A 48 volt dc tractor with an electric hydraulic loader would be an awesome mobile battery bank. Your solar array would have tonnes of extra generation in the summer. If I needed it or had any time or resources to devote to it I would look for an electric forklift for parts and controls and merge it with an older tractor with a dead engine. Separate dc hydraulics probably a pump on its own dc motor. Secondary bank for the house.
3 Likes
That is my thoughts exactly. I have a dead farmall H. I want to try first and then there is a pasquali 988 with a loader and dead motor as well here. But the pasquali has to work I need it in my barn to clean out as the d15 just canāt get into some of the corners and I have to shovel about 200 square feet of the barn by hand right now. So I am hoping as the funds become available to try to convert the old H as a first try. Then the pasquali or one of my case ingersoll 448 only because I might be able to sell the diesel ingersoll I have to fund the electric one I would build. Right now it all comes down to money. I am thinking small tractor as electric atleast to start for tedding and raking hay. I have looked at what it would take for my two bigger jobs and for now it would be more cost effective to find a 100hp gas tractor I could convert to wood. To handle the big jobs of mowing and baling. Maybe as the cost of batteries come down. I see JD is testing a 150 hp electric tractor right now that would be about 300 hp in diesel so big can be done but it takes a lot of batteries which is money.
1 Like
I think thatās a perfect fit scenario for a charcoal powered tractor. Lighter unit, easier to build and fire, and could fit hand in hand with a wood heat system. Look up Thierryās charcoal powered Oliver. Especially for vintage equipment that could bypass a whole bunch of carb issues.
Hmm if only someone had built oneā¦
Honestly look at Waynes tractor itās more along the lines you were talking about. Not sure where it is maybe someone could post a link.
1 Like
I did look at that just debated if I thought making charcoal was all that easy. Mostly because I simply have never seen it done. But I do like how simple the gasificer is and how you can pump exaust back into it.
I sort of wondered if you could just take a bucket of red hot coals out of a wood stove and dump them into a charcoal system as the fuel.
Moved to itās own thread. Carry onā¦
1 Like
The raw wood gasses are putting on way more āreal miles and wood usinā as Steve U would say. Itās hard to argue charcoal superiority, it doesnāt matter anyways. If I had farm woodlot and an outdoor boiler I wold run my whole world on charcoal. The build is supper easy the charcoal is not too much work but it never ends.
1 Like
The JD prototype info claimed āaround 4 hoursā of field time, then 3 hours to recharge. On brand new batteries. I could see using something with those performance figures, but for practical purposes it doesnāt come close, especially now that road time is significant, going from quarter to quarter. The price of such technology also is a question, I suspect it will be prohibitive.
The diesel consumption involved in farming efforts is at a level now to cause seasonal fuel supply issues. To convert that much energy use to electric boggles the mind. I think logistically itās well beyond our capabilites as a society.
70 years ago when the first gas tractors came across the Midwest I am sure the old timers where saying the same thing about not being able to make enough gas to power all those tractors.
Check out this comparison of electricity vs gas prices for car fuel. It shows that the price per mile is alot less on gas. I saw the same figures when I was part of the ev car club in college back in 95 we calculated that the electronic car we had with lead acid batteries fuel cost was the same as a gas car getting 100 mpg mile per mile traveled.
70 years ago the Ghawar field was just tar seeps presided over by Saudi nomads.
The practicalities of serious emulation of our FF vehicle system are far greater. Thereās always going to be difficulty comparing all the various external energy inputs. Just the simple fact of FF electric generation wipes out the advantages or hoped for efficiencies of electric battery powered transportation.
I hear gasoline has an energy density of 10,000 watt hours per kilogram, lithium batteries 250 watt hours. Considering the weight of the IC engine and transmission, the energy density disadvantage drops from a factor of 40 to a factor of 10, but clearly a serious performance penalty which canāt likely be overcome due to material properties.
In the case of Nova Scotia, a small Canadian province, it has been estimated by an expert in battery technology that transportation needs account for 50 gigawatt hours per day. He states that world lithium battery production last year was 60gw/hr.
I had read your thread before, excellent work, and a perfect example. I feel for the energy density, simplicity and clear āgreen-nessā, charcoal or wood gas conversions of gas tractors is probably impossible to beat. For small winter jobs in the cold north charcoal has to be the best.
I checked my source information, the figures were for the UK, where personal transportation wonāt be as significant, and the analysis was for hydrogen, but I assume that the energy penalties for either are similar. The estimation was that the UK electrical grid would have to be 60% larger. I apologize for my earlier mis-statement of many times larger generating capacity. The obstacles are still imposing.
Fellows.
Look back and you can see that all of your presentations, numbers and arguments split along a line of:
Doing this for ME and mine, to daily, practically, actually use. Bottom-Up approach.
Doing this for a replacement improvement for ALL others to use. Top-Down approach.
Once you decide which camp/goal set you want to live in it all just becomes so much easier.
D-I-Y will always be from the bottom up.
Top Down drumming; the Eliteās will always control you one way or the other.
J-I-C Steve Unruh
7 Likes
Hydrogen is a bit less efficient. Plus we gain about 15-20% efficiency from the grid flattening. In the US and Canada the grids are first gen, and need to be upgraded to help make them more reliable. which we have been working on since the 2003 northeast blackout.
The volume of EV components drives down prices for other things like Solar, and Utility scale systems which end up saving you money even if you donāt use it. Batteries are one of many examples. They have dropped in price by 50% in the last two years.
The real trick, is that instead of subsidizing two infrastructures, we are focusing on improving a single infrastructure that we know everyone needs.
We already have oil and the associated infrastructure, if we canāt hit every nook and cranny, it isnāt -that- important. In 20-30 years, we have a much better chance of hitting that target.
We donāt really gain anything with NG/hydrogen. The price of FFs move in unison. If oil goes to 100/barrel, NG and coal will also climb in price. Which ends up tanking the global economy and requires trillions in bailout money for at least a 3rd time since I have been alive. I donāt want to keep paying for the same mistake over and over.
Last, with hydrogen there really isnāt an escape, because you canāt make a usable form at home. So you are again stuck running to the gas station and paying whatever they charge and you canāt store it in a transportable form easily. It is compressed at a super high pressure. It just doesnāt gain you -anything- in fact you lose over just using gas/diesel. You actually want a weapon to fight higher prices with, you are better off waiting.
3 Likes
right. The top down approach make the bottom up approach far easier in this case.
And while the elites will be in control, they have far less control if you arenāt giving them money. They are forced to change their ways as well.
The reality is that bringing down the cost of solar plus storage plus EVs gives you a wicked weapon that is easy and cost effective to use for a lot of people. It is too easy for the elites to control FF prices.
1 Like
Steve I agree that is why I am running the numbers to go off grid this summer. I think I can swing it but I donāt know for sure. Converting a smaller tractor to get rid of some of my haying cost at the same time will make it more doable. I honestly think the bottom up solution to energy will be more cost effective in the long run it forces people to pay their own way up front but they keep the profits to themselves over the long haul. Batteries are very close to cost effective it would be a big winner if you can balance your power production with your demand. Ie store and burn wood for wood gas genorator on a somewhat regular basis instead of larger solar and battery systems. More like a 16 hour battery then several days. With todayās batteries that would save alot of money.
Having everyone out in the sticks on their own power would save tons of money in infrastructure and mantance. I donāt actually see everyone jumping off the grid but I could see enough people jumping off to not need to update the remote parts of the grid to keep up with the increasing demand.
1 Like
Wrong SeanOām
Your cost-down PV solar have require multi-Billion $ fabrication plants 'scaled" investments.
Same with the high-density battery storage āsolutionsā.
Same with the āaffordableā PV vehicles like the Leaf, Volt, Bolt.
Multi-billion $ āscaledā manufacturing concerns.
The $'ed Elites Investors owning you and all who bought into the spin cycle.
SEH/America, Vancouver WA fab plant tech from 1991-1998 talking here. 12-15 hours a day/night shift working wafer-monkey. Got the silicon dust cough and worn out knees CNC machine racing to prove it. All so memory and processing chips could keep Moore-Law racing for Intel/Microsoft and others Billionaires making of a handful few. And them now trickling back out some billions garnered into their deemed social consciousness projects.
Fāem. I optāed out for wood. Should have worked then making pencils. All that time our trees just kept growing.
S.U.
2 Likes
If you have a look on Tesla S forums, youāll see that real world power consumption runs roughly .27-.34 kw per mile. So for me, thatās $.07 - .09 per mile electricity from the battery. Charging losses are 15%, so my cost to put those kwās into the battery amount to $.08 - .10 per mile. I drive hills, snow and cold so I figure Iām going to be right at the top of this range since these consumption numbers came primarily from US drivers in much better conditions.
My wife drives a Honda Civic that averages 7L/100km in these same conditions, gas is about $1.10 right now. That works out to $.12/mile, so the diff between the two is about 2 tenths of a cent per mile, and the S with the big battery pack costs $87,000.00 up here.
Though thereās no doubt Iād rather drive the S, itās not getting anywhere near 100mpg equivalent on a cost basis, well - not up here anyway. Now, a tin can ev charging at $0.04/kwhr like in some states, - that could probably do it.
1 Like
I bet the gas prices didnāt stay that low for long. It wasnāt that long ago that they where alot higher.
1 Like