Electric Cars mainstream since the 1970es

I'd think that hydrogen fuel cells would be more plausible than a battery electric vehicle in that time period. You're unlikely to get batteries with sufficient density for a commuter vehicle, but a rather expensive vehicle with an electric motor powered by fuel cells would be possible.

That said, you'd need to get the hydrogen in the first place. Go with some combination of coal and natural gas processes? You'd have less dependance on foreign oil, but it wouldn't be the most greenhouse gas-friendly fuel source.
 
I'd think that hydrogen fuel cells would be more plausible than a battery electric vehicle in that time period. You're unlikely to get batteries with sufficient density for a commuter vehicle, but a rather expensive vehicle with an electric motor powered by fuel cells would be possible.

That said, you'd need to get the hydrogen in the first place. Go with some combination of coal and natural gas processes? You'd have less dependance on foreign oil, but it wouldn't be the most greenhouse gas-friendly fuel source.

Fuel cell technology isn't really mature for vehicle use today and was even more backward 40 years ago. Hydrogen burns just fine in a standard ICE engine, so why not just configure a standard gasoline car to run on hydrogen instead? Of course this requires that fuel injection technology be more commonplace by the 1970s, which would require multiple PODs at the management levels at GM, Ford, AMC and Chrysler.
 
I think you're reaching back to the early to mid part of the century for this to be feasible with electric cars either failing to disappear completely or manufacturers chase after them on their own either because of a perceived potential military use that subsidizes development or some perception that they have economic potential.

If you want simple oil dependence, a better bet is natural gas, of which the US has an abundance and which is a byproduct of oil exploration, which keeps the oil companies happy by using something they often burn off. Gas powered vehicles existed as early as the 1930s.
 
Hydrogen burns just fine in a standard ICE engine, so why not just configure a standard gasoline car to run on hydrogen instead? Of course this requires that fuel injection technology be more commonplace by the 1970s, which would require multiple PODs at the management levels at GM, Ford, AMC and Chrysler.

The best way to use hydrogen is to use the hydrogen with some carbon atoms added. CNG is far far easier to store and transport.

Plus, it works with simple carburetors and feedback controls optional
 
Maybe a Germany beats Russia POD. They will invent electric U-Boats and be far away from nuclear power.

So, this might allow for significant advancements in battery technology where maybe we can get Nickel-Metal Hydride batteries by the 70s...these are necessary to make electric cars doable.

Then you need something disastrous to happen to crude oil (i.e. nuked Middle East) so that nuclear and coal power are better options and charging cars is more effective that using whatever little oil is left.
 

Delta Force

Banned
How could a timeline have had develope, that the last 40 years had been an age post oil-dependance ?

The 1973 Energy Crisis is delayed, and more nuclear power stations are built over the next few years. When an energy crisis does occur, perhaps some time in the early 1980s (well enough after 1973 for one or two generations of units to be completed or nearing so), significant reductions in energy consumption are achieved. Nuclear energy is more widespread by that point and standardized units have started to be built. The utilities are stuck with a surplus of electricity, and when petroleum starts rising in costs and scarcity in the early 1980s a concerted effort is let by government and business together to develop electrified vehicles.
 
IMO the best way would be for some nations to enact ordinances supporting electric cars in cities and producing less pollution.
 
The Duke of Edinburgh used to drive around London in a Ford Transit with milk float batteries in the back I believe in the 1970's. Maybe if he was less controversial he could popularize it.
 
Have something happen to jack oil prices up to truly insane levels, like maybe a civil war in Saudi Arabia or some other big-time oil producer.
 
There would definitely be no energy crisis in 1979. OPEC would drive the price of oil low enough to get more business.
 
MUCH earlier

I had a thought to encourage the infrastructure much earlier.

In the early days of motorcars, electrics were not uncommon. So, suppose the trolley car lines, to generate revenue from those rich enough to afford cars, provided charging stations in the city, so someone could drive to town, plug in their car while they did their business, and have a full battery when it was time to go home?

Is there any change that this would make the electrics desirable enough to spur battery development earlier?
 
I've seen a TL where electric cars become the norm for driving within cities in the early 20th century while gas is more popular for rural and suburban areas. So that would be possible-they don't fill in the full motor car role but owning them is pretty normal and common.
 

Delta Force

Banned
There would definitely be no energy crisis in 1979. OPEC would drive the price of oil low enough to get more business.

Why would they do that? You can profit by maximizing profit margins or maximizing sales. As an inelastic resource, the best way to profit is to maximize margins.

In terms of weight, petroleum has twice the energy density of coal, 48 MJ per kilogram of fuel oil versus 24 MJ per kilogram. One liter of petroleum weighs 0.88 kilograms, and there are almost 159 liters in a barrel of petroleum. That gives a weight of 139.92 kilograms per barrel of petroleum.

Coal is priced is short tons, which are equivalent to around 907 kilograms. Using density equivalence, it takes 3.24 barrels of petroleum to equal the energy content of a short ton of coal. Thus, a barrel of petroleum must cost 30.86% as much as a short ton of coal for it to be competitive for power generation.

Coal is currently priced at $43.50 per short ton, which means petroleum would have to cost $13.42 per barrel to remain competitive for electricity generation, excluding transportation costs, etc. Checking here, in the period since the end of World War II petroleum has never been that inexpensive except for a brief period in the late 1990s.

However, petroleum was used for 20% of United States energy generation during the little-known Bandwagon Market for petroleum fired electric generation that took place between 1965 and 1973, and petroleum and coal had largely the same margins. Under some conditions petroleum might work out.

The larger issue though is that petroleum is inelastic and is still selling quite well at prices higher than those seen since 1973. I doubt they could make as much money as they do now even with petroleum being sold for electric generation.
 
Ya. This is just not going to happen, at least without massive, massive timeline changes.

Batteries back then were awful. You'd have to go with lead acid batteries, and they were/are very heavy for the amount of power you can store in them.

Electronics tended to use NiCds and then NiMH batteries, but they (especially the former) have real problems with recharging cycles - if you don't use them to depletion, the amount of storage drops. And in cars, you'd sure have to recharge BEFORE you hit empty.

Also, Cadmium is somewhat poisonous, so would be a problem in a crash.

-------
As for fuel cells. Ha. They were pretty immature then, and Hydrogen is a REAL pain to store. Actually the best methods they were coming up with were adsorption in a metal matrix, not pressurized.
 
I had a quick look at this a while ago - you can get a useful city runabout with lead-acid batteries any time from the 1960s onwards. Four seats or two people and a boot full of shopping, 50 miles range, 30 miles per hour. Not a lot, but adequate for most journeys for most people.

More nuclear power might help here, since the poor load-following abilities of the electrical supply encourage low off-peak tariffs that can be used to charge the car more cheaply.

The trick is selling it. You either need it to be a second car, or to have people accept that long trips mean using public transport. Either requires people to look at cars somewhat differently.
 
I know about a guy named Victor Wouk who designed a hybrid car as early as 1974. The EPA created a project to recruit engineers build a car that got far less emissions than other cars.

Wouk was the only man who met their criteria, with a hybrid built out of a Buick Skylark.

But an EPA official didn't think hybrids were practical, so the project got nowhere.

If the EPA official had approved, I imagine hybrid cars could have been on the road as early as 1981.
 
Top