New Airstream self powered trailer

[John in Santa Cruz]

Originally Posted by marsman

...This problem is hugely compounded in a tow vehicle or even working pickup truck which is relegated to a daily average of <100 miles and carries an 800 mile battery around - TALK ABOUT A HUGE WASTE OF ENERGY! all that weight being lugged around.

800 lbs? My F250 diesel longbed laughs at your 800 lbs. its got a ~ 6800 lb curb weight, 8800 lb GVWR, and something like 12500 lb hitch tow rating, even more with a fifth wheel. and if you upgrade the springs to F350, the payload goes up 1000 lbs without any chassis, wheel, axles or brake changes (other than final drive, a F350 7.3 probably has a higher final drive reduction ratio than my f250, this means its slower but can pull more).

Heck a full tank of diesel is 266 lbs, not counting the tank. My truck has the old school Ford 7.3L Powerstroke diesel which probably weighs 800 lbs on its own, because the gas versions of my truck have way better payloads.

[HABBERDABBER]

That's what I see. He wrote..... 800 miles, NOT 800 lbs.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by JeffreyG

Conceptually, all hydrogen vehicle concepts for GHG reduction anticipate that the hydrogen will have to be manufactured with electrolysis, and the power will have to be solar / wind.


Steam reforming of methane is the current approach because it is cheaper and people looking for hydrogen right now are using it in processes, not trying to use it as a replacement fuel with no GHG impact.

Not quite. Another scheme, which is currently getting significant attention here in Alberta, is to produce hydrogen from methane but capture the carbon dioxide at the production facility and sequester it, for an ideally zero-carbon-emitting but not sustainable hydrogen fuel source. It is trendy to call this "blue" hydrogen production, versus "grey" (from methane without carbon capture) and "green" (from water with renewable zero-GHG energy source).

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by Selkirk

I recall watching one of Escape’s recent YouTube videos where Karl discusses this very concept….and he speculated that some form of electric assist technology may very well be commonplace within the towable RV industry in the future. So yes, it might very well be an option available on a 2030-something model ETI trailer.

It does seem possible... most likely using a complete powered chassis from Lippert, rather than anything designed and assembled in-house by Escape.

Originally Posted by Selkirk

However, add that same $20k propulsion assist system to a $30-$50K trailer, and the price jump is going to be rather significant for the portion of the market where most consumers (and Escape owners) reside.

I agree. This is a good example of interesting technology colliding with economic reality.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by JeffreyG

If H2 is to be the energy storage media of choice (as opposed to batteries, for instance) then it will be in liquid form.


Liquid H2 is bulky relative to diesel or gasoline, but not prohibitively so. It's less bulky / massive than batteries, for example. We can see a path to fitting adequate range in H2 onto long haul trucks, for example.


Gazing at my crystal ball, I think personal vehicles, urban buses, school buses, and most trucks will all just become BEV. I don't see a universal hydrogen system.



But that doesn't mean we won't have hydrogen fueled trucks in some remote applications, plus airliners.

A problem with cryogenic fuels (liquid hydrogen or liquified natural gas) is that a refrigeration system required to keep them cold enough is not practical, so fuel tanks are just insulated and eventually the fuel vaporizes and vents (it "boils off"). A small loss this way is tolerable in a scheduled commercial application where the fuel is loaded then immediately used, but parking an RV with half a tank of fuel and having it disappear while camped or parked at home would be unacceptable. So liquid is necessary for rockets, probably necessary for aircraft (that's the Airbus plan), and beneficial for trains and long-haul trucks, but probably not viable for personal vehicles including cars (all current production hydrogen fuel cell cars use compressed hydrogen gas) and RVs.

I agree that batteries make more sense than hydrogen from any source for most applications.

[bjsmitty]

I would settle for an aftermarket retrofit. Since my husband passed away, I have taken out 2 taillights while trying to back up my trailer without a spotter.

[skyfree]

Back to the proposed Airstream...I don't think it makes sense to put a motor in a travel trailer for many reasons. The main one being most electric vehicles already have very powerful electric motors and don't need additional horsepower. They need battery capacity.

A better engineering solution would be to put the range extender battery in the trailer with a universal electrical connection to the tow vehicle. This would not have to be a super high current connection -- just something adequate enough to provide about 2-3kw of charging to the main vehicle battery pack while connected.

This would require cooperation between auto manufacturers to come up with an acceptable standard though, which is very unlikely. Maybe someday.

[marsman]

The idea of putting the battery in the trailer with some proper heavy electrical hookup to the tow vehicle does make sense; one thing I haven't seen discussed but I have noted on YouTube videos of people towing with their electrical vehicles is the complexity of parking with their trailer in the generally limited space provided around most modern charging stations.

On top of that there would be some requirement or special long cabling required to hook up a tow vehicle and hook up a trailer simultaneously at a charging station...not to mention some really irate TESLERATI waiting around for space at their charging station!

Gasoline here in Sudbury, Ontario this morning priced out at $1.61 per liter or about $6.46 per gallon. WOW I need an electric pickup truck with 600 mile towing range....Thinking of turning my gas-powered F150 into a nice garden box

[alanerickson]

Overhead lines. Eliminates the massive battery requirements. You can charge and move at the same time. Interstates only and then you have a normal battery for when you get off the interstate.

https://youtu.be/_3P_S7pL7Yg

WSJ did an article in November 2021 on the cost of EV. If you can charge at home there is a cost advantage, but if you have to use an EV supercharger on the road then you actually pay ~ 30 percent MORE per mile compared to gas.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-muc...ne-11636626601

[JeffreyG]

Originally Posted by alanerickson

Overhead lines. Eliminates the massive battery requirements. You can charge and move at the same time. Interstates only and then you have a normal battery for when you get off the interstate.

A catenary seems plausible for trucks and buses. One could install them only on main, cross country interstate highways and create a large marketplace where BEV semi-trucks would become practical because the truck would only need to carry enough battery power to get to and from the main interstate.


Harder to picture for cars, mainly because the catenary itself is going to need to be at least 13' 6" high to clear all the trucks. Your basic passenger car would need a stupid tall connector.


But then thinking about this Airstream proposal, an intermediate cool idea would be a catenary for trucks and buses, and then RV trailers could reach up to it to power the BEV tow vehicle on long haul. That solves the BEV problem in tow vehicle cars we discussed earlier in this thread.

[Brian B-P]

Overhead power lines for vehicles are powered all of the time (they need to be for any number of vehicles anywhere on the line), so there's no way to wait to turn on the power until communication is established and payment is arranged. So this would be free energy for all users? A controlled-access set of lanes with billing like a toll road? Automated video tolling along the entire length of the powered lane, with the video system assessing whether or not the vehicle was connected? Even if a toll can be arranged, would every vehicle pull the same amount of power (charging up the battery on smaller vehicles, running down the battery on a vehicle too heavy to maintain speed on the allowed power) - and how would that be regulated - or would small RVs subsidize heavy trucks? None of these are issues on the systems which actually use track or overhead power systems, because they're not open to the public.

It's an interesting idea, but the practical barriers would be immense.

[JeffreyG]

Those roads everyone is driving on now cost insane amounts of money to build and maintain despite no mechanism to ensure each user pays exactly, to the penny, for their own usage.

I don't see why the energy in a catenary would need to be any different.

Sometimes people get very hung up on certain details of new technolgy (Lithium mining will be bad for the environment!) while ignoring that a lot of status quo is exactly the same (Oil mining, shipping, spilling, and refining are bad for the environment!).

How can we pay to power all these trucks on the highway? Probably the same way we built the highway in the first place.

[alanerickson]

Originally Posted by Brian B-P

It's an interesting idea, but the practical barriers would be immense.

Same technology as what you use to say if you should be in the HOV lane or not except it has a power meter tied to it and security checks to make sure everything is valid. It's really not that hard. Communication both ways and if you don't have all the valid credentials you get "flagged". It's currently a 1-5 year federal felony to steal power, and it would seem that the penalties could already be in place to discourage any sort of "hacking" to bypass systems.

[gbaglo]

And, then there is the visual pollution.

[John in Santa Cruz]

I can see some folks driving around with their trolly/catenary e-car and then charging their tesla, then using that power in reverse to power their home or whatever.

but I doubt this will ever happen. trains only need a single overhead as they use the tracks for ground. I grew up in San Francisco which still has a large fleet of trolley busses that use dual trolleys, and I remember wire derailments being a daily occurance, driver having to hop out, and reseat one or the other trolley pickup back on the appropriate wire. Doing this on freeways? Chaos!

[alanerickson]

I was the one that originally posted the overhead lines, but I don't see it happening either. Not pretty, but it does solve the long haul problem for heavy loads.

[Mike G]

Nice looking concept trailer, but I'll believe it when I see it being produced. Quite a bit of 'blue sky' in those videos.



I didn't see any air conditioner on that Estream.

[HABBERDABBER]

Originally Posted by alanerickson

I was the one that originally posted the overhead lines, but I don't see it happening either. Not pretty, but it does solve the long haul problem for heavy loads.

What if you put the electrical lines embedded into the roadbed? No dorky overhead masts needed to get a connection, no unsightly power lines to mar the view. What could go wrong?
Do the energy transfer with induction.....we charge our cell phones that way, don't we?

Clearer thinking folks than me can set me straight, I trust, with this notion.
But..........is something like this possible? Probable?

And when do I get my jetpack?

[ColoradoSwany]

I want an autonomous self-driving trailer. Just program the sucker for my destination and meet it there. I’ll take my combo car/plane.

[HABBERDABBER]

Originally Posted by ColoradoSwany

I want an autonomous self-driving trailer. Just program the sucker for my destination and meet it there. I’ll take my combo car/plane.

Not before I get warp drive to get somewhere muy pronto, and of course
transfiguration to beam me there even quicker. That road time behind the wheel is tiring, often numbingly so. Beam me there...Scotty.
Yeah, in my dreams.....or on TV, maybe.