Products

Jimbo & the Dual Flush Retrofit Kit

June 25, 2010 – 6:30 am

Leigh Curry of Curry Conduit contacted Green Landlady about testing out the Dual Flush Retrofit Kit.  Basically the kit is installed in the tank of an existing single flush toilet and turns it into - as the name states - a dual flush model.  Personally I have plenty of experience with dual flush toilets, as I have a number of them installed in my home.  However, I still have a few regular 1.6 gpf toilets (the standard in California) in my older units, so I was eager to give the device a try.

The Dual Flush Retrofit Kit parts Jimbo installed.

Leigh assured me that it was a do-it-yourself type of job, but after opening the package and realistically assessing my handyman skills, I called my plumber.

Jimbo loves me.  I’ve put his kids through college.  His reaction to my request was, “Why are you always the first one to try new things?”  Heartwarming.

Installation of the Dual Flush Retrofit Kit does require that you remove the toilet tank.  Novices should be warned that the process can be tricky.  Because the nuts and bolts can become rusted together, you “risk cracking the porcelain”, as my plumber put it.  Fortunately, no Sawzall* was required and Jimbo was able to remove the tank quickly and easily.

As Jimbo pulled out Dual Flush Retrofit Kit parts and grumbled about hating to read directions, he remarked that, “Whoever made this really thought this out”.  The installation wasn’t particularly difficult and an experienced maintenance man could, with practice, probably install it in thirty minutes.  Jimbo spent a fair amount of time bolting the tank to the bowl because the bolts are very long and the gaskets are squishier than he’s used to, but he did note that the Dual Flush Retrofit Kit was “over-designed” to insure against leaks.

The level of water in the tank can be adjusted and Jimbo and I spent a fair amount of time peering into the tank after every test flush to make sure we had the right amount of water flowing with each flush.

I’m happy to report the Dual Flush Retrofit Kit works well and I am now flapper free!  Since most toilet flappers develop leaks at some point over their brief lifetimes, I feel pretty lucky to have dispensed with that worry.  In terms of the installation or subsequent use, there were no glitches and I am looking forward to lower water bills for many years to come.  Thank you to Leigh of Curry Conduit for providing a test model.  Jimbo was curious about what the kit cost and when I told him $20-30, plus shipping and handling, he said, “It’s a pretty good product for the price.”

Of course, that’s assuming you don’t crack your toilet tank during installation!  Test your bolts, if they seem to be stuck in place by mineral deposits or rust, then the Dual Flush Retrofit Kit may not be for you.  If you find yourself with rusty bolts and have an older toilet that uses more than 1.6gpf, your best bet is to upgrade to a new high efficiency toilet and there may be rebates available.

On the other hand, if your toilets are in fairly good shape then consider saving yourself some water, money and worry about flappers — remember 1 in 10 flappers are leaking as we speak.  Are you flushing money down the drain?

* Sawzall: (1) A reciprocating saw often used by do-it-yourselfers.

Other Articles of Interest:

By Kimberly Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Tech Rescue for Multifamily Crisis Situations

June 24, 2010 – 6:20 am

As FEMA, the financial meltdown and BP have demonstrated so well, it is always a good idea to have a well-thought out and technologically viable response plan before a crisis… and that includes multifamily.

Conor Lee became interested in this issue when he produced the Apartment Internet Marketing (AIM) Conference and observed crisis situations unfold on several multifamily companies. It became clear to him that most firms were not as prepared for a crisis as they would have liked to believe. Lee developed and launched ResidentC to provide multifamily with an affordable way to manage crisis situations both to improve safety and preserve financial stability.

Resident C is a web-based service that provides 2-way mass communication which can be very useful for crisis and risk management.  It can be used at the site level and/or by regional and corporate staff, making it invaluable for larger, national companies. What does it do? The technology allows management to initiate communication with residents either through the Internet or a mobile phone within seconds. Resident C’s powerful platform then permits contact with residents, staff, emergency crews and the media through SMS (text), landlines, voice mail, mobile phones, email, social media or any other programmed website .

The platform is a simple to use web-interface designed for owners who manage a large number of residents, but the system may also be practical for smaller operators.  Below are a few examples when or where the platform might be launched for greater resident safety:

  • Beachfront apartments in tsunami areas
  • Northern areas where winter weather can freeze pipes
  • Planned or emergency interruptions to water or sewer service
  • Areas that get windstorms, ice storms, freezing rain or blizzards
  • Fires in the subject or adjoining buildings
  • People problems – domestic violence, people with mental issues, criminals on or near the property
  • Next-of-kin contacts for seniors, dormitory or apartment residents (in the case of illness, flu epidemics, accident or death)
  • Tenant inconveniences like broken pipes inside/outside the building
  • Tracking and communicating with residents trapped in a building
  • Dormitories on campus, daycamps and campgrounds where children are in large groups and there is an emergency
  • Checking on residents in all kinds of situations when physical access may not be possible or wise

The ResidentC system allows for an escalating alert level too.  If there is a tornado warning but it becomes a hit-your-cellar broadcast, this can be managed immediately.  When there is good communication during any sort of event, injuries and property damage might also be minimized. As ResidentC can be controlled remotely, off-site staff can manage communications with residents if on-site staff is busy.

Lee (pictured right) does recommend management communication be standardized and approved as part of the set-up of the platform.  This ensures that template messages are available, always appropriate and consistent. This also eliminates the concern that staff might inadvertently notify someone of information protected by privacy laws or send a miscommunication that might later instigate a legal action against the property owner.

Emergency messages do not need to contain great detail and it is suggested they be more along the the lines of this message:

“This is an emergency. Please evacuate your apartment by the fire escape. For further information call Happy Apartments Management at 800-we-r-safe.”

Lee states that beyond resident safety, risk mitigation is a primary goal of the system and a concern for most clients.  He also indicated that liability insurance premiums may be lowered with the use of risk management platforms and fully defined emergency policies and procedures.

The current interface does have a feature that allows posting on the property portal, as well as polling capacity to allow residents to respond by pressing a key.  For example, when asked a question such as, “Are you safe now?”, the caller would be instructed to,  ”Please press 1 for yes and 2 for no.”  This polling feature allows management (or emergency personnel) to communicate before, during and after an incident.  Once residents are encouraged to use the system – as easy as using the internet, a landline or mobile phone - they may be more inclined to report suspicious activity or potential property hazards too.

The greatest benefit of the system, however, is its 30 second timing. A full blast out can hit all channels simultaneously, including the social media sites, or an individual blast can be programmed only to make robo calls, send an email, post on media sites or send a text message. Conor does warn managers not to overdo it with the SMS and voice features.  He cautions that residents would prefer management keep those messages to a minimum - a few per month maximum -  but tenants will appreciate getting important information via email.

What’s next for ResidentC? In the next few months they will launch a new version of the software which will aid in marketing and promotion and streamline inter-company communication. These new features should be valuable to any size operator:

  • Marketing features to increase drive-by leads
  • Automating service requests by phone
  • Different pricing for regular (non-crisis) resident communication
  • Automated conference call features that patch staff into a bridge line
  • Advanced risk management features to further reduce insurance costs

The monthly cost of the system for high-end users is around $100, based on the number of units. However, a smaller landlord weighing the cost against the benefits might also look at staff time.  Could the property be better managed with the use of this communication platform?  Does the property’s particular geographic area experience many emergency weather events? Has there been an emergency in which 2-way communication would have made a difference in resident welfare? Everyone will answer differently, of course, but small or large, every property manager needs to have a solid emergency plan.

For information on the system, please contact Conor Lee, ResidentC Founder and CEO, at 415-742-1033 or visit the website, www.ResidentC.com. Have you been in a crisis situation? Have you been in a situation when this interface would have been useful? How did your management team handle a crisis or emergency situation? Were you endangered or were conventional methods sufficient to protect you and other residents? Comment below or send us an email.

Other Articles of Interest:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Philips Newest LED: WOW!

May 13, 2010 – 1:12 pm

Philips' Wonder LED

LED with CFLs in foreground

When people talk about the number twenty-five, I think about things like mortgages, roof life and how much I enjoyed my middle-twenties.  However, the latest association I have made with this number belongs to Philips‘ newest - and the world’s most powerful – light-emitting diode, dubbed the Wonder LED by the press.

This is the first LED designed to replace a 60 watt incandescent lamp by simply screwing into the existing fixture. It has also been designed to emit a similar soft white light to appeal to consumers’ tastes. Once the price becomes competitive – there were no indications how much these would cost when marketed – they will certainly give our grown-up CFLs a run for their money.
Today’s compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) last ten times longer than incandescents, reduce energy consumption by 75% and the cost is within the acceptable’ range for the average, energy-conscious, American consumer. The previous issue of buzzing has been solved by replacing the magnetic ballast with an electronic one.  Also, although turning CFLs on and off frequently might shorten their life, the energy efficiency remains unchanged. In fact, the simple act of switching out incandescents to CFLS (or LEDs) has a pretty profound affect. According to Philips’ website:
“Changing a light bulb does make a difference. Worldwide, lighting consumes 19% of electricity. Every incandescent lamp we replace with an ENERGY STAR®–qualified bulb saves approximately 75% in energy consumption. They can last up to 10 times as long as traditional incandescents, so resources are also conserved in manufacturing, transportation and building maintenance.

Conserving energy through this simple act creates ripples affecting our community, nation and the entire earth. We’re reducing the pressure to build new power plants and generating less waste for our landfills. And most important of all, we’re cutting the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming.”

Candidly, reading that last passage increases all my endorphins for the day. Like most energy-aware people, I use CFLs at home. I don’t find this a problem, but they do  have one drawback: the need to be separately recycled becuase there are minute amounts of mercury used in their technology.  Although a bit inconvenient, this is less of a problem now that retailers have CFL recycling at their stores - the trendsetters were Ikea and Home Depot.
CFLs  have been more popular than LEDs for two reasons.  They are priced within a typical consumer acceptance range and our incandescents could be easily switched out and the new lamp switched in.  LEDs may still be in the pricey range, but this new bulb will switch in easily now too.  CFL acceptance was fueled by rebates from local utilities and government policies.  With the lack of adequate consumer education about LEDs, the cost barrier may be with us until the government, the manufacturers and the sustainability community work in concert to make switch-outs economically feasible.
Philip’s new LED reduces energy use by 80% (besting CFLs’ 75% reduction) and not only works with dimmers (a style issue that some could not get past with the old CFLs) but it lasts twenty-five times longer! This is truly an incredible achievement and probably the best news for the built environment in a very long time.  Philips uses remote phosphorous technology and light distribution design in the new LED’s manufacture.  Of course, if you understand that terminology, you probably don’t need to be reading this post.  When can you get one?  Probably by Hannukah or at least Christmas, as they are expected to become available in the fourth quarter of 2010.
Clearly there’s only one group I can think of that might not be thrilled.  In fact, I offer my deepest sympathies to orthopedists everywhere.  After all, if we only need to change those lightbulbs every 50 years, who’s going to fall off a ladder?

Other Articles of Interest:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Dreading summer? Install a Solar Attic Fan.

April 17, 2010 – 7:36 am

In an effort to reduce summer energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions, a newly conscientious breed of residents is learning to live with the thermostat set a few degrees higher.

Using proven strategies like opening windows to create cross-ventilation and installing ceiling fans, they manage to cool down their apartments enough to make it tolerable.  Not using air-conditioning also saves money.

A comfortable interior temperature can be more easily achieved by ventilating and cooling the attic and the roof, as heat rises.  Installing a solar roof fan is a relatively inexpensive one-time expense that will draw trapped air up and out of the building.

The fan is operated by the solar panel attached to it and operates without building electricity.  Several attic fan models are available at building supply houses and a wide variety can be found here: Shop at Amazon.com! Fans start at around $200  for the simplest Solar Panel (Solar Panel Attic Fan Model 4) and the most expensive commercially available model was on sale the day I searched at Amazon for $529.00 (Sunrise Solar Flat Base 1050 CFM Attic Fan).  Obviously the advantage of a bigger fan is that it will draw more hot air out of the attic faster than the less powerful versions, but they all work efficiently.

Installation of a solar fan is done on top of the roof and requires no additional wiring.  The solar panel operates the fan by producing enough electricity to keep the fan blades spinning.

In a building in which utilities are paid by the residents, there isn’t a direct benefit for management.  Tenant comfort does have a indirect affect on net operating income (NOI), however.  Any successful effort to improve resident thermal comfort will have a corresponding beneficial effect on resident retention. Managers interested in these solar attic fans should also check with DSIRE and local utilities for possible rebates and/or tax incentives.

Other Articles of Interest:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments (2)

Endangered Species: California Wine & Dark Roofs

April 2, 2010 – 6:43 am

When Secretary of Energy, Stephen Chu, announced last year that the greatest threat to California’s agricultural industry was global warming, I never realized he was talking about wine.  The media was so busy digesting his brilliant suggestion that we all paint our roofs white, that evidently they missed his dire warnings about California.  Our greatest agricultural producer is entirely dependent on the Sierra Snowpack. Frighteningly, climate change predictions anticipate that 90% of this snowpack could disappear by the turn of the  century. And without water so will all those beautiful, fertile, sunny farms and vineyards.

As one of many attempts to address climate change,  all flat roofs in California since 2005 (mostly commercial and industrial) must be white. Although the newest regulations for sloping (mostly residential) roofs are prescriptive only, the California Energy Commission (CEC) certainly hopes by clarifying product and application standards for white and reflective roof coatings and materials that many of these surfaces will become ‘cool’ roofs as well.

My son, who lives in California, not only drinks wine but thinks white roofs are a great idea.  He sent me a brief email recently indicating that he would like to paint his roof white. “After all,” he wrote, “What could it cost?  $500?”

In the interest of the rest of the wine drinkers of America and the multifamily community, I decided to do a little investigative reporting. Let’s face it.  Lots of people talk about painting their roofs white, but do you know anybody who has actually done it?  We’d love to hear from you incidentally, if you have.

After speaking with Adam Gottlieb, the  charming spokesman for the California Energy Commision (CEC), I learned it is important to note that you can’t use  just  any old white paint.  Yes, we may call it paint, but these coatings are pretty complex.

Product: It appears the most active manufacturer of reflective roofing coatings is Hyperseal, Inc., a company that states their products are non-toxic, environmentally friendly and ”green”.  Shipping on their website was quoted at 1 to 2 days, so supply seems to be in balance with demand.  (No guarantees, of course, after this article is published.) Hyperseal, Inc. also produces the most popular roof coating product, Hyperglass Cool Top Coat.  This white paint-like coating is formulated for roofs and described as:

“A non-solvent, non-toxic, elastomeric coating that is specially formulated with high quality glass microspheres. The infusion of microspheres nearly doubles the reflective properties, as well as making the coating extremely durable, water resistant, and lighter than regular paints.”

Process: Building professionals will tell you the prep work is the most critical  element of any project and coating roofs with a rubberized glass- infused product that cures in 24 hours is no different.  The manufacturer’s instructions recommend:

  • Wash the roof with a tri-sodium phosphate solution and follow by rinsing with water
  • Wait for the surface to dry completely
  • Thin paint up to 15% with water (if needed) and always mix thoroughly.
  • Apply paint with a roller sprayer, trowel or brush. If spraying, use the largest tip compatible with the pump.

Candidly, I don’t even want to imagine how many times a sprayer would probably clog during application. My recommendation? Do not tackle this as a do-it-yourself project.  Save your hair and hire a professional who actually has specific training in these applications.  In other words, a specialist. Ka-ching, I know, but you won’t regret it later.  No building product produces its best and highest performance without proper application.

Cost Calculation A gallon of Hyperglass Top Coat ranges from $31.69 to $34.44 depending on whether you buy one can or a 50 gallon drum. Beyond the reflective benefits, the manufacturer also touts the product can produce up to a 10 year roof life extension. To calculate how much product will be needed, roofers often use a rule of thumb.  Assuming your building on the ground measures 90 x 150 (13,500 sq.ft.), this will be only about ¾ of your roof area because of the roof’s slope.

One gallon of Hyperglass Cool Top Coat covers 150 sq.ft. with a 5 mils coating (.005 inches), so a one-coat application would require 120 gallons for an 18,000 sq.ft. roof, or $2252.56 before sales tax and labor.  However, the manufacturer suggests a Hyperflex primer be applied and two coats of the Hyperglass top coat.  It is not an inexpensive proposition once labor and any permits are added. Then again, how much do you love California wines, romaine lettuce and Mexican salsa?

Payback: For an apartment complex the return on investment is not quite as concrete as it is for a single-family owner. The roof expense is borne by the property owner, but the savings on utilities will generally benefit the tenants.  Studies do show that white roofs reduce air conditioning costs by 20% during hot, sunny weather.  However, if a landlord is replacing a roof, it definitely makes sense to consider installing a ‘cool’ roof as white and light-colored reflective roofing materials only cost about 15% more to install than darker roofing materials.

As an additional incentive, ‘cool’ roofs can qualify for tax credits and other incentives if they can be certified under the DOE’s EnergyStar program.  No one is proposing we paint the Black Hills of Dakota white, but some states are getting pretty aggressive offering incentives.  Among these are Florida and Georgia and more and more utilities are offering rebates on white roofing materials.

Will it really make a difference even if everybody does it? A Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study estimated 20-25% of the urban environment consists of rooftops, with another 40% in other paved hardscapes. The researchers concluded that if we were able to whiten urban environments around the world, we could slow climate change by eleven years. As Climate change appears to be accelerating beyond what scientists had projected- particularly in the degradation of the white ice at the poles – even a small delay might give us time to create better solutions. Unfortunately, as the ‘white’ ice melts it creates more ‘dark’, heat-absorbing water.  Our arctic ice has 80-90% reflectivity, or albedo, and this solar reflectance  is a major factor in helping to cool the earth. White roofs cannot match this benefit, but any improvement in our heat islands – which some call cities - can help prevent even greater arctic ice loss.

Around the world countries like Brazil are beginning to incorporate white roofs into new developments. Overcoming aesthetic prejudice in America, however, is a tough sell. Candidly, we just don’t like how white roofs look. Another barrier is the issue consumers have with other white things like furniture, cars and clothes. These things simply do not stay white. We’ve learned from commercial installations that all it takes is five or six years without good maintenance and the white roof we didn’t like to begin with darkens to a dingy gray, or worse, develops nonsymmetrical streaking. Yeek!

In this writer’s opinion, manufacturers, utilities and municipalities need to solve this problem before the white roof will proliferate as thoroughly as it should.  Certainly our white roof prejudice is a superficial one but it may still take legal mandates, peer pressure and education to build meaningful acceptance and compliance.

Hence, there’s probably no need to add dark roofs to the endangered materials list. California vineyards are a different story.

Other Articles of Interest:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (4)

Vampire Power: Help Your Residents Unplug

March 25, 2010 – 7:30 am

The numbers were simply astronomical. AT&T announced that the vampire power[1] from the cell phone charger – the same one I disgracefully leave plugged in – could actually brew three to four million cups of coffee a day. Or less importantly, provide power to 24,000 homes. The math geek in anyone rebels, of course, but it turns out no one left out a decimal nor was it a mistake. The tiny footnote at the bottom of the press release explained:

1Energy saving calculations based on the following assumptions by AT&T: 277 million wireless users in U.S., minimum one phone per user; user charges device 3 to 4 times per week for 8 hours; 80% of users leave charger plugged in wall socket; average charger wastes 170 mW (0.17 watts) when idle.

When we think in terms of numbers, everybody over 9 has a cell phone these days.  The majority of us leave our chargers plugged in, admittedly very poor energy manners.  Beyond the shame, we need to think cumulatively.  Energy conservation is also like dieting.  It only works when we make the right small choices every day, even holidays.  No matter how tiny one’s personal contribution, it is the combination of all our little indulgences that continue to fuel global warming.

Our parents said things like, “Turn out the light!”  Now it’s our turn to lovingly command, “Unplug your charger, the microwave, the computer,” et cetera.

Fortunately, innovation may soon help us with our power-sloppy behaviors.  AT&T is using sensors to shut off power when a cell phone is not plugged into the charger. Their Dallas office has announced their newest product, the Zero Charger, will not create phantom loads.  In other words, unless your phone is plugged into the unit and actively charging, it will not draw even a miniscule amount of power off the grid. In fact, the AT&T Zero Charger has achieved a 5-star energy rating.  The Zero Charger will cost no more than the current one it replaces, which I find delightfully responsible on the part of AT&T. It goes on sale in May and will be available nationally at any AT&T retail outlet or online at www.wireless.att.com.

Before then we still have time to power a home or two merely by unplugging our chargers, and while we’re at it, turn off the power strips, unplug the Playstation… you get the gist.

Further reading:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

A Little EV History & Peek at the Future

March 5, 2010 – 6:30 am

Industry has been trying to build a good electric car since their invention in the 1830’s.  In the early 1900’s a basic electric car was around $1,000 and was built like a horse carriage. The majority sold in the United States were designed for the upper classes at a cost of around $3,000.  Compared to steam and gasoline-powered cars, they were clean and delightfully convenient. What fueled their popularity? The steam cars needed water more frequently than the electric cars needed to re-charge.  The gasoline cars required hand-cranking to start, manipulation of the gear shift and clutch and expelled foul odors and fumes.

Of course, when oil was discovered in Texas, this dropped the price of gasoline low enough so it became accessible to more people.  It may surprise you to know that during 1899 and 1900, electric vehicles were the most popular car in America.  Their peak production coincided in 1912 with the invention of the electric starter which replaced the cumbersome handcrank on the gasoline models.  By this time electric cars were almost double the price of gasoline-powered options. Their popularity faded and they were off the scene for about forty years.

However, in the 1960’s and 1970’s, concerns about foreign oil dependence and national security spurred the return of the EV.  The cars were really only suitable for inner-city or neighborhood driving, but they were popular for a time. The Department of Energy (DOE) offers this glimpse into that era from their website:

“Two companies were leaders in electric car production during this time. Sebring-Vanguard produced over 2,000 CitiCars. These cars had a top speed of 44 mph, a normal cruise speed of 38 mph and a range of 50 to 60 miles. The other company was Elcar Corporation which produced the Elcar. The Elcar had a top speed of 45 mph, a range of 60 miles and cost between $4,000 and $4,500.”

Fast forward to 1984 as that is the year I recall meeting with the principals of an electric car company in Southern California.  The inventors were struggling with the same types of battery issues we have today.  They optimistically estimated it would take another $500,000 to solve the problem. From today’s perspective, it seems they left off several decimal points.

Unfortunately, our big gas tanks and the loosening of supply spoiled us and we kept driving.  Americans’ false sense of entitlement kept big American cars as sacred as big American breasts. We wanted freedom, status, cheap operation, total access and we expected value and long life.

What Americans do not want is a dead battery. With our new found global consciousness, we may tolerate slow speeds, simplistic looks and expensive list prices, but only if EV manufacturers give us a comfort level with these new-fangled energy storage containers. As EV batteries average around $15,000 and their life is about 5 years (lithium-ion batteries can reach 10 years), consumers have a solid basis for concern. 

On the other hand, cars have lots of  body surface, or ’skin’ which presents new opportunities.  I have wondered why inventors can make a baseball hat powered by a solar-fan or take pictures of far off galaxies - equally cool in my estimation - yet no one had mounted or built solar panels onto car rooftops.  I also imagined solar panels would add weight, making EVs less efficient but then I decided this was merely an engineering problem.  Surprisingly, while I’d been drinking lattes and pondering the mysteries of EVs and solar tech, other people have actually been doing something.

Before I go on, I will warn you I will be talking about nanotechnology.  If you think its too far in the future to matter, please email Josh Chamot.  Josh is the media contact for the National Science Foundation and recently blogged that $80 billion dollars of commerce in 2010 will be enabled in the United States through Nanotechnology.  Of course, he also talked about Disneyland’s nanotech adventure in their amusement parks, but entertainment can be educational.  (It also sounds pretty cool.)

Nanotech is so out of our realm of experience that the way nanoparticles react is impossible for humans to predict.  Even scientists who work with this stuff every day warn there is no point in trying to use our intuition about ‘how things work’ in the nanosphere.  From our perspective, nanoparticles do crazy, unimaginable things.

To begin to understand nanotech, try to grasp the notion that light is ‘big’ and ‘heavy’ in the nanotech world.  As a matter of fact, nanoparticles are so small that the photons of light that illuminate objects (so that we can photograph them) are bigger than they are.  I am going to stop here, but if you are interested in the subject, NPR will link you to some beautiful images (renderings) and a new book, No Small Matter: Science on the Nanoscale.  The book is supposed to help it all make sense for the layperson.  If you read it and it does make sense to you, please let us know so we can all read it.

So what has this got to do with the subject of EVs?  In early February 2010 Impactlab.com reported that researchers from Imperial College (IC)London, UK., and Volvo Car Corporation, had partnered.  Using the IC’s nanotechnology patented as ‘Buckypaper’, they intend to develop a prototype material that will become the electric car’s bodywork and double as its battery.  Buckypaper is a thin sheet made from an aggregate of 500 carbon nanotubes.  A human hair is 50,000 times thicker than a carbon nanotube, by the way, so this visual may be a difficult one to conjure.  Here’s a cocktail party opener:  Buckypaper was named for Richard “Bucky” Buckminster, by all accounts a nice fellow from Milton, Massachusetts and a visionary American architect and futurist.  For the greenies reading this, he popularized terms like ’synergetics’.

Anyway, to summarize Buckypaper’s most stunning characteristics, this IC product is 10 times lighter and 500 times stronger than steel.  So if the weight of the batteries could be removed and an EV is 1000 pounds lighter and its shell 500 times stronger, that generation of electric vehicles might last for someone’s entire lifetime and beyond.

Megan Treacy reported on this technology in a post this week on EcoGeeks.org.  She described Buckypaper’s fantastic possibilities as follows:

The advantages of the material are pretty exciting.  Lithium-ion batteries are heavy and generate electricity through chemical reactions, which eventually wear down the batteries.  The [Buckypaper] carbon-polymer material is lightweight and doesn’t require chemical reactions, meaning both a longer life and quicker charge.

If used in the body of an EV, like the roof, door panels or trunk, in place of a lithium-ion battery, an EV could lose 990 pounds and travel faster and farther.  The more surface of the car the material covered, the more charge it could store.

The Volvo/Imperial College partnership hopes to replace batteries in the next ten years through this material, although it would seem that an EV would still need some way to store energy for its operation.  The partnership is scheduled to invest 3.4 million Euros (US$4.614 million) in their effort to revolutionize the electric vehicle  industry. I do have the utmost confidence they’ll figure it out.  After all, Imperial College has some of the greatest scientific minds in the world and Volvo has the profit incentive.

Photos courtesy of the Department of Energy.

If you enjoyed this article, you may want to read the rest of the series:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Electric Vehicle Hype, Tech & A Beauty Pageant

March 4, 2010 – 6:30 am

How about some pretty pictures of the 2010 and 2011 EVs and a look at some of the manufacturer’s performance claims?  If you are globally responsible but still long for that personal vehicle that is beautiful on the outside (i.e., near zero emissions on some models), this article is for you.

The BugE (designed and built by Blue Sky Design of Creswell, Oregon) is a three-wheeled, all electric single-person ride which was recently described at the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS) as “a head-turning, rocketship-esque design.  It has a 30-40 mile range and 50 mph top speed using lead acid batteries.”  Range is dependent on the speed driven, with longer distances at lower speeds.  (20 miles at 40 mph, 30 miles at 30 mph, 40 miles at 20 mph.)  The design team claims that the BugE goes ”25 miles on the energy it takes to run a dishwasher for one load, which works out to about 1 penny per mile” and that “the BugE is simply a Model T for the 21st century”.  The BugE website encourages patrons to ”think Global, act Local, one BugE at a time” and outlines their organization as a “grassroots community-based business network” – certainly an interesting and futuristic model.

The Nissan Leaf runs 100 miles on a single charge which takes seven hours, however, a 30-minute quick charge can get batteries up to an 80% level.  Nissan claims “excluding the cost of the batteries, [the Leaf] will cost no more to buy and run than a traditional gasoline-powered car.” As the batteries are a very expensive part of this purchase, this statement is a bit disingenuous.  According to allcarselectric.com, the lithium ion battery pack will cost somewhere between $10,000 and $24,000.  Most assume it will be $10,000, but Nissan has not publicly confirmed this and/or whether they will lease the battery separately from the rest of the car.  Is this to avoid issues with the 10 year battery warranty California now requires of EV manufacturers?  The batteries are recycled, which defrays the full cost of providing a new battery pack perhaps, but no one seems to have a 10-year battery yet.  It appears the launch is delayed until late 2011 or 2012.

Green Vehicles Triac has an 80 mph top speed and up to 100-mile range with plans to sell an optional capacity battery pack to boost range by 25%.  This zero-emissions vehicle is allowed in carpool lanes with only a single occupant.  Charging is quicker than many other EVs - 6 hours for a full charge – and the manufacturer says “it is as simple as plugging in a toaster”.

Ford Focus Electric is targeted to debut in 2011 and will be built at Ford Motors’ Michigan assembly complex for all sales in North America.  Many are familiar with the vehicle from the Jay Leno Show in which it has been a ‘guest’. It will be the company’s first battery-powered electric passenger vehicle and is targeted to get up to 100 miles per charge.

Charging the Ford Focus Electric’s lithium-ion batteries will take between six to eight hours using a 220V wall outlet or longer using a 110V outlet.  It will use an interface similar to the Ford Fusion Hybrid’s “SmartGauge” display, providing information on remaining vehicle range and battery charge.

The Revenge Verde Supercar is pretty darn fast and looks it.  Its looks also landed it as a finalist in the EyesOn Design Award, considered one of the highest achievements in the auto industry.  The manufacturer is also the first to offer both General Motors and Ford powertrains to the public.  The Revenge  has a 400hp Hp2g Hybrid 10 mpge engine and runs on E85 fuel combined with its own recharge energy.  The Revenge is capable of a 0-60 in 3.5 seconds and the manufacturer claims it can attain a top speed of over 200mph.  Based on the success and interest during and after its debut, the designers are working on a high performance model of the Revenge Supercar called the RSC Blade. Parts from several supercar manufacturers are used in these models, which makes their design perhaps that much more interesting.

The Chevy Volt is pushing a lot of other people to hit their development accelerator as General Motors intends a volume roll-out at year end in 2010 “with 10’s of thousands” planned for dealers during 2011. The Volt’s range on battery power alone is about 40 miles.  Extended range between charges utilizes gas to provide an estimated 300 additional miles.  GM places the car’s MPG at 230 and energy consumption at 25 kWh- about $2.75 – for every 100 miles.  The Volt is intended to charge in eight hours on a 120-volt/15-amp outlet or in around three hours on a 240-volt/30-amp outlet.

For those of you who have been wondering how the Volt will be marketed, there’s already a Chevy Volt Song in play.  Get ahead of the curve and forbid your children to listen to it now.  You can thank me later for this video link, which is the best advertisement for beefing up arts and music education I’ve seen in years. It also documents that cheerleading has way too much influence for the good of society. Anyway, I don’t think the Macarena has any worries about being displaced, but one never knows. (It’s only 2.22 minutes long; it just seems endless.)

The Mitsubishi i Miev is a battery-powered version of the Japanese “i” minicar, which was introduced in Japan in 2006. The i-MiEV uses advanced lithium-ion propulsion batteries, and the Japanese manufacturer has limited initial unit production to allow its engineers the opportunity to address any problems that may occur. I am not sure if this makes me feel more or less confident, but Japanese auto manufacturers are very disturbed by Toyota’s problems and want to practice caution and protect what’s left of their own brands.

The Tango is intended as a commuter car (it is 5″ narrower than some motorcycles) and provides the ability to maneuver through traffic when lane splitting is allowed. According to the manufacturer, “With over 1,000 ft-lbs of torque starting at zero rpm and a 600 kW (805 hp) motor controller, the Tango accelerates from 0-60 mph in under four seconds, finishes the standing 1/4 mile in about 12 seconds at over 100 mph, and can reach over 130 mph with no gear shifting.” Its manufacturer, Commuter Cars, also claims, “Its 39-inch wide, 60-inch tall two-to-a-lane commuter car grips and handles like a top sportscar and is among the quickest in Cobo Hall, owing to the combined 804-hp and 1000-lb-ft produced by two advanced DC electric motors, each of which spins a rear wheel.” (Read more:  motortrend.com.)

The Tango’s roll cage has 4 times more side protection bars than a large SUV and uses the same structure required for race cars traveling over 200mph. Its low center of gravity – with 2,000 lbs of battery and equipment under the floor – ballasts it to achieve the rollover threshold of a sports car.

Here’s a video link from a year ago in which a Tesla customer rides in a Tango EV to a U.S.-based Tesla dealership. One narrator has a lovely British accent, but please don’t watch unless you’re ready to buy an EV.  Glistening all spit-shined (not literally) in those immaculate dealer surroundings is like having ten of your favorite movie stars poised on bar stools calling out, “Pick me!”   Well, maybe not quite, but since auto manufacturers always have beautiful women pose and lounge around their cars I thought, I can cheapen myself too.

Speaking of Tesla, the Model S is a sedan intended to provide more of the traditional ride of the American family car. Its upgraded Signature Model S will not be introduced until 2011. It promises to be a lot more expensive but fancy with a limited number of vehicles. The Model S powertrain features a liquid-cooled, floor-mounted battery pack and a single-speed gearbox. The S standard sedan costs about $4 to fully charge, is pure electric, two times as efficient as hybrids, has the powertrain is built by an EV manufacturer. It also has a 17″ info-tainment touch-screen.

To me the Tesla Roadster and the Roadster Sport are just delicious.  An average lease of the the former is about $1638 a month, but how much is your planet worth to you?  (A few more terms may apply.)

So who should win the beauty pageant? Please make your vote with a comment below.

Photos courtesy of the North American International Auto Show 2010 (www.naias.com) and Nissan, Mitsubishi, General Motors, BugE, Tesla, Green Vehicles, Revenge Design, Inc. and Ford Motors.

If you enjoyed this article, you may want to read the rest of the series:

Here is a link to Inhabitat’s article on the new Porsche 918 Spider and another link to Ferrari’s Hybrid Supercar unveiled at the Geneva Auto Show this week – and yes, the links do have pictures.  Ooo La La!

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Ready to Plug In Your Tenant’s Leaf?

March 3, 2010 – 6:45 am

Certainly the use of electric cars provides an opportunity for a homeowner with a 120Volt outlet in the garage - and those with charging stations set up at work - but what about apartment residents?  According to National Geographic, many experts predict that 10% of our vehicle fleet will be some form of electric vehicle (EV), conversion or hybrid EV by 2013.  This may seem fast to some of us, but if they are right, we are not prepared.

The Department of Transportation estimated that there were 254.4 million registered passenger vehicles in the United States in 2007, so using 10% to do the math that means over 25 million vehicles are going to need outlets soon.  This won’t be something that only happens at work.

With the price tags of the two available EVs currently in the $100,000 range, this crowd may not live on your property at the moment, but an affordable EV will soon be in target range - if the Chevy Volt arrives at year-end as promised.  What is not easily discernible is the growing consumer interest in retrofits of existing vehicles.  Many car owners are converting their vehicles’ operation to electric and its impact on the EV market and demand for charging options could explode.

A recent article in the Multifamily Executive stated:

“Like GM, Ford also recommends having a dedicated 240-volt line to the garage, with 80 to 100 amps to meet the needs of two cars at 40 amps apiece. Ford will require the installation of a charge point, a box that is hard-wired into the home that contains the cord and ensures the cord isn’t charged unless it’s plugged into the car. Ford says it is working to make it as easy as possible on the customer, including providing an option to have the box installed upon purchasing its plug-in Focus.”

The utility companies will prefer re-charging during off-peak hours when electricity usage is lowest, but this requires infrastructure, so a bit of panic is seemingly permeating utility companies’ planning departments.  There are big benefits to setting up solar and wind-powered charging stations wherever possible, of course, but there is an advance start-up cost and continuing maintenance is required for best operation and life of these expensive systems.

One concern I don’t hear talked about is how building managers are going to manage security.  How do you protect your outdoor charging station from the opportunists who see expensive photovoltaic panels as easy money?  And what are those $10,000 to $24,000 electric vehicle batteries going to sell for once the EVs roll out in volume numbers? Okay, so that one is neither an issue nor solvable until we have enough unprincipled electric vehicles owners to support a black market. Managers may still want to site charging stations somewhere in plain sight and at least think about how to protect your tenants’ future big investments.

Although the focus is currently on new construction – San Francisco is adjusting its building codes and Portland, Oregon, as well - city planners are already setting up permitting requirements for existing buildings.  Manufacturers are pressing for quick upgrades to infrastructure as well.  Britta Gross is director of global energy systems and infrastructure commercialization for GM.  According to Multifamily Executive, she recommends dedicating at least a minimum number of spaces to EVs, with the best long term solution entailing the installation of a 240-volt outlet at each stall along with any appropriate upgraded transformers. Ford makes similar recommendations.

In Vancouver, B.C., a building code was recently implemented that requires all new multifamily buildings to wire 20% of their parking stalls for EVs.  Target electrical capacity, incidentally, is identified as the ability to accommodate the load of simultaneous charging of  all vehicles within the building’s electrical grid. New building wiring is reasonable in cost, but whether buildings codes or tenant demand drive them, retrofits on older buildings may place some drag on building operations’ budgets.

Initially there may be incentives for landlords – such as reduced or even free energy for charging and/or free installation of charging hook-ups - but these usually go only to the ‘pioneers’.  Even if mandates are slow in coming, your property will need to have its electrical system upgraded to include charging areas or you can expect to lose some portion of your EV population.  Without charging capability at home it will be too inconvenient for EV-owning tenants to bunk at your place.  Electric vehicles are fantastic, of course, but electricity is not free either.  (Peak usage loads make it more expensive for tenants to charge their EVs during normal business hours.)

There may be another safety issue with tenants who stay when you don’t provide needed services.  They may take matters into their own hands. While researching this article I kept having a recurring vision of a bunch of electrical extensions threaded out a row of apartment bedroom windows.  I hope I’m just being paranoid.

If you still doubt the pending impact of the new EVs during a recession with so many people reluctant to buy new cars, check with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  The final ruling is still being reviewed, but the EPA has new guidelines for measuring performance of electric vehicles.  This is currently expressed as miles per gallon (MPG) to provide a basis for comparison with gasoline or biofuel powered vehicles so don’t get confused by the ‘G’.  When GM announced on August 11th, 2009, that based on the proposed EPA guidelines the new Chevy Volt was expected to get up to 230 MPG, this got everybody’s attention.  Not only could we patriotically chant ‘buy US taxpayer supported cars’ , but we could all give it a ‘wow’ rating.

Nissan quickly followed up with claims that its Leaf model would get up to 367 MPG using the EPA’s new guidelines.  Of course, when you look at EVs it also makes sense to factor in (1) how far a full charge takes you before the gasoline-powered electric generator kicks in (30 to 40 miles in a non-luxury prototype), (2) the pollution caused by the many coal-fired plants that produce the electricity and (3) the life of those expensive batteries.  The environmental damage of EVs is still dwarfed by that of the gasoline-powered vehicles we drive.

California is one of the states encouraging EV rollouts, but in a thoughtful attempt to protect the consumer they will require a 10-year-warranty on all EV batteries.  (Lithium-ion batteries can have a 10 year life with some resale value for parts.)  As the technology to extend battery life beyond a solid five years is still somewhat sketchy, some manufacturers are meeting the regulation by including two expensive batteries rather than one.  Of course this raises the car prices by $15,000 plus, an unfortunate result. Some companies are intending to lease the batteries, which would sort of circumvent the issue and possibly the regulation as they would not be “sold”, but that will be quickly addressed by regulators if it’s not in the works already.

Everyone agrees innovation is needed to push the number of EV users to meet the EPA’s greenhouse gas reduction goals and mandates, and some plug-in groups are pressuring states to make regulations (like the 10-year battery requirement) more realistic.  Either the price of an EV must be low enough to reasonably compete, or gasoline must be high enough to drive the market away from conventional automobiles.  In any case, eventually you too will have a tenant bring home an electric vehicle (EV) or a retrofit and want you to ‘Mickey Mouse’ a charging accommodation.  While you still have time, you may want to develop a plan.

Should  you set up a charging station on your property?

The answer may need to be based on what’s going on where you live.  San Francisco is currently the most ‘plugged’ area in the country and has the full backing of city officials and residents.  As a testament to this support, converted hybrids can be found plugged into the public charging stations  across from City Hall.  Companies like Google (its principals are investors in the Tesla EVs) have added charging stations for their employees and executives, several of whom already have EVs and converted hybrids. Organizations like Plug In America, an EV advocacy group, have been delighted with the response of 20 U.S. cities in the planning stages of ‘electrifying’ their infrastructure, but it will not be easy.

When those first few electric vehicles (EV) show up, don’t assume your current garage facility or parking area has adequate power.  It may have the outlets, but can your electrical system handle the additional load?  Tenants can be notoriously cranky with unreliable infrastructure, particularly if your EV-charging induced brown-out fries their kids’ computer.  You also need to know what your local codes require or you may end up with a tenant problem and a big fat fine.

If your municipality or utility company doesn’t have guidelines yet, an initial resource for EV prospects is San Francisco’s Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E).  Their comprehensive guide for installing a charging station in a single-family residence includes relevant information for multifamily residences too.  If you understand that these new vehicles all use different types of technology, then it is easier to recognize their charging needs will be different as well. (Think leaded gasoline and unleaded here if you need a visual.)  Eventually one technology may dominate, but for now there are all kinds of technological combos in use.

What are the first steps for installing an EVSE charging station?

  • Determine what kind of Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) is used in the electric vehicle (EV) model (or conversion) and its electrical requirements.
  • Determine whether the EV requires conductive or inductive charging as they are installed differently and require different connectors.
  • Verify whether the vehicle’s battery requires ventilation during charging – this information is available from the dealer or vehicle manufacturer.
  • Have an electrical contractor evaluate your panel to see if there is sufficient capacity.  Most residents will want to use the quicker Level 2 EVSE charging method (3 as opposed to 8 hours for a full charge).
  • In an older building or single-family home, installing a Level 2 EVSE charging station may not be possible without an upgrade.
  • If you need a new electrical panel to provide sufficient capacity that is the expensive piece in setting up a standard charging station.
  • Adding a 240V 40 amp Level 2 charging circuit may be worth it if this tenant amenity has ‘legs’ with your particular resident mix and builds your Rep as a committed green manager.
  • Set up a separate meter initially for the EV charger or you will not qualify for the reduced energy costs generally offered to encourage EV facilities.
  • Some cities do not allow separate meters for single-family residences, but this should be less of a problem for an apartment building.
  • Make sure you will not need to store flammable or combustible materials in the charger area.
  • Do not attempt to do the work yourself unless you are an electrical contractor, as this could make you liable for all kinds of damages.
  • ‘Electrify’ a fifth of your units as a baseline by 2015, but if each of your units has two drivers with two vehicles, perhaps you will need to develop a more exacting plan.

Electrical Permits are Required

When your electrical contractor applies for the installation permit they will have to provide (a) an electrical panel schedule, (b) drawings with the wiring of the new branch circuit with meter, charger and all receptables, (c) document flow in cubic fee per minute and (d) any air inlet or outlet ventilation with vent fan specifications.  The contractor also has to document that there are no hazards and document where exactly the EVSE will be located.  It can be outside, although some equipment may need to be protected for longest life.  It is obviously wise to plan the plug-in and its cords away from anticipated foot traffic.

What are the costs of putting in a charging station?

If you are planning on solar power, companies like Sequoia Solar are out there and will give you a quote.  It won’t be cheap but there are financing plans and you could potentially charge your tenants for usage.  This could also change on whether or not your public utility, the Feds or your city decide to give out freebies, so do your homework.  Of course, a system that uses the existing municipal grid is less risky in a return on investment analysis and a lot cheaper initially, but does not present the same opportunity for ancillary income.

In a single family home an electrical contractor will charge $500 to $1,000 for an upgrade if the current panel has sufficient electrical capacity.  If not, tack on another $1,000 for the new electrical panel in an average single-family home.  A multi-family property may require a more extensive upgrade as it may have more than one charging station installation planned.  Luckily insurance carriers do not seem to be requiring a separate rider if there is an EVSE installed in a single-family home, but check with your insurance carrier just to be sure.  The rules may be different for multifamily housing as there may be more perceived liability, particularly with the 240Volt 30 and 40amp Level 2 charging circuits.  But whatever you decide, tenants in the near future will or will not move to your property based on whether or not they can charge their EVs.  If you decide to take the plunge early, market the heck out of your decision and build your green brand in every vacancy listing.

Photos courtesy of the North American International Auto Show.

If you enjoyed this article, you may want to read the rest of the series:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (1)

Myth-defying the Electric Car

March 2, 2010 – 6:39 am

None of us question the miracle of light when we flip a light switch, but biases that surround the electric car have been difficult to dislodge.  Part of this was the industry’s own fault.  Detroit has been reluctant to re-tool and dragged its feet when it came to investing in the technology.  Another part of the fault squarely belongs to the public.  We have been unwilling to support an electric vehicle unless it gave us exactly the same performance a gasoline-powered vehicle could.

In other words, we have all been pretty short-sighted in the past, so let’s look at the myths surrounding this technology and see what the science is.

Myth: Electric cars can only go 20 or 30 miles before their battery runs out.

False: Tesla’s all electric vehicles have ranges of 160, 230 and 300 miles, depending on the model.

People tend to confuse the technology of electric vehicles with hybrids.   Chevrolet’s new Volt scheduled for release in 2010/2011 will allow 40 miles in its fully electric battery mode but has a backup capacity of 300 additional miles with a gasoline-powered electric generator.  It is a competitor to a full EV, but it isn’t fully electric even if its general operation is.

Myth: Electric cars are unreliable in inclement weather.

False: If you were one of the lucky ones at the Carlton Hotel in Switzerland the weekend of February 13th and 14th, 2010, you would back me up here.  Tesla offered free test drives in the exclusive St. Moritz neighborhood and wowed the crowd.  To date 1000 roadsters have been delivered to 21 countries, including 30 in Switzerland, and they are oh-so-pretty.

The company’s press release touted the car’s ”all-weather durability and its solid performance in the rugged Alps”.  This may not seem like a hoard of vehicles coming to a neighborhood near you, but every major manufacturer recognizes this is the future and each is trying to bring an electric vehicle (EV) to market.  To keep it simple, the examples I use here are Tesla models, but there are many other manufacturers.

Myth: Slow acceleration makes electric cars a problem in traffic, on freeways and can hinder maneuverability in driving.

False: First of all, let’s stop thinking 20th Century here.  The Roadster has no tailpipe emissions, is twice as energy efficient as a hybrid and it  accelerates faster than a Porsche. EVs vary depending on their cost, but we are way past the old go-cart days.

Myth: Electric vehicles need more maintenance than gasoline-powered engines.

False: How can a vehicle that has no spark plugs, no fuel tank, no fuel pump, no tail pipe, etc., require more maintenance?  You will want to check the batteries once a month, add water when needed and keep the connections tight and clean.  Inflate your tires properly, maintain the brakes, clutch and suspension and that’s about it.  Depending on whether you buy a conversion or a new model, at about 80,000 miles you should change the brushes on the motor.

Myth: Electric Vehicles (EV) need special electrical outlets.

True: Although it consumes no gasoline, a Tesla roadster does require a plug to recharge.  The only thing special about the voltage, however, is where you want to plug it in.  Europe’s electrical voltage is different from ours, so their electric cars will plug into a 220volt/50hertz electrical outlet.  The U.S. electric grid – based on what we consider a safer system - has 110 volt/60hertz electricity.  Tesla provides a search site for charging stations in the United States which are 120volt and 208-240volt.  It might be noted here that the car can be fully or partially recharged with solar or wind power, which are completely renewable.

If your garage is wired, you will already have a 120volt plug and an 8-hour charge should do it.  At a commercial charging station at 240volt electricity, 3 hours would be sufficient for a full charge.  However, more than one word of caution for do-it-yourselfers about putting in a 240volt plug in your own garage.  This kind of voltage can be deadly and building codes require the plug be grounded. (I use a 240volt plug for a kiln and as a safety precaution turn off the electricity whenever I am handling the plug. It is probably overkill but it rains a lot where I live and water conducts electricity.)

Myth: Electric cars are delicate and should not be taken to places where they might under perform, like really high altitudes.

False: As the electric vehicles use no oxygen (imagine!), high or low altitude makes no difference in their operation.  On the other hand, any of you who have driven or lived on a higher plain know that downshifting is your only choice with a fossil-fuel vehicle.  Passing a truck on Alpine roads in a gas-guzzler of any kind – which does use oxygen –  is probably a death wish. Okay, so it could be a death wish in an EV as well, but you get my point.

Myth: These vehicles are way too expensive for the average family.

Half-truth: This depends on your definition of average.  The Tesla Roadster retails around 84,000 Euros (US$114,046) overseas before taxes but it is about $101,500 base price in the U.S. - if you can get on the waiting list.  The Telsa Model S, a sedan that seats seven, will retail for about $49,900.  Its higher performance Model S Signature has not been priced yet, but it is limited to 1000 vehicles, so it will probably have a 25% to 50% premium on top of that.

Myth: All EVs use some sort of backup fossil fuel.

False: Tesla’s promotional literature appeals to the net-zero crowd with this kind of copy:

“If you really want zero emissions, electric vehicles can be powered from 100 percent renewable energy. You even can generate your own energy to fuel them by installing solar panels that last for decades. Good luck trying to drill an oil well in your back yard!”

Granted it’s a bit snarky, but effective.  100% renewable and under your own control – not OPEC’s or Venezuela’s or Shell’s – has a a lot of appeal.  Other manufacturers attempting to make these EVs and hybrids more affordable are using many different combinations of technologies.  Eventually one will come out on top and then, as greater volume production is realized, the prices will drop.  Really.  In the early 1980’s a 20 MB personal computer was about $3500.  There was no family vacation that year, but we bought one for our business and we were never sorry.  Now these new EV prototypes are appealing, if expensive, in the same way.  Electric vehicles are poised to dominate the market as the cost of non-renewables will escalate.

Purchase price and environmental benefits aside, the other consideration is the electricity cost to run an EV.  The U.S. government will begin to aggressively tax non-renewables to discourage their use – which is already done all over Europe.  The electricity that costs a quarter of what gasoline would to fuel the same mileage today may be only a tenth of the cost in a decade.  Taking an average daily commute in a gasoline powered car at $5 a day, a commuter would save $900 annually with an EV.   Anyone with an EV will need to pay to charge it somewhere, so setting up charging stations within your apartment complex could be a significant profit center.  The earnings could also be used to justify setting up a solar photovoltaic system, which should last a long time with even decent maintenance and thrill your greener tenants even if they are paying for it.

The question is, will we get ahead of the curve or follow behind? If you manage a property for yourself or an employer, being grid ready will be important to you.  When you do add electrical charging outlets for your residents – which you eventually will have to do – you may want to set up a net-metering system.  This should not fall under rent control but if there is no regulation in your area – or interpretation is murky - writing up a green lease that covers this may be something to incorporate in your practices now.

Myth: You can build your own solar charging station at home .

True: Maybe you can, but I know I would definitely have to hire a professional.  Tesla’s CEO is also the Chairman at SolarCity, which makes one utter… how convenient… but to this I have neither argument nor criticism.  SolarCity has been a pioneer in leasing and financing home solar photovoltaic systems in the western states and Arizona.  As the cost of these systems has been a barrier to quicker adoption, I would like to see them and their competitors go national as quickly as they can.

Synergy is a key concept in sustainability.  If we would actually stop competing so heavily and share some technology for the good of the planet, we might get to a net-zero result faster.  I like partnerships like Tesla and SolarCity, particularly if  the two companies collaborate to produce inexpensive, long-term financing and eliminate the ’advance cost’ barrier.  If Americans try photovoltaics on their garage to charge their EVs, they may like them enough to consider converting their homes. Yes, the sun does not always shine and the wind does not always blow, but that’s why God made batteries.

Myth: The $7500 Federal Tax Credit applies to electric vehicles like the Tesla Roadster.

True: Because state and federal policy change frequently, Tesla has an EV Incentive link you can search on your own.  Until at least December 31, 2010, the Roadster and their other models currently qualify for the full $7500 federal tax credit.  There may also be local utility companies and municiple governments that will kick in a rebate or incentive.  Many employers will pay for parking for EVs and some cities allow free parking passes or at least special parking privileges, so do your research.  There may be other incentives you can get for setting up a solar-charging station as a business or a residence. Check with the Department of Energy (DOE) for updates, but the current policy for the EV tax credit in government-speak is:

“The minimum amount of the credit for qualified plug-in electric drive vehicles is $2,500 and the credit tops out at $7,500, depending on the battery capacity. To qualify, vehicles must be newly purchased, have four or more wheels, have a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 14,000 lbs, and draw propulsion using a battery with at least four kilowatt hours that can be recharged from an external source of electricity.  The full amount of the credit will be reduced with respect to a manufacturer’s vehicles after the manufacturer has sold at least 200,000 vehicles.  The credit will then phase out over a year. ”

Myth: Electric cars are ugly.

Totally false: These cars are not only quiet and fumeless, but when you gaze upon that Roadster or that Sport… admit it.  All you can think is nice ride.

Photos courtesy of the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS).

If you enjoyed this article, you may be interested in the rest of the series:

By Elizabeth Madrigal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (3)