehicle.
Dave (UK)
December 25th, 2008
I love to see that such observant and intelligent people are watching such key and/or potentially momentous issues like these. You all have managed to spell it all out for those viewers who may not be as savvy you. Oh, and Dave, I completely agree… there has been resistance to just about every movement in history, and sadly this one probably won’t be any different. *sigh* Never the less, we must keep supporting what progress is made.
January 15th, 2009
How can they make the claim of ZERO EMISSIONS without charging it completely by solar power? How much COAL are they burning for a four hour charge? They are just taking the emissions out of the city by burning it off site at the power plant!
THIS IS NOT ZERO EMISSIONS; Prepare to fool your conscience if you drive electric charges with anything OTHER than complete SOLAR charge. But Solar panels also pollute the air FAR more harmful chemicals during manufacturing and extraction of the materials.
The NET global benefit is ZERO; the only answer, honestly, at the moment is to STOP DRIVING.
January 17th, 2009
Wizardtom, first off, the vehicle itself has no emissions, how you get your power is your own business. Second, no one is going to just stop driving, so this is a pretty good alternative. Third your not “just taking the emissions out of the city.” You are significantly reducing those emissions. Large power generation is way more efficient then ICE power generated by a cars engine. As fare as solar being the only zero emission power source, try again. Ever heard of Nuclear power, that has virtually no emissions. Or hydro power. Add these the the already more emission efficient power generation of a central station and you have a NET global benefit that is certainly not ZERO, and is in fact very significant.
January 24th, 2009
Wizardtom either works for big oil or wants a Flintstones car. This is an incredible achievement and is possibly the most environmentally friendly invention since the hydro dam. I think everyone should get on board.