施政報告: 買36台電動巴士...

原帖由 lokwah2a 於 2011-10-12 18:57 發表


不過, 250-350 萬係雙層, 500萬只不過係單層
電由發電廠傳到充電站都 Loss 許多, 充電池有壽命, 本身都唔輕, 要架巴士 "車來車去", 其實用柴油更環保
炭排放都係一樣, 只不過改為電廠出, 可能仲多 D (因為有 Loss) ...

請留意呢D措施係改善路邊污染
而且電動車剎車時可以將動能儲起
效率一定高過純柴油車

原帖由 Eddie 於 2011-10-12 19:07 發表

請留意呢D措施係改善路邊污染
而且電動車剎車時可以將動能儲起
效率一定高過純柴油車

能量回收現在只能減少電池的不濟問題，而如果路路順這用途是零，這正正是電動車越順越食電既問題

其實最理想都係混合動力，這是有效減少卻不用改變現有的巴士使用模式

原帖由 DGCNYO 於 2011-10-12 20:43 發表

能量回收現在只能減少電池的不濟問題，而如果路路順這用途是零，這正正是電動車越順越食電既問題

其實最理想都係混合動力，這是有效減少卻不用改變現有的巴士使用模式 ...

香港市區呢d開開停停既環境能量回收明顯會比柴油車效率高好多

原帖由 hkbw 於 2011-10-12 07:25 發表


個幾部野要用柴油內燃機叉電, 絕對並非今時今日的hybird系統~

今時今日的hybird系統, 是引擎輔助磨打, 係需要時係兩個一齊為車子提供動力,
而非之前的純以電力, 但就要由一部柴油內燃機來發電~ ...

Wrong. The serial-drive system, which only the motor is used for traction, that the Designline used are still a popular hybrid technology that are used on some of the most popular hybrid systems like the BAE Systems HybriDrive and Siemens ELFA systems. The one you are talking about is the parallel drive system e.g Volvo i-SAM.

原帖由 manlok 於 2011-10-12 22:09 發表

香港市區呢d開開停停既環境能量回收明顯會比柴油車效率高好多

要留意，只是提升？高？你會唔會搞錯，以現今的電池能力，打爆一車就算俾你回收都開唔到半日....

咁叫高的話純屬文字遊戲，這只是比沒有的高，遠比用一個300L油缸的巴士還差幾十皮遠

原帖由 NV58 於 2011-10-13 03:32 發表


Wrong. The serial-drive system, which only the motor is used for traction, that the Designline used are still a popular hybrid technology that are used on some of the most popular hybrid systems lik ...

Not sure if i get that wrong, but according to the bus yearbook 2004, it mentioned that the bus's power 'was supplied from water-cooled battery and a Capstone Micro Turbine charges the batteries as required.' That's mean it was not the same system as the hybrid technology used nowadays such as Toyota Prius.

The Toyota hybrid system, similar to others in the market, provide power mainly from the batteries, but when the car is accelerated or the power level of the battries are low,
the engine will come into action, providing additional power to the car, and charge the batteries at the same time. As far as my understanding, the major difference is the Designline micro turbine is not an engine on its own which cannot provide additional horsepower to the vehicle, but the Toyota and most of the common hybrid system can do that.

Also, the micro turbine is not as same as an engine which requires warm up time before the turbine can be called into action.

As far as I know, even designerline itself has been quite successful in area outside HK, but the unique geographical characteristic may mean that only the parallel system can
be capable to run in HK. At least, as far as I know, there is no serial-drive system which can make a successful operation in HK so far yet.

[ 本帖最後由 hkbw 於 2011-10-14 00:03 編輯 ]

原帖由 hkbw 於 2011-10-13 16:02 發表


Not sure if i get that wrong, but according to the bus yearbook 2004, it mentioned that the bus's power 'was supplied from water-cooled battery and a Capstone Micro Turbine charges the batteries as  ...

No. I read your "柴油內燃機" as diesel powered combustion engine, so by definition means diesel engine. Turbine is a completely different beast. In any case, the Designline sold well initially, but as it turned out, it was not a very reliable system.

What makes the Designline different from other hybrid is the type uses a turbine instead of a petrol/diesel engine as the source of power. The design is still fundamentally a serial drive system - the motor powers the vehicle directly, and the engine (normal combustion or turbine or whatever) is there solely to provide electricity to the motor and the battery that goes with the system and at no point it is used for drive the vehicle directly.

So what you are now saying is completely different from what the initial post I was replying, which you were referring that the parallel drive system has superceded the serial drive system. This is clearly not the case. In fact, in a parallel drive system, the engine is actually used to drive the vehicle directly. Have a ride on the B5, and you'll see how it works.