Upload
shavonne-nichols
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Automated Electronic Transportation
Transforming America's Transportation Future
8.25.2008
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Utah State University
Texas A&M University
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
California Energy Commission
Energy Intersection Inc.
Argonne National Laboratory
Austin Energy
University of California PATH Program
John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA)
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
AET Collaboration Contributing Organizations
AET VisionWe envision a systematic transition to a national automated electric transportation system that dramatically improves America’s mobility and energy security. The system will:
a) provide energy directly to vehicles from electrified highways—dramatically reducing their use of petroleum and the emission of CO2, and
b) automate control of the vehicles while on the highways, reducing congestion, improving safety, freeing the driver’s time, and providing new in-vehicle services.
The system will extend, not replace, our current highway system—vehicles capable of traveling on electrified automated highways will also be able to drive as conventional vehicles on conventional roadways.
Transportation Issues Addressed by AET
• Oil dependence– 2/3 oil consumed for transportation– 60% of oil is imported
• Vehicle emissions – 66% of all Carbon Monoxide– 38% of all Nitrogen Oxides– 26% of all Volatile Organic Compounds– 30% of all Carbon Dioxide
• Safety – Over 40,000 traffic fatalities per year– Over 3 million injured– Annual cost more than $200 billion
• Congestion – estimated annual cost of $64 billion
• Oil invulnerability– Use domestic energy sources for transportation– Imported oil competes with other options
• No vehicle emissions– Point source emissions only– Far fewer to manage– Easier to manage than moving sources
• Congestion – Expected capacity per lane from 2 to 4 times that of conventional highways
• Safety through automation– Driver and environmental problems cause 95% of the crashes – Automation can eliminate human driver problems of inattentiveness, impairment,
misperception and misjudgement that lead to most crashes– Automation can see through all weather conditions
Two Key AET Elements
1. Energy carrier switch
from oil to electricity
from the vehicle to the road
2. Control switch
from humans to automated systems
Simultaneously address 4 transportation issues.
Possible Transition Path to AET
Implementation PlanDevelopment of consensus roadmap (2009-10)
First seed funding for architecture definition and enabling research (2010)
National commitment of substantial research funding to: Resolve key technical obstacles Address institutional and political challenges Define staged deployment strategy Design system and national network
Implement first specialized, limited-scale applications (goods movement)
National decision on large-scale deployment
Identified ChallengesTechnical feasibility Wireless power transfer to moving vehicles Automated driving technology (fault handling)
Public and private sector roles in funding, development and operation of system
Public and industry acceptance of such a large change and its associated up-front costs
Network effects (large scale needed to gain large benefits)
Liability
Electric utility questions: How will they serve and price the new loads? Dynamics of power flows (bidirectional)
Roadmap OutlineGoals
Critical System Requirements
Major Challenges
RDD&D Pathways
Financial, Policy, and Organizational Pathways
Timeline
Resource Needs
Desired Roadmap OutcomesConcise, cohesive reportDescribing vision and pathways to get thereConsensus-orientedInclusive of technology, deployment, regional
optionsDelineating initial technology, financial, policy,
and organizational paths forward Aggressive but realistic goals / timeline
Industry / Government / University Participation
National RDD&D program plan
Potential StakeholdersIndustry (must eventually adopt ownership role) Utilities Infrastructure providers System Integrators Component and technology providers including vehicle OEM’s Investors
Government DOE EERE; DOT FHWA; EPA; DOC; DOI; DOD; DHS State Agencies National Labs (DOE; DOT; DOD; etc.)
Research Universities
Transportation and environmental interest groups
For More InformationSee our report at:
http://energylab.usu.edu
The Federal Transportation Landscape
Interdependent, but jurisdictionally-separated policies and R&D pathways
R&D pathways stove-piped
No current pathway attempts to address all challenges simultaneously…..AET does
DOT DOE EPA
Safety & Congestion
EnergyEfficiency
Air Quality& otherenviron-mentalresiduals
Federal Government
DOD
DHS
DOI
DOC
DOA
The fundamental paradigm hasn’t changed appreciably for a century.
Paradigm: Self-propelled vehicles driven on conventional roadways by humans will
be the primary method of land transportation for the next 50 years.
Question: Is this “systems-level” paradigm, from which all major transportation R&D pathways are derived, still valid?
Electrification problematic in self-propelled vehicles
Batteries Limited range and excessive weight may be looking for “unobtainium” because it requires less institutional risk
than transformational systems-level change
Hydrogen Losses incurred during catalytic cracking of hydrocarbons are not offset
by efficiency of H2 fuel cells
Electrolysis, distribution, storage and conversion of H2 incurs heavy energy losses relative to using electricity directly
On-board storage highly problematic (-423ºF liquid; 90,000 psi gas; 100 kilos/gal equivalent w/ metal hydride
Does not leverage electricity’s value as energy carrier Electricity 100 X more efficient as energy carrier than vehicles Revisiting in-motion energy transfer a viable option
The technical challenges are considerable but dramatic advancements have been made in recent years:
• Electricity distribution / delivery- smart grid
• Safe and reliable power transfer- near-field inductive, resonance, & direct
• Vehicle power electronics
• Control systems & automation
Example: Preliminary Results of ORNL Evanescent Power Transfer
Initial examination of evanescent wave power transfer (loosely coupled magnetic resonance) funded by lab “seed money”
Demonstrated 300W power transfer with 82% efficiency
Analysis indicates efficiencies in low to mid-90% range at distances of 1 ft.
Efficiency is fairly constant over frequency; power transfer very peaked