Automated Electronic Transportation

Transforming America's Transportation Future

8.25.2008

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Utah State University

Texas A&M University

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

California Energy Commission

Energy Intersection Inc.

Argonne National Laboratory

Austin Energy

University of California PATH Program

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA)

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)

AET Collaboration Contributing Organizations

AET VisionWe envision a systematic transition to a national automated electric transportation system that dramatically improves America’s mobility and energy security. The system will:

a) provide energy directly to vehicles from electrified highways—dramatically reducing their use of petroleum and the emission of CO2, and

b) automate control of the vehicles while on the highways, reducing congestion, improving safety, freeing the driver’s time, and providing new in-vehicle services.

The system will extend, not replace, our current highway system—vehicles capable of traveling on electrified automated highways will also be able to drive as conventional vehicles on conventional roadways.

Transportation Issues Addressed by AET

• Oil dependence– 2/3 oil consumed for transportation– 60% of oil is imported

• Vehicle emissions – 66% of all Carbon Monoxide– 38% of all Nitrogen Oxides– 26% of all Volatile Organic Compounds– 30% of all Carbon Dioxide

• Safety – Over 40,000 traffic fatalities per year– Over 3 million injured– Annual cost more than $200 billion

• Congestion – estimated annual cost of $64 billion

• Oil invulnerability– Use domestic energy sources for transportation– Imported oil competes with other options

• No vehicle emissions– Point source emissions only– Far fewer to manage– Easier to manage than moving sources

• Congestion – Expected capacity per lane from 2 to 4 times that of conventional highways

• Safety through automation– Driver and environmental problems cause 95% of the crashes – Automation can eliminate human driver problems of inattentiveness, impairment,

misperception and misjudgement that lead to most crashes– Automation can see through all weather conditions

Two Key AET Elements

1. Energy carrier switch

from oil to electricity

from the vehicle to the road

2. Control switch

from humans to automated systems

Simultaneously address 4 transportation issues.

Possible Transition Path to AET

Implementation PlanDevelopment of consensus roadmap (2009-10)

First seed funding for architecture definition and enabling research (2010)

National commitment of substantial research funding to: Resolve key technical obstacles Address institutional and political challenges Define staged deployment strategy Design system and national network

Implement first specialized, limited-scale applications (goods movement)

National decision on large-scale deployment

Identified ChallengesTechnical feasibility Wireless power transfer to moving vehicles Automated driving technology (fault handling)

Public and private sector roles in funding, development and operation of system

Public and industry acceptance of such a large change and its associated up-front costs

Network effects (large scale needed to gain large benefits)

Liability

Electric utility questions: How will they serve and price the new loads? Dynamics of power flows (bidirectional)

Roadmap OutlineGoals

Critical System Requirements

Major Challenges

RDD&D Pathways

Financial, Policy, and Organizational Pathways

Timeline

Resource Needs

Desired Roadmap OutcomesConcise, cohesive reportDescribing vision and pathways to get thereConsensus-orientedInclusive of technology, deployment, regional

optionsDelineating initial technology, financial, policy,

and organizational paths forward Aggressive but realistic goals / timeline

Industry / Government / University Participation

National RDD&D program plan

Potential StakeholdersIndustry (must eventually adopt ownership role) Utilities Infrastructure providers System Integrators Component and technology providers including vehicle OEM’s Investors

Government DOE EERE; DOT FHWA; EPA; DOC; DOI; DOD; DHS State Agencies National Labs (DOE; DOT; DOD; etc.)

Research Universities

Transportation and environmental interest groups

For More InformationSee our report at:

http://energylab.usu.edu

Next StepsContact:

Jeff MuhsJeff.muhs@usu.edu

Ted Foxfoxec@ornl.gov

Christine Ehlig-Economidescaee@tamu.edu

The Federal Transportation Landscape

Interdependent, but jurisdictionally-separated policies and R&D pathways

R&D pathways stove-piped

No current pathway attempts to address all challenges simultaneously…..AET does

DOT DOE EPA

Safety & Congestion

EnergyEfficiency

Air Quality& otherenviron-mentalresiduals

Federal Government

DOD

DHS

DOI

DOC

DOA

The fundamental paradigm hasn’t changed appreciably for a century.

Paradigm: Self-propelled vehicles driven on conventional roadways by humans will

be the primary method of land transportation for the next 50 years.

Question: Is this “systems-level” paradigm, from which all major transportation R&D pathways are derived, still valid?

Electrification problematic in self-propelled vehicles

Batteries Limited range and excessive weight may be looking for “unobtainium” because it requires less institutional risk

than transformational systems-level change

Hydrogen Losses incurred during catalytic cracking of hydrocarbons are not offset

by efficiency of H2 fuel cells

Electrolysis, distribution, storage and conversion of H2 incurs heavy energy losses relative to using electricity directly

On-board storage highly problematic (-423ºF liquid; 90,000 psi gas; 100 kilos/gal equivalent w/ metal hydride

Does not leverage electricity’s value as energy carrier Electricity 100 X more efficient as energy carrier than vehicles Revisiting in-motion energy transfer a viable option

The technical challenges are considerable but dramatic advancements have been made in recent years:

• Electricity distribution / delivery- smart grid

• Safe and reliable power transfer- near-field inductive, resonance, & direct

• Vehicle power electronics

• Control systems & automation

Example: Preliminary Results of ORNL Evanescent Power Transfer

Initial examination of evanescent wave power transfer (loosely coupled magnetic resonance) funded by lab “seed money”

Demonstrated 300W power transfer with 82% efficiency

Analysis indicates efficiencies in low to mid-90% range at distances of 1 ft.

Efficiency is fairly constant over frequency; power transfer very peaked