# Korea Constructs Road That Wirelessly Charges Moving Electric Buses



## Sasqui (Aug 14, 2013)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/william...hat-wirelessly-charges-moving-electric-buses/

Thinking outside of the bus?  lol



> The first of it’s kind technology doesn’t need the vehicles to stop at a point to charge.
> 
> The bus’s batteries are equipped with a novel technology called “Shaped Magnetic Field In Resonance” that sends electromagnetic fields created by the electric cables buried in the asphalt to the bus but not normal cars.
> 
> ...


----------



## D007 (Aug 14, 2013)

If more people would start thinking like this. Goodbye energy crisis.


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 14, 2013)

D007 said:


> If more people would start thinking like this. Goodbye energy crisis.



I don't know if I'd go that far... but it certainly is brilliant.


----------



## Champ (Aug 14, 2013)

innovation like this is the future


----------



## Widjaja (Aug 14, 2013)

Making sure innovation takes a long time to become mainstream to maintain profit from the old is the present!


----------



## Frick (Aug 14, 2013)

They are doing similar tests in Sweden.

http://mashable.com/2013/06/17/volvo-electric-road-car-charge/


----------



## de.das.dude (Aug 14, 2013)

think of how much energy is wasted when there are no buses... it can be weight activated.... but this idea needs ab it more tweaking.


----------



## Frick (Aug 14, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> think of how much energy is wasted when there are no buses... it can be weight activated.... but this idea needs ab it more tweaking.



In Volvos version (which is directly connected to the road, sort of like Hot Wheels et al) the lines are only live when there are vehicles there. How it works exactly I don't know. But yeah that is probably a requisite.


----------



## ShiBDiB (Aug 14, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> think of how much energy is wasted when there are no buses... it can be weight activated.... but this idea needs ab it more tweaking.





If theirs nothing to receive the charge than the charge isn't going to move anywhere. It's not like this thing is shooting electricity into the air when theirs no buses.


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 14, 2013)

ShiBDiB said:


> If theirs nothing to receive the charge than the charge isn't going to move anywhere. It's not like this thing is shooting electricity into the air when theirs no buses.



I think it senses when the proper vehicle is present.  If it was on all the time, there indeed would be wasted electricity if electrons are moving through the underground conductors.


----------



## Mussels (Aug 14, 2013)

it needs to make a circuit for electricity to flow.

no bus = no circuit.

its like saying power outlets waste electricity with nothing plugged in.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Aug 14, 2013)

High tension powerlines basically buried under ground is all this is. This could be useful in heavy congested areas but useless anywhere else. Its a novel idea but nothing that will change the world or even mass transit.



Mussels said:


> it needs to make a circuit for electricity to flow.
> 
> no bus = no circuit.
> 
> its like saying power outlets waste electricity with nothing plugged in.



Technically the line is the circuit. Not the bus. The bus is just leaching off the byproduct of a high voltage line (underground circuit).


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 14, 2013)

Mussels said:


> its like saying power outlets waste electricity with nothing plugged in.



Mussels, it's induction, there's not a plug in the middle of the road!


----------



## Norton (Aug 14, 2013)

Sasqui said:


> Mussels, it's induction, there's not a plug in the middle of the road!



Power= current X voltage (P=IV) IF no current is being drawn (inductive or otherwise) then the power line uses no power. There are losses due to resistance in the wire but these are generally only a few % 

This is very much similar to how a water tower maintains pressure at it's base. If no water is being drawn through the water line then there is no loss in pressure.


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 14, 2013)

Norton said:


> Power= current X voltage (P=IV) IF no current is being drawn (inductive or otherwise) then the power line uses no power. There are losses due to resistance in the wire but these are generally only a few %
> 
> This is very much similar to how a water tower maintain pressure at it's base. If no water is being drawn through the water line then there is no loss in pressure.



When a car or other vehicle passes through the feild, it will induce current and there will be power loss.  If you have current passing through a conductor there is power use (unless you're talking super-conductors), but as you say, not much.  They may use constant current regulators, I don't know

Article states this:



> The technology recognizes vehicles capable of accepting the electric charge and those that cannot.



That would imply it shuts off a segment when it's not inducing a current into the intended target.


----------



## Frick (Aug 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> High tension powerlines basically buried under ground is all this is. This could be useful in heavy congested areas but useless anywhere else. Its a novel idea but nothing that will change the world or even mass transit.



Also along main roads. Obviously not for rural areas, but along parts of the swedish E4 for instance it would be ideal.

And the new part is obviously not burying cables, it's how the power is utilized, and the fact that they seem to believe it's a viable alternative. The biggest threat is probably the self driving cars they say we'll have.

BTW, from the original source (under News):



> Power comes from the electrical cables buried under the surface of the road, creating magnetic fields. There is a receiving device installed on the underbody of the OLEV that converts these fields into electricity. The length of power strips installed under the road is generally 5%-15% of the entire road, requiring only a few sections of the road to be rebuilt with the xembedded cables.


----------



## Norton (Aug 14, 2013)

Sasqui said:


> That would imply it shuts off a segment when it's not inducing a current into the intended target.



   Kinda similar, in a crude analogy, to those inductive charging mats that can charge your cell phone but you can't make a grilled cheese sandwich on one.

   Mmmm!!!  grilled cheese.... with tomato and bacon!!!


----------



## suraswami (Aug 14, 2013)

but in US we need more oil to burn!


----------



## erocker (Aug 14, 2013)

I wonder what this does to the testicles, riding a couple feet off of an electrical grid?  Kinda serious question.. 



suraswami said:


> but in US we need more oil to burn!



But then we won't be able to sell our enormous supply overseas only to be sold back to us at a huge increase?! Really though, it would be great to be off of it.. for everyone not profiting off of it anyways.


----------



## AsRock (Aug 14, 2013)

erocker said:


> I wonder what this does to the testicles, riding a couple feet off of an electrical grid?  Kinda serious question..
> 
> 
> 
> But then we won't be able to sell our enormous supply overseas only to be sold back to us at a huge increase?! Really though, it would be great to be off of it.. for everyone not profiting off of it anyways.



HAHHA makes men think of sex even more often.., i was thinking what if the cables become damaged is there a chance of people getting electrocuted lol.


Although it be kinda cool seeing everyone's hair stand on end


----------



## suraswami (Aug 15, 2013)

erocker said:


> I wonder what this does to the testicles, riding a couple feet off of an electrical grid?  Kinda serious question..
> 
> 
> 
> But then we won't be able to sell our enormous supply overseas only to be sold back to us at a huge increase?! Really though, it would be great to be off of it.. for everyone not profiting off of it anyways.



I prefer work from home and this open top (convertible) eco friendly ride!


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 15, 2013)

OK, this us great and all, but how is the efficiency? Last I saw, induction over any distance more than a few mm is extremely inefficient.

Not exactly an answer to the energy crisis if it wastes a crap load of energy.

The solution of having quick chargers positioned strategically along the route the charge the bus when it is stopped to pick up/drop off passengers seems like a better solution.


----------



## Norton (Aug 15, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> OK, this us great and all, but how is the efficiency? Last I saw, induction over any distance more than a few mm is extremely inefficient.
> 
> Not exactly an answer to the energy crisis if it wastes a crap load of energy.
> 
> The solution of having quick chargers positioned strategically along the route the charge the bus when it is stopped to pick up/drop off passengers seems like a better solution.




From Frick's link on the main article:


> The bus will receive 20 kHz and 100 kW (136 horsepower) electricity at an *85%* maximum power transmission efficiency rate while maintaining a 17cm air gap between the underbody of the vehicle and the road surface.



Over 90% would be better but 85% isn't terrible...


----------



## Jstn7477 (Aug 15, 2013)

Norton said:


> Over 90% would be better but 85% isn't terrible...



Now we just need to wait for the 80Plus Platinum rated induction system.


----------



## Mussels (Aug 15, 2013)

Sasqui said:


> Mussels, it's induction, there's not a plug in the middle of the road!



i reject your reality and substitute something logical sounding.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 15, 2013)

D007 said:


> If more people would start thinking like this. Goodbye energy crisis.



The only problem is that electricity doesn't just fall from the sky. And that's the main problem with all the eco maniacs and fanatics. They apparently all think electricity is generated by magic pixies. There are still loads of gas and coal power plants, nuclear reactors and even renewable resources like hydro energy doesn't come with its price tag. Hydro power plant dams also alter ecosystems significantly even though they don't directly polute them.

Besides, what they invented is basically a cordless tram and many cities still use buses that run on wires (i remember i've seen them in Budapest, Hungary few years ago). All they did was move the wires from above into the ground. Interesting but not all that new... it's just that technology matured enough to do it now.


----------



## Frick (Aug 15, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> The only problem is that electricity doesn't just fall from the sky. And that's the main problem with all the eco maniacs and fanatics. They apparently all think electricity is generated by magic pixies. There are still loads of gas and coal power plants, nuclear reactors and even renewable resources like hydro energy doesn't come with its price tag. Hydro power plant dams also alter ecosystems significantly even though they don't directly polute them.
> 
> Besides, what they invented is basically a cordless tram and many cities still use buses that run on wires (i remember i've seen them in Budapest, Hungary few years ago). All they did was move the wires from above into the ground. Interesting but not all that new... it's just that technology matured enough to do it now.



The first paragraph is obvious and is not something that is forgotten, at least not here. Where electricity comes from is a huge deal. The second paragraph is not correct. Such trams are trains, these are normal electrical vehicles that can drive anywhere but are charged on the go.

I really don't see why people feel a need to "simplify" advances.


----------



## de.das.dude (Aug 15, 2013)

ShiBDiB said:


> If theirs nothing to receive the charge than the charge isn't going to move anywhere. It's not like this thing is shooting electricity into the air when theirs no buses.



as sasqui already said, its induction.

also, google for energy losses in power transmission.
that will give an idea of just how much power is wasted in just getting the electricity to that point.


the problem with "green people" are that they think, since electricity is cheap, it must not be burning a lot of fossil fuels :/


----------



## de.das.dude (Aug 15, 2013)

Norton said:


> Power= current X voltage (P=IV) IF no current is being drawn (inductive or otherwise) then the power line uses no power. There are losses due to resistance in the wire but these are generally only a few %
> 
> This is very much similar to how a water tower maintains pressure at it's base. If no water is being drawn through the water line then there is no loss in pressure.



that argument is not entirely true. take your gizmo charger for example..

there is a step down transformer in it that goes from the outlet voltage to a lower voltage nearer to the charging voltage (5V)
even if you dont have something being charged, it will still consume power.


----------



## m1dg3t (Aug 15, 2013)

Phantom draw? das.dude

Somewhere, Nikola Tesla is saying "It's about fucking time!"


----------



## Frick (Aug 15, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> the problem with "green people" are that they think, since electricity is cheap, it must not be burning a lot of fossil fuels :/



Which it shouldn't, and that is a big part of that discussion.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Aug 15, 2013)

it's too early to know if this idea is going to be viable in the U.S.


----------



## lyndonguitar (Aug 15, 2013)

Science Fiction turns to Science


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 15, 2013)

Norton said:


> From Frick's link on the main article:
> 
> 
> Over 90% would be better but 85% isn't terrible...



Thats the maximum, but what is the real efficiency?  I just don't see this being a benefit over what other systems are already doing with quick chargers that the bus automatically connects to along the route when it is stopped.

Besides the efficiency issue there is also the issue that the road has to be tore up and replaced to put the system in.  I'm sure this is a much larger cost compared to installing new bus stops with built in chargers.


----------



## Frick (Aug 15, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Thats the maximum, but what is the real efficiency?  I just don't see this being a benefit over what other systems are already doing with quick chargers that the bus automatically connects to along the route when it is stopped.
> 
> Besides the efficiency issue there is also the issue that the road has to be tore up and replaced to put the system in.  I'm sure this is a much larger cost compared to installing new bus stops with built in chargers.



Note that only 5-15% of the lenght needs that actual cabling. Besides, roads require maintenance anyway, this would take some long term planning anyway and in that time frame it's probably not that difficult to schedule it.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 15, 2013)

Frick said:


> The first paragraph is obvious and is not something that is forgotten, at least not here. Where electricity comes from is a huge deal. The second paragraph is not correct. Such trams are trains, these are normal electrical vehicles that can drive anywhere but are charged on the go.
> 
> I really don't see why people feel a need to "simplify" advances.



It is correct. I don't know where else they also use them but i've seen them in Budapest. It looked like a normal bus with a "fork" looking thing on a top that connects to the wires above the road. The thing has quite a lot of reach so it can drive pretty much freely on the designated road. The bus had normal rubber wheels and it wasn't on rails or anything.


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 15, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> it's too early to know if this idea is going to be viable in the U.S.



Not much is viable in the US... states can't even agree on a comprehensive rail system.  It's a joke.


----------



## de.das.dude (Aug 15, 2013)

Sasqui said:


> Not much is viable in the US... states can't even agree on a comprehensive rail system.  It's a joke.



i lol'd


----------



## sno.lcn (Aug 15, 2013)

D007 said:


> If more people would start thinking like this. Goodbye energy crisis.



Depends on how you're generating the electricity


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 15, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> i lol'd



It really is sad.  We've got an old infrastructure (including a political one) that makes progress akin to swimming in pudding.


----------



## Peter1986C (Aug 15, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> It is correct. I don't know where else they also use them but i've seen them in Budapest. It looked like a normal bus with a "fork" looking thing on a top that connects to the wires above the road. The thing has quite a lot of reach so it can drive pretty much freely on the designated road. The bus had normal rubber wheels and it wasn't on rails or anything.



ALthough it did make me think of a trolley bus as well, it simply isn't. Trolleybuses cannot take detours if certain streets are under maintenance, this bus can (it is not fully dependant on a constant electricty supply).

About the energy thing trolley busses use less energy on a macro level than diesel busses, as long as they are lighter (achievable, I suppose, if there are no fuel tanks/batteries) their increased efficiency over cumbustion based vehicles willl help conserving energy. And EVs are needed to be able to step away from fossil fuels because most renewable energy that is actually standing a chance (solar, geothermal, maybe nuclear fusion) leads to the need to use that energy in form of electricity.


----------



## Jstn7477 (Aug 15, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> It is correct. I don't know where else they also use them but i've seen them in Budapest. It looked like a normal bus with a "fork" looking thing on a top that connects to the wires above the road. The thing has quite a lot of reach so it can drive pretty much freely on the designated road. The bus had normal rubber wheels and it wasn't on rails or anything.



San Francisco has electric trolley buses as well using overhead wires. I rode on a few back in 2009 when I visited that city. They even still have the classic cable cars as well.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 15, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> High tension powerlines basically buried under ground is all this is. This could be useful in heavy congested areas but useless anywhere else. Its a novel idea but nothing that will change the world or even mass transit.



I dont know about that, if it works and is efficient enough, england would be hammered with them all over the place.
manchester has a extensive tram network too which is being extended even now so they clearly could be bothered doing the hardwork of installing it if there was a benefit obv


----------



## de.das.dude (Aug 15, 2013)

Sasqui said:


> It really is sad.  We've got an old infrastructure (including a political one) that makes progress akin to swimming in pudding.



its really sad that you guys have lost that awesomeness of the trains you had before. ive seen some line and they are in need of maintenance....
though the amtrak lines and the underground look good.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 15, 2013)

Frick said:


> Note that only 5-15% of the lenght needs that actual cabling. Besides, roads require maintenance anyway, this would take some long term planning anyway and in that time frame it's probably not that difficult to schedule it.



Tearing up 5-15% of the roads in a busy metropolitan area all at once is not something that is feasible in a lot of areas.  Especially when I don't see a benefit to this over some of the systems that are already being put in place where the bus connects to a rail system when it stops at the stops and it is quick charged for 30-60secs while it is stopped, and the rail system is providing a pretty constant 95%+ transfer efficiency.  I believe there is already a system like this in place in LA or somewhere in CA.


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 15, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> its really sad that you guys have lost that awesomeness of the trains you had before. ive seen some line and they are in need of maintenance....
> though the amtrak lines and the underground look good.



It's a mess and formerly subsidized Amtrack is not healthy.  Here's a blurb from Wiki:



> Passenger service is a different story. The sole intercity passenger railroad in the continental United States today is Amtrak. Commuter rail systems exist in more than a dozen metropolitan areas, but these systems are not extensively interconnected, so commuter rail cannot be used alone to traverse the country. Commuter systems have been proposed in approximately two dozen other cities, but *interplays between various local-government administrative bottlenecks and ripple effects from the 2007–2012 global financial crisis have generally pushed such projects farther and farther into a nebulous future point in time, or have even sometimes mothballed them entirely.*
> 
> The most culturally notable and physically evident exception to the general lack of significant passenger rail transport in the U.S. has been, and continues to be, the Northeast Corridor, which connects Washington and New York City with Boston and, jutting from those northern points, also other areas of Connecticut and Massachusetts. The corridor handles frequent train service that is both Amtrak and commuter. Meanwhile, New York City itself is noteworthy for high usage of passenger rail transport, meaning not just the New York City Subway system (which counts more as a short-haul metro system despite its fairly extensive network and relatively long lines) but also the Long Island Rail Road, the Metro-North Railroad extending into Connecticut, and links through the New Jersey Transit system to the Philadelphia-based Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority trains to points as far south as Newark, Delaware. The New York City Subway system is used by one third of all U.S. mass transit users.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transportation_in_the_United_States

A recent and sad article about Amtrack losing subsidies (that they enjoyed for more than a few decades):  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/u...sion-on-local-routes.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


----------



## Frick (Aug 15, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Tearing up 5-15% of the roads in a busy metropolitan area all at once is not something that is feasible in a lot of areas.  Especially when I don't see a benefit to this over some of the systems that are already being put in place where the bus connects to a rail system when it stops at the stops and it is quick charged for 30-60secs while it is stopped, and the rail system is providing a pretty constant 95%+ transfer efficiency.  I believe there is already a system like this in place in LA or somewhere in CA.



Which is why this would probably be something that would be implemented over time. Also think about longer streches of road outside the metropolitan areas with heavy traffic, and the major shipping roads. Not just for busses, but trucks as well (which is what Volvo is working on).


----------



## CounterZeus (Aug 15, 2013)

suraswami said:


> I prefer work from home and this open top (convertible) eco friendly ride!
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/130814/Andhra_Bullock_Cart.jpg



They fart, thus produce gas!


----------



## Easy Rhino (Aug 16, 2013)

if we could harness the power of mailman's fap sessions i believe we could solve this problem rather easily.


----------



## de.das.dude (Aug 16, 2013)

Sasqui said:


> It's a mess and formerly subsidized Amtrack is not healthy.  Here's a blurb from Wiki:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



well, there is your problem. its not the self sufficient. it needs to be run on subsidies.
plus rail travel is not popular cross country, most people rather drive(which is faster since the trains run on slow lines) or go by air which i think will cost about the same.


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 16, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> most people rather drive



That's the #1 reason!  In reality, most larger metro areas in the US do have good local train services.  They are popular because driving in the cities is generally a bitch!


----------



## Frick (Aug 16, 2013)

The only american city I have experience from is Detroit anno 2005 and it sucked so hard in most ways, but especially transportation. 

Anyway I really think this system would be best employed as a sort of trains on roads, on longer heavily trafficed stretches.


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Aug 16, 2013)

Champ said:


> innovation like this is the future



Innovate or die. It's not just true for commercial entities. Our present ways are completely and utterly unsustainable.


----------

