"e-Jeepney" - The electric powered jeepney

[kinyo]

Po said the testing will be done for a month so that the viability, emission testing, health, environment, and economic concerns on the vehicle will be determined before buying of additional units can be determined.

[ghosthunter]

^^^ might be referring to the driver's "silent but deadly" emissions.

[marg]

My project proposal would involve the University of the Philippines with their private jeepney service and to improve it to E-jeeps through a grant from maybe greenpeace, ADB, WB or such. I would need a survey for the number of Jeeps in the area, the location of stations, routes and stops. The time they would operate and the average income of the drivers.

I would have to devise a plan to pay back the loan... Luckily the gov. also provides free E-jeep rides... Can the city of Q.C. support my project to place a e-charging station in U.P., or maybe even think up of routes inside the school once mechanism are in place... I'm sure I want to do this and I only have 2 months. I've done P.proposals before and I could finish it in a week, ++ with calculations for activities and their benchmarks.

Ya, while you're paying back the loan, don't forget that by the 15th month, every e-jeepney needs a new P160,000 battery pack.

[romski123]

http://green.yahoo.com/blog/guest_bl...-vehicles.html

Seven myths about electric vehicles

By Jim Motavalli, Mother Nature Network

Seven myths about electric vehicles


Related topics: Science, Electric Cars, Cars
More from Guest Bloggers blog



25 votes
Buzz up! 2diggsdigg


(Photo: Beautiful Earth)


Everything you thought you knew about plug-in hybrids and battery cars is probably wrong. And it's a good idea to get acquainted with the facts because your next car (or maybe the one after that) will likely be electric: a hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or battery car.

That’s where the auto industry is going, where the world is going. By this time next year, the picture will be dramatically different, with a host of consumer choices, from the ***y Fisker Karma and the versatile Volt to the ultra-cool Coda.

Here's an abriged version of Plug-In America’s top 12 EV myths...

Myth 1: EVs don’t have enough range. You'll be stranded when you run out of electricity.

FACT: Americans drive an average of 40 miles per day, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Most new battery electrics have a range of at least double that and can be charged at any ordinary electrical outlet (120V) or publicly accessible station with a faster charger.

At present, all it takes is planning for EV owners, who can travel up to 120 miles on a single charge, to use their cars on heavy travel days.


Myth 2: EVs are good for short city trips only.


FACT: Consumers have owned and driven EVs for seven years or more and regularly use them for trips of up to 120 miles.


Myth 3: The charging stations must be built before people will adopt EVs.

FACT: Most charging will be done at home, so public charging isn’t a necessity.

And at least seven companies are competing to dominate the public-charging-station market, and a trade group representing the nation’s electric utilities has pledged to “aggressively” create the infrastructure to support “full-scale commercialization and deployment” of plug-ins.


Myth 4: EVs take too long to charge.


FACT: The most convenient place and time to charge is at home while you sleep. Even using the slowest 120-volt outlet, the car can be left to charge overnight, producing about 40 miles of range.

Most new battery cars and plug-in hybrids will charge from 240-volt outlets providing double or triple the charge in the same amount of time. Charging stations that reduce charging time even more are beginning to appear.


Myth 5: Plug-ins are too expensive for market penetration.

FACT: New technologies are typically costly. Remember when cell phones and DVDs were introduced? Also, the government stimulus package includes a $2,500 to $7,500 tax credit for EVs and PHEVs. Some states are considering additional incentives ($5,000 in California and Texas).

And EVs require almost no maintenance or repair: No oil or filter changes, no tune-ups, no smog checks.


Myth 6: Batteries will cost $15,000 to replace after only a few years.

FACT: The battery is the priciest part of a plug-in, but costs will drop as production increases. The auto industry is expected to be purchasing up to $25 billion in advanced batteries annually by 2015. Some car makers plan to lease their batteries, so replacement won’t be an issue.


Myth 7: EVs just replace the tailpipe with a smokestack.


FACT: Even today, with 52 percent of U.S. electricity generated by coal-fired power plants, plug-in cars reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and most other pollutants compared with conventional gas or hybrid vehicles. Plug-ins can run on renewable electricity from sources such as the sun or wind.

Plug-in hybrids will reduce greenhouse gases and other emissions, even if the source of electricity is mostly coal, a 2007 study by the Electric Power Research Institute and NRDC showed.


Interested in learning more? Here are the facts behind five more myths including whether batteries are bad for the environment or the grid will crash if millions of EVs are plugged in at once.


Jim Motavalli is the transportation blogger for the Mother Nature Network where a version of this post first appeared.

[ghosthunter]

A few things about the e-jeepney project:

1. range is only 65 kilometers (with new, fully charged batteries). It is also important to note that as the batteries age (during regular use) the range of the ejeepney drops well below the claim 65 km range.

2. recharging takes at least 8 hours.

3. powered by lead acid batteries.

4. slow top speed.

5. recharging power still taken from the Meralco power grid (what happened to the garbage fueled recharging station?)

6. Each ejeepney costs P650,000. A quarter is battery cost alone. Does not include cost of the vital recharging system.

7. A standard jeepney costs around the same. A multicab is much cheaper.

8. lead acid batteries storage capacity decline with each recharge cycle. Deep cycle batteries have a maximum cycle life of around 500 cycles if done properly. Less than optimum recharge (wrong recharging rate) or discharge conditions (example: drained too much) drastically shortens battery life. So assuming one cycle per day and operated daily, the batteries will need to be replaced in 1 year and five months time.

9. E-jeepney owner/operator will need to have P170,000 in his savings to purchase a new battery pack to replace the worn out old battery-pack in his 1.5 year old e-jeepney.

10. makati route e-jeepneys have yet to prove they are economically self-sustaining for public transport operators since they are still financed by foreign NGOs in their day-to-day operations.

11. SM MOA, one of the first to adapt electric powered "trams" to ferry people around the commercial complex have ditched the electric powered trams and replaced them with petrol power trams instead. Ever wondered what made one of the most success business owner change his mind about electric transport around his flagship commercial complex?

12. In the end, when taken as a whole, it will cost more to operate than a regular jeepney.

13. e-jeepney published "press-kits" are deceptive when they state the operating cost of the e-jeepney because they do not include the cost of operating the re-charging "station" nor the cost of the expensive replacement battery-pack into the calculations.

[hein]

Myth 1: EVs don’t have enough range. You'll be stranded when you run out of electricity.

FACT: Americans drive an average of 40 miles per day, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Most new battery electrics have a range of at least double that and can be charged at any ordinary electrical outlet (120V) or publicly accessible station with a faster charger.

At present, all it takes is planning for EV owners, who can travel up to 120 miles on a single charge, to use their cars on heavy travel days.

Myth 2: EVs are good for short city trips only.

FACT: Consumers have owned and driven EVs for seven years or more and regularly use them for trips of up to 120 miles.

You are deceiving people, Mr. Rommel Juan. The range of your low-tech e-jeepney is just 40 miles.

Let us be more honest please.

[jpradapena]

hello po,

That was very informative, thanks! I already visited U.P. and they currently have 3 E-Jeeps being tested at the Nat. Transp. Bldg.

Well question ko lg po (sorry if na ulit), ano yung mga indicators that shows na viable yung application ng e-jeep sa isang city... is there already a national program for the adoption of e-jeeps for testing in their cities?

regarding the battery life... I think Motolite can think of ways to make this cheaper. charging stations.. studies are still lacking, coordination between cities on how to properly integrate other forms of transport systems in the current one.

I may change my project to the study of the e-jeeps application in Marikina city, since they already have a community with good living conditions; I enjoy seeing people on bikes, affordable alternative transports being used.

critique and opinion po,

ty

[ghosthunter]

Well question ko lg po (sorry if na ulit), ano yung mga indicators that shows na viable yung application ng e-jeep sa isang city...

Simple accounting of the operating costs of the ejeeps including the purchase prices, ROI period, replacements parts (including battery), etc.

Then compare those figures with operating a standard jeepney or multicab public transport.

Try getting an estimate of the amount of money the drivers of jeepneys usually earn at the end of the day. Can the e-jeepney (charging the same fare as jeepneys) make the same or more money for the drivers/operators?

You will also have to consider the limitations of the e-jeepney like maximum driving range in a day, long recharging time between uses, replacement battery pack after a year & half of operating, etc.

is there already a national program for the adoption of e-jeeps for testing in their cities?

From what I know, it is still based on the local government's decision if to adopt the ejeep or not.

There is no national program to promote it. I think that is the best because each local city would have it's own special needs and requirements.

regarding the battery life... I think Motolite can think of ways to make this cheaper.

The problem is not "cheaper".

The problem is making a deep cycle battery that is cheaper yet lasts long.

The basic construction of a deep cycle battery is similar to what is found in car batteries but with one big difference, the plates are much thicker. This means more lead is needed. If less lead is used, it will be cheaper but also less charge is stored.

Motolite might make it temporarily cheaper by reducing their profit margins but that is not sustainable in the long run, especially when more electric vehicles are on the road. Would you want to be stuck with a locally made electric car in where you can not afford to buy a replacement battery pack because the only (local) manufacturer decided it will not support the price discounting anymore.

You have to remember Motolite is a company that needs to profit from the sales of their products. They are not a charity.

charging stations.. studies are still lacking,...

Studies are not just lacking... they are absent.

Who pays for the electricity? Where will the electricity be sourced? Who maintains the recharging stations?

These are basic questions yet absent in the ejeepney press-kits. Clearly overlooked by overzealous product promoters and politicians alike.

[fourtheboys96]

is short, do a life cycle analysis and an economic analysis. do the economic analysis that is being done by environmental economists and not the one used by business and financial people.

[uls]

hindi ba ejeepneys are supposed to replace diesel PUJs?

that was the original plan of the ejeepney makers diba?

to convince PUJ operators to replace their diesel PUJs with ejeepneys

that plan didnt turn out well

if for every ejeepney sold, one diesel PUJ is taken off the road, i guess that would be considered a success (for environmentalists)

but thing is, for every ejeepney sold, no diesel PUJ is taken off the road

so what exactly is the environmental impact of ejeepneys?

somebody pls enlighten me

[fourtheboys96]

if for every ejeepney sold, one diesel PUJ is taken off the road, i guess that would be considered a success (for environmentalists)

but thing is, for every ejeepney sold, no diesel PUJ is taken off the road

so what exactly is the environmental impact of ejeepneys?

somebody pls enlighten me

this one of the misconceptions with regards to e-jeepneys.

although it doesn't have tailpipe emission, it doesnt necessarily mean it is good for the environment. why? some would argue that the emissions are just transferred from the tailpipe to some other place (most probably in coal-fired power plants). now, the said argument may or may not hold water depending on how clean we produce our electricity.

another one is the battery. we all know batteries have toxic substances in it. the critical factor as already mentioned before is the overall lifespan and mileage of one full charge. if batteries don't last long enough and we don't have the right facilities to recycle or dispose it, we may have adverse environmental impact from its usage.

this has been mentioned before. we can compare the amount of energy used in transporting X number of passengers for T amount of time for conventional jeeps and e-jeepneys. other benefits and costs can be valued for comparison. e-jeepneys should have lower energy requirement, higher benefit and/or lower cost than conventional jeepneys for it to be worth considering.

[uls]

this one of the misconceptions with regards to e-jeepneys.

although it doesn't have tailpipe emission, it doesnt necessarily mean it is good for the environment. why? some would argue that the emissions are just transferred from the tailpipe to some other place (most probably in coal-fired power plants). now, the said argument may or may not hold water depending on how clean we produce our electricity.

another one is the battery. we all know batteries have toxic substances in it. the critical factor as already mentioned before is the overall lifespan and mileage of one full charge. if batteries don't last long enough and we don't have the right facilities to recycle or dispose it, we may have adverse environmental impact from its usage.

this has been mentioned before. we can compare the amount of energy used in transporting X number of passengers for T amount of time for conventional jeeps and e-jeepneys. other benefits and costs can be valued for comparison. e-jeepneys should have lower energy requirement, higher benefit and/or lower cost than conventional jeepneys for it to be worth considering.

i know what your saying and i'd like to add more to what you said

but first, environmentalists (like the ejeepney promoter here in the forum) only talk about how "green" ejeepneys are coz they have zero emissions

how about what goes into producing ejeepneys?

all the parts that make up the ejeepneys

they have to be made somewhere, shipped from somewhere

if the parts are made in China, then factories in China have to use energy and materials to produce those parts (China factories are powered by electricity produced by coal-fired power plants)

the parts have to be shipped here inside container vans loaded on ocean freighters which burn fossil fuel

pag dating dito sa Manila port, the parts have to be delivered to the ejeepney assembly plant using diesel trucks

then the energy used to assemble the ejeepneys (Meralco power) isnt all green (not all Meralco power comes from hydroelectric plants)

then the batteries... we all know how toxic lead acid batteries are

then they gotta paint the ejeepneys

is the paint produced in "green" paint factories?

a lot of things that go into producing ejeepneys arent green

[ghosthunter]

then the batteries... we all know how toxic lead acid batteries are

Even when recycled, using an improper recycling process releases lead into the air & water.

Given the Philippines does not have a certified "green" battery recycling facility, this would simply add to the toxic problems we already have.

[uls]

so basically, what i'm saying is --

maybe the environment is better off if the ejeepney wasnt produced at all

the ejeepney isnt reducing the carbon footprint of other carbon emitters

buti sana if for the number of ejeepneys sold, an equivalent number of carbon emitters (PUJs) are eliminated

but no carbon emitters are being eliminated

and they keep producing more ejeepneys

the production of ejeepneys has its own carbon footprint

so dagdag carbon pa yan without carbon reduction somewhere else

[Mguy]

My take on the e-jeepneys:



Its future:



I hope I'm wrong about this. The way this project is to get going is that there would be interest from the operators and drivers alike. The government cannot force feed them this vehicle wherein they know that it will not be capable of doing what an ordinary jeepney can do. It has to be viable by a long margin against the jeepney.

Probably city governments will subsidize them at first, just like what Makati does. But when they start breaking down and the local government won't give money to have them fixed, the e-jeepney is going the way of the dodo.

[ghosthunter]

My take on the e-jeepneys:

..... It has to be viable by a long margin against the jeepney.

Probably city governments will subsidize them at first, just like what Makati does. But when they start breaking down and the local government won't give money to have them fixed, the e-jeepney is going the way of the dodo.

Exactly my point. The e-jeepney cannot be financed by the local government or by some non-profit agency forever.

The e-jeepney needs to be economically viable to stand on it's own financially to be even considered a "successful" project.

Yet here we have so many people arguing without brains.

[fourtheboys96]

i know what your saying and i'd like to add more to what you said

but first, environmentalists (like the ejeepney promoter here in the forum) only talk about how "green" ejeepneys are coz they have zero emissions

how about what goes into producing ejeepneys?

all the parts that make up the ejeepneys

they have to be made somewhere, shipped from somewhere

if the parts are made in China, then factories in China have to use energy and materials to produce those parts (China factories are powered by electricity produced by coal-fired power plants)

the parts have to be shipped here inside container vans loaded on ocean freighters which burn fossil fuel

pag dating dito sa Manila port, the parts have to be delivered to the ejeepney assembly plant using diesel trucks

then the energy used to assemble the ejeepneys (Meralco power) isnt all green (not all Meralco power comes from hydroelectric plants)

then the batteries... we all know how toxic lead acid batteries are

then they gotta paint the ejeepneys

is the paint produced in "green" paint factories?

a lot of things that go into producing ejeepneys arent green

the last part of my post will answer you questions. plus the life cycle analysis i've mentioned prior to that.

i am not counting e-jeepneys out as possible solution to some of our pollution problem. we just need to study more of the e-jeepneys we have in our country. lots of studies really because it is not only the environment that will be affected. as what GH also mentioned, the capability to provide effective transportation should also be factored in.

[ghosthunter]

the last part of my post will answer you questions. plus the life cycle analysis i've mentioned prior to that.

i am not counting e-jeepneys out as possible solution to some of our pollution problem. we just need to study more of the e-jeepneys we have in our country. lots of studies really because it is not only the environment that will be affected. as what GH also mentioned, the capability to provide effective transportation should also be factored in.

As it stands, I am counting out e-jeepneys as a feasible mass transport system in our cities. It has too many short-comings of a technology used not ready for it's intended application.

In a two year life cycle, it would probably cost more to purchase, run and maintain than a similar capacity conventional diesel powered jeepney.

The promoters & marketeers of the e-jeepney are just using the so-called "green" credentials of an electric vehicle as the only selling point of the e-jeepney. They omit specific facts from getting to the public that would give the people a more balanced view of the ejeepney. They also overstate certain facts as well.

Those facts have already been mentioned in this thread time and time again so I need not to mention them.

More than anything, the ejeepney is more of a political campaign toy than a serious public mass transport system.

[fourtheboys96]

As it stands, I am counting out e-jeepneys as a feasible mass transport system in our cities. It has too many short-comings of a technology used not ready for it's intended application.

In a two year life cycle, it would probably cost more to purchase, run and maintain than a similar capacity conventional diesel powered jeepney.

The promoters & marketeers of the e-jeepney are just using the so-called "green" credentials of an electric vehicle as the only selling point of the e-jeepney. They omit specific facts from getting to the public that would give the people a more balanced view of the ejeepney. They also overstate certain facts as well.

Those facts have already been mentioned in this thread time and time again so I need not to mention them.

More than anything, the ejeepney is more of a political campaign toy than a serious public mass transport system.

i tend to agree. we must focus on improving our mass transportation system and really plan where we put our businesses/offices, residences etc (zoning).

[Mguy]

i tend to agree. we must focus on improving our mass transportation system and really plan where we put our businesses/offices, residences etc (zoning).

I always thought that the best method is an overhaul of all jeepney and bus lines in the metro. Take for example, on certain parts of Shaw Blvd, there are about 6-8 lines plying a part of that road. Tendency is that they all get bottled up.

Redraw all the routes, with consultation with the transport groups. Reduce the number of jeepneys or bus plying lines where the MRT/LRT/LRT 2 lines are existing. Jeepneys will be designated for short trips while buses for long ones. Identify stops, etc.

This could be plotted within 6 months and implemented partially by route over a span of a year.