General economic conditions

Over the past decade, GDP growth averaged 1% due to government downsizing, drought, a drop in construction, the decline in tourism and foreign investment due to Asian financial difficulties, and less income from the renewal of fishing-vessel licenses. The 2007 edition of “Doing Business,” prepared by the World Bank’s private sector development department, declared the Marshall Islands to be the world’s “Best Performer” for its ease and low expense in hiring and firing employees. But the study gave the Marshall Islands extremely low ratings for its protection of investors and contract enforcement.

Labor

In 2007, the Marshall Islands joined the International Labor Organization, which means its labor laws will comply with international benchmarks. This will impact business conditions in the islands.

Taxation

The income tax has two brackets with rates (8% and 14%). The corporate tax is 11.5%. The general sales tax is 6%. There are no property taxes.

Foreign assistance

United States government assistance is the mainstay of the economy.

Under the terms of the Amended Compact of Free Association, the U.S. will provide US$57.7 million per year to the Marshall Islands (RMI) through 2013, and then US$62.7 million through 2023, at which time a trust fund made up of U.S. and RMI contributions will begin perpetual annual payouts.

The United States Army maintains its Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll. Marshallese land owners receive rent for the base, and a large number of Marshallese work there. The main airport was built by the Japanese during World War II, and the only tarmac road of the capital was built partly by the Taiwanese and partly by the Americans.

Agriculture

Agricultural production is concentrated on small farms. The most-important commercial crops are coconuts, tomatoes, melons, and breadfruit.

Industry

Small-scale industry is limited to handicrafts, fish processing, and copra.

Tourism

The tourist industry, now a source of foreign exchange employs less than 10% of the labor force.

International airlines serve Majuro.

Fishing

Fishing has been critical to the economy of this island nation since its settlement.

In 1999, a private company built a tuna loining plant with more than 400 employees, mostly women. But the plant closed in 2005, after a failed attempt to convert it to produce tuna steaks, a process that requires half as many employees. Operating costs exceeded revenue, and the plant’s owners tried to partner with the government to prevent closure. But government officials personally interested in an economic stake in the plant refused to help. After the plant closed, it was taken over by the government, which had been the guarantor of a $2 million loan to the business.

Energy

On September 15, 2007, Witon Barry (of the Tobolar Copra processing plant in the Marshall Islands capital of Majuro) said power authorities, private companies, and entrepreneurs had been experimenting with coconut oil as alternative to diesel fuel for vehicles, power generators, and ships. Coconut trees abound in the Pacific’s tropical islands. Copra, the meat of the coconut, yields coconut oil (1 liter for every 6 to 10 coconuts).

On July 3, 2008, the government of the Marshall Islands declared a state of emergency related to energy shortages due to a lack of financial reserves and unusually high energy costs.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Marshall Islands, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

At the core of most proposals is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through reducing energy waste and switching to cleaner energy sources. Frequently discussed energy conservation methods include increasing the fuel efficiency of vehicles (often through hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric cars and improving conventional automobiles), individual-lifestyle changes and changing business practices. Newly developed technologies and currently available technologies including renewable energy (such as solar power, tidal and ocean energy, geothermal power, and wind power) and more controversially nuclear power and the use of carbon sinks, carbon credits, and taxation are aimed more precisely at countering continued greenhouse gas emissions. More radical proposals which may be grouped with mitigation include biosequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide and geoengineering techniques ranging from carbon sequestration projects such as carbon dioxide air capture, to solar radiation management schemes such as the creation of stratospheric sulfur aerosols. The ever-increasing global population and the planned growth of national GDPs based on current technologies are counter-productive to most of these proposals.

Alternative energy sources

Renewable energy

One means of reducing carbon emissions is the further development of renewable energy such as wind power. Scientists have advanced a plan to power 100% of the world’s energy with wind, hydroelectric, and solar power by the year 2030, recommending renewable energy subsidies and a price on carbon reflecting its cost for flood and related expenses.

Greenhouse gas emissions result from fossil fuel-based electricity generation. Currently governments subsidize fossil fuels by $557 billion per year. However, in some countries, government action has boosted the development of renewable energy technologies—for example, a program to put solar panels on the roofs of a million homes has made Japan a world leader in that technology, and Denmark’s support for wind power ensured its former leadership of that sector. In 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger promised an initiative to install a million solar roofs in California, which became the California Solar Initiative. Most forms of renewable energy generate no appreciable amounts of greenhouse gases except for biofuels derived from biomass.

In some cases, such as with hydroelectric dams, there are unexpected results. One study shows that a hydroelectric dam in the Amazon has 3.6 times larger greenhouse effect per kW•h than electricity production from oil, due to large scale emission of methane from decaying organic material. This effect applies in particular to dams created by simply flooding a large area, without first clearing it of vegetation. There are however investigations into underwater turbines that do not require a dam. And pumped-storage hydroelectricity can use water reservoirs at different altitudes to store wind and solar power.

In June 2005, the chief executive of BT allegedly became the first head of a British company to admit that climate change is already affecting his company, and affecting its business, and announced plans to source much of its substantial energy use from renewable sources. He noted that, ””Since the beginning of the year, the media has been showing us images of Greenland glaciers crashing into the sea, Mount Kilimanjaro devoid of its ice cap and Scotland reeling from floods and gales. All down to natural weather cycles? I think not.””

Nuclear power

Nuclear power currently produces over 15% of the world’s electricity. Due to its low emittance of greenhouse gases (comparable to wind power) and reliability it is seen as a possible alternative to fossil fuels, but is controversial for reasons of capital cost and possible environmental impacts. Also, there are political impacts in some countries.

The bulk of CO2 emission from nuclear power plants can be eliminated if nuclear power plants themselves generate the electricity required during the uranium enrichment process (already being done in France and to some extent by the Tennessee Valley Authority’s many nuclear units in the U.S.). In addition, gas centrifuge technology has/will greatly reduced the energy required for enrichment, thus reducing the LCA carbon emissions per kilowatt-hour (see Piketon plant).

Current uranium production is expected to be adequate at current consumption rates for about a century (from uranium mining, see also peak uranium). There are a number of alternative nuclear fission technologies, such as breeder reactors, (see generation IV reactors) which could vastly extend fuel supplies if successfully developed and utilized. Lower-risk thorium cycles have been demonstrated in the past.

Nuclear fusion is another variant of providing nuclear energy, but it will not provide any immediate mitigation to global warming as the time horizon for its commercial deployment is expected to be after 2050.

Carbon intensity of fossil fuels

Natural gas (predominantly methane) produces less greenhouses gases per energy unit gained than oil which in turn produces less than coal, principally because coal has a larger ratio of carbon to hydrogen. The combustion of natural gas emits almost 30 percent less carbon dioxide than oil, and just under 45 percent less carbon dioxide than coal. In addition, there are also other environmental benefits.

A study performed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Gas Research Institute (GRI) in 1997 sought to discover whether the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from increased natural gas (predominantly methane) use would be offset by a possible increased level of methane emissions from sources such as leaks and emissions. The study concluded that the reduction in emissions from increased natural gas use strongly outweighs the detrimental effects of increased methane emissions. Thus the increased use of natural gas in the place of other, dirtier fossil fuels can serve to lessen the emission of greenhouse gases in the United States.

Most mitigation proposals imply& — rather than directly state& — an eventual reduction in global fossil fuel production. Also proposed are direct quotas on global fossil fuel production.

Energy efficiency and conservation

Reducing fuel use by improvements in efficiency provides environmental benefits and as well as net cost savings to the energy user. Building insulation, fluorescent lighting, and public transportation are some of the most effective means of conserving energy, and by extension, the environment. However, Jevons paradox poses a challenge to the goal of reducing overall energy use (and thus environmental impact) by energy conservation methods. Improved efficiency lowers cost, which in turn increases demand. To ensure that increases in efficiency actually reduces energy use, a tax must be imposed to remove any cost savings from improved efficiency.

Energy conservation is the practice of increasing the efficiency of use of energy in order to achieve higher useful output for the same energy consumption. This may result in increase of national security, personal security, financial capital, human comfort and environmental value. Individuals and organizations that are direct consumers of energy may want to conserve energy in order to reduce energy costs and promote environmental values. Industrial and commercial users may want to increase efficiency and maximize profit.

On a larger scale, energy conservation is an element of energy policy. The need to increase the available supply of energy (for example, through the creation of new power plants, or by the importation of more energy) is lessened if societal demand for energy can be reduced, or if growth in demand can be slowed. This makes energy conservation an important part of the debate over climate change and the replacement of non-renewable resources with renewable energy. Encouraging energy conservation among consumers is often advocated as a cheaper or more environmentally sensitive alternative to increased energy production.

Residential buildings, commercial buildings, and the transportation of people and freight use the majority of the energy consumed by the United States each year. Specifically, the industrial sector uses 38 percent of total energy, closely followed by the transportation sector at 28 percent, the residential sector at 19 percent, and the commercial sector at 16 percent. On a community level, transportation can account for 40 to 50 percent of total energy use, and residential buildings use another 20 to 30 percent.

In developed nations, the way of life today is completely dependent on abundant supplies of energy. Energy is needed to heat, cool, and light homes, fuel cars, and power offices. Energy is also critical for manufacturing the products used every day, including the cement, concrete and bricks that shape our communities.

While the U.S represents only five percent of the world’s population, it consumes 25 percent of its energy and generates about 25 percent of its total greenhouse gas emissions. U.S. citizens, for example, use more energy per capita for transportation than do citizens of any other industrialized nation—which in part, reflects the greater distances traveled by Americans compared with citizens of other nations.

Transport

Modern energy efficient technologies, such as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and development of new technologies, such as hydrogen cars, may reduce the consumption of petroleum and emissions of carbon dioxide. A shift from air transport and truck transport to electric rail transport

would reduce emissions significantly.

Increased use of biofuels (such as biodiesel and biobutanol, that can be used in 100% concentration in today’s diesel and gasoline engines) could also reduce emissions if produced environmentally efficiently, especially in conjunction with regular hybrids and plug-in hybrids. For electric vehicles, the reduction of carbon emissions will improve further if the way the required electricity is generated is low-carbon (from renewable energy sources).

Effective urban planning to reduce sprawl would decrease Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT), lowering emissions from transportation. Increased use of public transport can also reduce greenhouse gas emissions per passenger kilometer.

Urban planning

Urban planning also has an effect on energy use. Between 1982 and 1997, the amount of land consumed for urban development in the United States increased by 47 percent while the nation’s population grew by only 17 percent.

Inefficient land use development practices have increased infrastructure costs as well as the amount of energy needed for transportation, community services, and buildings.

At the same time, a growing number of citizens and government officials have begun advocating a smarter approach to land use planning. These smart growth practices include compact community development, multiple transportation choices, mixed land uses, and practices to conserve green space. These programs offer environmental, economic, and quality-of-life benefits; and they also serve to reduce energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions.

Approaches such as New Urbanism and Transit-oriented development seek to reduce distances travelled, especially by private vehicles, encourage public transit and make walking and cycling more attractive options. This is achieved through medium-density, mixed-use planning and the concentration of housing within walking distance of town centers and transport nodes.

Smarter growth land use policies have both a direct and indirect effect on energy consuming behavior. For example, transportation energy usage, the number one user of petroleum fuels, could be significantly reduced through more compact and mixed use land development patterns, which in turn could be served by a greater variety of non-automotive based transportation choices.

Building design

Emissions from housing are substantial, and government-supported energy efficiency programmes can make a difference.

New buildings can be constructed using passive solar building design, low-energy building, or zero-energy building techniques, using renewable heat sources. Existing buildings can be made more efficient through the use of insulation, high-efficiency appliances (particularly hot water heaters and furnaces), double- or triple-glazed gas-filled windows, external window shades, and building orientation and siting. Renewable heat sources such as shallow geothermal and passive solar energy reduce the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted. In addition to designing buildings which are more energy efficient to heat, it is possible to design buildings that are more energy efficient to cool by using lighter-coloured, more reflective materials in the development of urban areas (e.g. by painting roofs white) and planting trees. This saves energy because it cools buildings and reduces the urban heat island effect thus reducing the use of air conditioning.

Reforestation and avoided deforestation

Almost 20% (8 GtCO2/year) of total greenhouse-gas emissions were from deforestation in 2007. The Stern Review found that, based on the opportunity costs of the landuse that would no longer be available for agriculture if deforestation were avoided, emission savings from avoided deforestation could potentially reduce CO2 emissions for under $5/tCO2, possiblly as little as $1/tCO2. Afforestation and reforestation could save at least another 1GtCO2/year, at an estimated cost of $5/tCO2 to $15/tCO2. The Review determined these figures by assessing 8 countries responsible for 70% of global deforestation emissions.

Pristine temperate forest has been shown to store three times more carbon than IPCC estimates took into account, and 60% more carbon than plantation forest. Preventing these forests from being logged would have significant effects.

Further significant savings from other non-energy-related-emissions could be gained through cuts to agricultural emissions, fugitive emissions, waste emissions, and emissions from various industrial processes.

Eliminating waste methane

Methane is a significantly more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Burning one molecule of methane generates one molecule of carbon dioxide. Accordingly, burning methane which would otherwise be released into the atmosphere (such as at oil wells, landfills, coal mines, waste treatment plants, etc.) provides a net greenhouse gas emissions benefit. However, reducing the amount of waste methane produced in the first place has an even greater beneficial impact, as might other approaches to productive use of otherwise-wasted methane.

In terms of prevention, vaccines are in the works in Australia to reduce significant global warming contributions from methane released by livestock via flatulence and eructation.

Geoengineering

Geoengineering is seen by some as an alternative to mitigation and adaptation, but by others as an entirely separate response to climate change. In a literature assessment, Barker ”et al.” (2007) described geoengineering as a type of mitigation policy. IPCC (2007) concluded that geoengineering options, such as ocean fertilization to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, remained largely unproven. It was judged that reliable cost estimates for geoengineering had not yet been published.

Chapter 28 of the National Academy of Sciences report ”Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base” (1992) defined geoengineering as “options that would involve large-scale engineering of our environment in order to combat or counteract the effects of changes in atmospheric chemistry.” They evaluated a range of options to try to give preliminary answers to two questions: can these options work and could they be carried out with a reasonable cost. They also sought to encourage discussion of a third question& — what adverse side effects might there be. The following types of option were examined: reforestation, increasing ocean absorption of carbon dioxide (carbon sequestration) and screening out some sunlight. NAS also argued “Engineered countermeasures need to be evaluated but should not be implemented without broad understanding of the direct effects and the potential side effects, the ethical issues, and the risks.”.

Greenhouse gas remediation

Carbon sequestration has been proposed as a method of reducing the amount of radiative forcing. Carbon sequestration is a term that describes processes that remove carbon from the atmosphere. A variety of means of artificially capturing and storing carbon, as well as of enhancing natural sequestration processes, are being explored. The main natural process is photosynthesis by plants and single-celled organisms (see biosequestration). Artificial processes vary, and concerns have been expressed about their long-term effects.

Although they require land, natural sinks can be enhanced by reforestation and afforestation carbon offsets, which fix carbon dioxide for as little as $0.11 per metric ton.

Biochar

Charcoal, or biochar, created by pyrolysis of biomass can be buried to create terra preta. The production of biochar may or may not involve energy recovery. The intention is that the carbon in the biomass is removed from the atmosphere for a longer period of time than would otherwise be the case.

Biofuels

During its growth, biomass traps carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis. When the biomass decomposes or is combusted, the carbon is again released as carbon dioxide. This process is part of the global carbon cycle. Through the use of biomass for energy and materials, e.g. in biomass fuelled power plants, parts of this cycle is controlled by man. Combining these biomass systems with carbon capture and storage technologies, so called bio-energy with carbon capture and storage, BECCS, is achieved. BECCS systems results in net-negative carbon dioxide emissions, i.e. the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

In comparison with other geoengineering options, BECCS has been suggested as a low-risk, near-term tool to effectively remove carbon from the atmosphere.

Carbon air capture

It is notable that the availability of cheap energy and appropriate sites for geological storage of carbon may make carbon dioxide air capture viable commercially. It is, however, generally expected that carbon dioxide air capture may be uneconomic when compared to carbon capture and storage from major sources& — in particular, fossil fuel powered power stations, refineries, etc. In such cases, costs of energy produced will grow significantly. However, captured CO2 can be used to force more crude oil out of oil fields, as Statoil and Shell have made plans to do. CO2 can also be used in commercial greenhouses, giving an opportunity to kick-start the technology. Some attempts have been made to use algae to capture smokestack emissions, notably the GreenFuel Technologies Corporation, who have now shut down operations. This technology has not reached commercial level yet.

Carbon capture and storage

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a plan to mitigate climate change by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from large point sources such as power plants and subsequently storing it away safely instead of releasing it into the atmosphere. The potential impact of CCS is huge. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says CCS could contribute between 10% and 55% of the cumulative worldwide carbon-mitigation effort over the next 90 years. The Agency says CCS is “the most important single new technology for CO2 savings” in power generation and industry. Though it requires up to 40% more energy to run a CCS coal power plant than a regular coal plant, CCS could potentially capture about 90% of all the carbon emitted by the plant. Norway, which first began storing CO2, has cut its emissions by almost a million tons a year, or about 3% of the country’s 1990 levels.

Technology for capturing of CO2 is already commercially available for large CO2 emitters, such as power plants. Storage of CO2, on the other hand is a relatively untried concept and as yet (2007) no powerplant operates with a full carbon capture and storage system. When this technique is used with biomass, the technique is known as biomass energy with carbon capture and storage and may be carbon negative. CCS applied to a modern conventional power plant could reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere by approximately 80-90% compared to a plant without CCS.

Storage of the CO2 is envisaged either in deep geological formations, deep oceans, or in the form of mineral carbonates. Geological formations are currently considered the most promising, and these are estimated to have a storage capacity of at least 2000 Gt CO2. IPCC estimates that the economic potential of CCS could be between 10% and 55% of the total carbon mitigation effort until year 2100.

In October 2007, the Bureau of Economic Geology at The University of Texas at Austin received a 10-year, $38 million subcontract to conduct the first intensively monitored, long-term project in the United States studying the feasibility of injecting a large volume of CO2 for underground storage. The project is a research program of the Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB), funded by the National Energy Technology Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The SECARB partnership will demonstrate CO2 injection rate and storage capacity in the Tuscaloosa-Woodbine geologic system that stretches from Texas to Florida. The region has the potential to store more than 200 billion tons of CO2 from major point sources in the region, equal to about 33 years of U.S. emissions overall at present rates. Beginning in fall 2007, the project will inject CO2 at the rate of one million tons per year, for up to 1.5 years, into brine up to below the land surface near the Cranfield oil field about east of Natchez, Mississippi. Experimental equipment will measure the ability of the subsurface to accept and retain CO2.

Seeding oceans with iron

:”See also: Iron fertilization”

The so-called Geritol solution to global warming, first proposed by oceanographer John Martin, is a carbon sequestration strategy whimsically named for a tonic advertised to treat the effects of iron-poor blood. It is motivated by evidence that seeding the oceans with iron will increase phytoplankton populations, and thereby draw more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. A report in Nature, 10 October 1996, by K. H. Coale et al., measured the effects of seeding equatorial Pacific waters with iron, finding that 700& grams of CO2 were fixed by the resulting phytoplankton bloom per 1& gram of iron seeded. Lenton and Vaughan found this technique to be potentially useful, but limited in its total capacity.

Opponents of this approach argue that fertilizing the ocean is dangerous and lacks any guarantee of efficacy. The original researchers themselves assert that, far from being a panacea for global warming, iron seeding may be entirely ineffective. Among their concerns are that nobody knows where the carbon goes after it is absorbed by phytoplankton. Instead of being drawn down to the ocean floor and acting as a carbon sink, the carbon could be reabsorbed by the water, effectively negating any initial gain. They also express concern that any attempt at geoengineering could result in massive, unpredictable changes to the environment. They point out that, considering the immense damage caused by adding nutrients to lakes and ponds, it would be a logical conclusion that adding nutrients to the ocean would also cause environmental damage. Large-scale growth in phytoplankton could reduce oxygen levels, creating dead zones where the ocean cannot support marine-life. They suggest that there is even the possibility that blooms would release more carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas in the form of methane than it would sequester.

Solar radiation management

Some scientists have suggested using aerosols and/or sulfate dust to alter the Earth’s albedo, or reflectivity, as an emergency measure to increase global dimming and thus stave off the effects of global warming. A 0.5% albedo increase would roughly halve the effect of CO2 doubling. In 1974, Russian expert Mikhail Budyko suggested that if global warming became a problem, we could cool down the planet by burning sulfur in the stratosphere, which would create a haze. Paul Crutzen suggests that this would cost 25 to 50 billion dollars/year. It would, however, increase the environmental problem of acid rain (although optimized engineering is thought to reduce this to insignificant levels)and drought.

An alternative technique, which may be more benign, is marine cloud brightening. Others have proposed building a literal solar shade in space.

Pacala and Socolow: 15 programs

Pacala and Socolow of Princeton

See also:

have proposed a program to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 billion metric tons per year − or 25 billion tons over the 50-year period. The proposed 15 different programs, any seven of which could achieve the goal, are:

# more efficient vehicles − increase fuel economy from 30 to 60 mpg (7.8 to 3.9 L/100& km) for 2 billion vehicles,

# reduce use of vehicles − improve urban design to reduce miles driven from 10,000 to 5,000 miles (16,000 to 8,000& km) per year for 2 billion vehicles,

# efficient buildings − reduce energy consumption by 25%,

# improve efficiency of coal plants from today’s 40% to 60%,

# replace 1,400 GW (gigawatt) of coal power plants with natural gas,

# capture and store carbon emitted from 800 GW of new coal plants,

# capture and reuse hydrogen created by #6 above,

# capture and store carbon from coal to syn fuels conversion at ,

# displace 700 GW of coal power with nuclear,

# add 2 million 1 MW wind turbines (50 times current capacity),

# displace 700 GW of coal with 2,000 GW (peak) solar power (700 times current capacity),

# produce hydrogen fuel from 4 million 1 MW wind turbines,

# use biomass to make fuel to displace oil (100 times current capacity),

# stop de-forestation and re-establish 300 million hectares of new tree plantations,

# conservation tillage − apply to all crop land (10 times current usage).

”Nature.com” argued in June 2008 that “If we are to have confidence in our ability to stabilize carbon dioxide levels below 450 p.p.m. emissions must average less than 5 billion metric tons of carbon per year over the century. This means accelerating the deployment of the wedges so they begin to take effect in 2015 and are completely operational in much less time than originally modelled by Socolow and Pacala.”

Societal controls

Another method being examined is to make carbon a new currency by introducing tradeable “Personal Carbon Credits”. The idea being it will encourage and motivate individuals to reduce their ‘carbon footprint’ by the way they live. Each citizen will receive a free annual quota of carbon that they can use to travel, buy food, and go about their business. It has been suggested that by using this concept it could actually solve two problems; pollution and poverty, old age pensioners will actually be better off because they fly less often, so they can cash in their quota at the end of the year to pay heating bills, etc.

Population

Various organizations promote population control as a means for mitigating global warming. Proposed measures include improving access to family planning and reproductive health care and information, reducing natalistic politics, public education about the consequences of continued population growth, and improving access of women to education and economic opportunities.

Population control efforts are impeded by there being somewhat of a taboo in some countries against considering any such efforts. Also, various religions discourage or prohibit some or all forms of birth control.

Population size has a different per capita effect on global warming in different countries, since the per capita production of anthropogenic greenhouse gases varies greatly by country.

Non-CO2 greenhouse gases

Action has been suggested on methane, soot, HFCs, and other climate drivers, in addition to that proposed for CO2 . Emissions of some of these actors are considered by the Kyoto Protocol.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Climate change mitigation, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

De-icers spray heated de-icing fluid, often propylene glycol or ethylene glycol, onto icy surfaces such as the bodies of aircraft and road surfaces. These prevent ice from forming on the body of the aircraft while on the ground. Ice makes the surface of the wings rougher, reducing the amount of lift they provide while increasing drag. The ice also increases the weight of the aircraft and can affect its balance.

Aircraft de-icing vehicles usually consist of a large tanker truck, containing the concentrated de-icing fluid, with a water feed to dilute the fluid according to the ambient temperature. The vehicle also normally has a cherry picker crane, allowing the operator to spray the entire aircraft in as little time as possible; an entire Boeing 737 can be treated in under 10 minutes by a single de-icing vehicle.

Some road contractors also choose to use de-icers as an alternative to gritters; the vehicle carries a tank of brine, which is sprayed on the road surface. Brine acts faster than solid salt and does not require compression by passing traffic to become effective. The brine is also more environmentally friendly, as less salt is required to treat the same length of road. Airport runways are also de-iced by sprayers fitted with long spraying arms. These arms are wide enough to cross the entire runway, and allow de-icing of the entire airstrip to take place in a single pass, reducing the length of time that the runway is unavailable.

Front-end loader

Front-end loaders are commonly used to remove snow especially from sidewalks, parking lots, and other areas too small for using snowplows and other heavy equipment. They are sometimes used as snowplows with a snowplow attachment but commonly have a bucket or snowbasket, which can also be used to load snow into the rear compartment of a snowplow or dump truck.

Gritter=

A gritter, also known as a sander, salt spreader or salt truck, is found on most winter service vehicles. Indeed, the gritter is so commonly seen on winter service vehicles that the terms are sometimes used synonymously. Gritters are used to spread grit, a mixture of sand and rock salt, onto roads. The grit is stored in the large hopper on the rear of the vehicle, with a wire mesh over the top to prevent foreign objects from entering the spreading mechanism and hence becoming jammed. The salt is generally spread across the roadway by an impeller, attached by a hydraulic drive system to a small onboard engine. However, until the 1970s, the grit was often spread manually using shovels by men riding on the back of the lorry, and some older spreading mechanisms still require grit be manually loaded into the impeller from the hopper. Salt reduces the melting point of ice by freezing-point depression, causing it to melt at lower temperatures and run off to the edge of the road, while sand increases traction by increasing friction between car tyres and roadways. The amount of salt dropped varies with the condition of the road; to prevent the formation of light ice, approximately 10& grams per square metre (2 lb/1000 ft²) is dropped, while thick snow can require up to 40& g/m² (8 lb/1000 ft²) of salt, independent of the volume of sand dropped. The grit is sometimes mixed with molasses to help adhesion to the road surface. However, the sweet molasses often attracts livestock, who lick the road. The grit is sometimes heated as it is passed out of the nozzle; this helps melt the ice and improves the solubility of the salt. Quieter rural roads may be considered too minor to grit, so grit bins are often provided, containing a mixture of sand and salt for drivers and pedestrians to shovel onto the road themselves. Different types of grit substrate can cause problems for some gritting machines with ‘blocking’ where sand/grit or salt is damp and clumps together, in these cases an augur or some form of vibrator has to be employed to enable continuous flow of substrate.

Gritters are among the winter service vehicles also used in airports, to keep runways free of ice. However, the salt normally used to clear roads can damage the airframe of aircraft and interferes with the sensitive navigation equipment. As a result, airport gritters spread less dangerous potassium acetate or urea onto the runways instead, as these do not corrode the aircraft or the airside equipment.

Materials

Gritters cannot use sea-salt, as it is too fine and dissolves too quickly, so all salt used in gritting comes from salt mines, a non-renewable source. Additionally, high concentrations of salt in soil kill plants, so it is in the interest of operators to limit gritting to an absolute minimum. As a result, road maintenance agencies have advanced networks of ice prediction stations, to prevent unnecessary gritting which not only wastes salt, but can damage the environment and disrupt traffic. The salt dropped is eventually washed away and lost, so it cannot be reused or collected after gritting runs, although the insoluble sand can be collected and recycled by street sweeping vehicles and mixed with new salt crystals to be reused in later batches of grit. As a result, operators must regularly purchase large quantities of rock salt.

In some areas of the world, including Berlin, dropping salt is prohibited altogether, except on the highest-risk roads; plain sand, without any melting agents, is spread instead. Although this protects the environment, it is more labour-intensive, as more gritting runs are needed; and as the sand is insoluble, it tends to accumulate at the sides of the road, making it more difficult for buses to pull in at bus stops. Other areas use alternative chemicals which are less harmful to the environment and cause less corrosion damage to metallic structures. The U.S. state of Oregon uses magnesium chloride, a relatively cheap chemical similar in molecular structure to sodium chloride, but less reactive, while New Zealand uses calcium magnesium acetate, which avoids the environmentally harmful chloride ion altogether. Urea is sometimes used to grit suspension bridges, as it does not react with iron or steel at all, but urea is less effective than salt, and can cost up to 7 times weight-for-weight. Most grit is mixed with hydrous sodium ferrocyanide which, while harmless in its natural form, can undergo photodissociation in strong sunlight to produce the extremely toxic chemical hydrogen cyanide. Although sunlight is generally not intense enough to cause this in polar and temperate regions, salt deposits must kept as far as possible from waterways to avert the possibility of cyanide-tainted run-off entering fisheries or farms. Gritting vehicles are also dangerous to overtake; as grit is scattered across the entire roadway, loose pieces can damage the paintwork and windows of passing cars. Loose salt does not provide sufficient traction for motorcycles, which can lead to skidding, especially around corners.

Gritters can also be used in hot weather, when temperatures are high enough to melt the bitumen used in asphalt. The grit is dropped to provide a protective layer between the road surface and the tires of passing vehicles, which would otherwise damage the road surface by “plucking out” the bitumen-coated aggregate from the road surface.

Snow blower

Snow blowers, also known as rotating snowplows or snow cutters, can be used in place of snowplows on winter service vehicles. A snow blower consists of a rapidly spinning blade which cuts through the snow, forcing it out of a funnel attached to the top of the blower. Snow blowers typically clear much faster than plows, with some clearing in excess of 5000& tonnes of snow per hour, and can cut through far deeper snow drifts than a snowplow can. In addition, snow blowers can remove snow from the roadway completely, rather than piling it at the side of the road, making passage easier for other road users and preventing the windrow from blocking driveways.

Snow groomer

A snow groomer is a machine designed to smooth and compact the snow, rather than removing it altogether. Early snow groomers were used by residents of rural areas to compress the snow close to their homes, and consisted of a heavy roller hauled by oxen which compacted the snow to make a smooth surface for sledging. With the invention of the motor car, snow groomers were replaced by snowplows and snow blowers on public thoroughfares, but remained in use at ski resorts, where they are used to maintain smooth, safe trails for various wintersports, including skiing, snowboarding and snowmobiling. Snow groomers remained unchanged throughout the 20th century, with most consisting of heavy roller which could be attached to a tractor or snowcat and then hauled across the area to be groomed.

The development of more advanced electronic systems in the 1980s allowed manufacturers to produce snow groomers which could work on and replicate a much wider range of terrains, with the most modern even able to produce half-pipes and ramps for snowboarding. Snow groomers are also used in conjunction with snow cannons, to ensure that the snow produced is spread evenly across the resort. However, snow groomers have a detrimental effect on the environment within the resort. Grooming removes nutrients and minerals from the soil underneath the snow and the regular pressure from the grooming vehicle increases the infiltration rate of the soil while decreasing the field capacity. This increases the rate at which water can soak through the soil, making it more prone to erosion.

Snow melter

A snow melting vehicle works by scooping snow into a melting pit located in a large tank at the rear of the vehicle. Around the melting pit is a smaller tank full of boiling water, heated by a powerful burner. The gases from the burner are bubbled through the water, causing some of the water to spill over into the melting pit, melting the snow instantly. The meltwater is discharged into the storm drains.

As they have to carry the large water tank and fuel for the burner, snow melting machines tend to be much larger and heavier than most winter service vehicles, at around 18& metres (59& ft), with the largest being hauled by semi-trailer tractor units. In addition, the complicated melting process means that snow melting vehicles have a much lower capacity than the equivalent plow or blower vehicle; the largest snow melter can remove 500 tons of snow per hour, compared to the 5000 tons per hour capacity of any large snow blower. However, snow melters are in some ways more environmentally friendly than gritters, as they do not spray hazardous materials, and pollutants from the road surface can be separated from the meltwater and disposed of safely. In addition, as the snow is melted on board, the costs of removing the collected snow from the site is removed. On the other hand, snow melting can require large amounts of energy, which has its own costs and environmental impact.

Snowplow

Many winter service vehicles can be fitted with snowplows, to clear roads which are blocked by deep snow. In most cases, the plows are mounted on hydraulically-actuated arms, allowing them to be raised, lowered, and angled to better move snow. Most winter service vehicles include either permanently fixed plows or plow frames: 75% of the UK’s Highways Agency vehicles include a plow frame to which a blade can be attached. Winter service vehicles with both a plow frame and a gritting body are known as “all purpose vehicles”, and while these are more efficient than using dedicated vehicles, the weight of the hopper often decreases the range of the vehicle. Therefore, most operators will keep at least a few dedicated plowing vehicles in store for heavy storms. In the event that specially designed winter service vehicles are not available for plowing, other service or construction vehicles can be used instead: among those used by various authorities are graders, bulldozers, skid loaders, and rubbish trucks. Front-end loaders can also be used to plow snow. Either a snowplow attachment can be mounted on the loader’s arm in place of the bucket, or the bucket or snowbasket can be used to load snow into the rear compartment of a snowplow or dump truck, which then hauls it away. Snowplows are dangerous to overtake; often, the oncoming lane may not be completely free of snow. In addition, the plow blade causes considerable spray of snow on both sides, which can obscure the vision of other road users.

Snow sweeper

A snow sweeper uses brushes to remove thin layers of snow from the pavement surface. Snow sweepers are used after plowing to remove any remaining material missed by the larger vehicles in areas with very low snow-tolerance, such as airport runways and racing tracks, as the flexible brushes follow the terrain better than the rigid blades of snowplows and snow blowers. These brushes also allow the vehicle to be used on the tactile tiles found at traffic lights and tram stops, without damaging the delicate surface. Unlike other winter service vehicles, snow sweepers do not compress the snow, leaving a rough, high friction, surface behind them. This makes snow sweepers the most efficient method of snow removal for snow depths below 10& centimetres (4& in). Snow deeper than this however can clog the brushes, and most snow sweepers cannot be used to clear snow deeper than 15& centimetres (6& in). A more advanced version of the snow sweeper is the jet sweeper, which adds an air-blower just behind the brushes, in order to blow the swept snow clear of the pavement and prevent the loosened snow from settling.

Surface friction tester

The surface friction tester is a small fifth wheel attached to a hydraulic system mounted on the rear axle of the vehicle, used to measure road slipperiness. The wheel, allowed to roll freely, is slightly turned relative to the ground so that it partially slides. Sensors attached to the axis of the wheel calculate the friction between the wheel and the pavement by measuring the torque produced by the rotation of the wheel. Surface friction testers are used at airports and on major roadways before ice formation or after snow removal. The vehicle can relay the surface friction data back to the control centre, allowing gritting and clearing to be planned so that the vehicles are deployed most efficiently. Surface friction testers often include a water spraying system, to simulate the effects of rain on the road surface before the rain occurs. The sensors are usually mounted to small compact or estate cars or to a small trailer, rather than the large trucks used for other winter service equipment, as the surface friction tester works best when attached to a lightweight vehicle.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Winter service vehicle, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

* May 15, 2008 – Cornell Auto X Prize Team Hacks Metro Geo Chassis for 100-mpg Hybrid – “Electric power generation may be the most complex and innovative aspect of building a hybrid for the Automotive X Prize, but a solid foundation to support all that battery weight is just as important. As Cornell’s Popular Mechanics-sponsored AXP team integrated electrical components into its Geo Metro mule, the car’s chassis has received a complete overhaul as well…”

* April 7, 2008 – PM-Sponsored Cornell Auto X Prize Squad Builds Mega-Efficient Drivetrain – “With just one semester of school before X Prize qualification rounds begin, a flurry of work by different groups within the Cornell AXP team is progressing here simultaneously. We ordered supplies for transforming our Geo Metro into a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle after our last update, and with much of our hardware in house, we’ve begun work on the mule—and its modified drivetrain…”

* February 21, 2008 – PM’s Huge Auto X Prize Team Tests Geo Metro, Set to Buy Off-the-Shelf Plug-In Parts – “In our last update, we announced that the Cornell team had selected a Geo Metro as our mule car for the Automotive X-Prize. Picking the right ride was an important step in developing our plug-in hybrid entry, but over the next semester the real hands-on work gets interesting…”

* November 9, 2007 – PM’s Auto X Prize Team Picks Geo Metro to Go Electric at 100 MPG – “After months of planning and analysis, the goals of our Automotive X-Prize team (now more than 70 people strong) are finally taking shape—the shape of a Geo Metro, to be exact. Based on analysis done by our various experts here at Cornell, we decided over the summer to create a mainstream, four-passenger, plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV)…”

* October 3, 2007 – PM’s Auto X Prize Kids Zip Toward 100 MPG With a Plug-in Car – “It’s been an exciting past few weeks for the Cornell Automotive X-Prize Team. Not only have we gotten a few new team members and a new office, but we’ve chosen the type of alt-energy car we’ll be trying to take 100 miles—and beyond—on a single gallon of fuel…”

* August 19, 2007 – Cornell Students Seek 100-mpg Auto X Prize (and PM Sponsors Them) – “Whether you’ve got a crossover vehicle or a hot rod, one thing’s for certain: You love your car. But dependency on foreign oil and the consequences of global warming have cast a pall on vehicle ownership…”

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Cornell 100+ MPG Team, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

The heavy industry sector has declined significantly over the past 20 years. An oil refinery formerly operated in the city under several different owners (Caminol Oil Co. from 1932–1967, Beacon Oil Co. from 1967–1982 and Ultramar Oil Co. from 1982–1987) until it permanently closed in 1987 [http://www.energy.ca.gov/oil/refinery_history.html]. A tire manufacturing plant was built in 1962 by the Armstrong Rubber Co., which operated it until that company was purchased by the Italian manufacturer Pirelli, which eventually closed the factory in 2001. On December& 11, 2007, the Hanford City Planning Commission approved construction of a plant that is expected to produce 60& million gallons (227 million liters) of ethanol per year for use as a gasoline additive and alternative fuel for vehicles. Most of the feedstock will be corn shipped from the Midwest. The proposed plant would be operated by Great Valley Ethanol LLC and was expected to open in 2010. However, in March 2009, the president of Great Valley Ethanol stated that difficulty in obtaining financing and the low price of gasoline had delayed the opening.

The retail sector is growing with taxable sales of USD 414.7 million reported in 2002, up by 4.6% from 2001.

Major employers within the city of Hanford in 2006 included the Kings County government with 1,041 employees, the Adventist Health System with 857, the Hanford Elementary School District with 520, the Del Monte tomato cannery with 435 year-round and 1,500 seasonal employees and Marquez Brothers International, Inc., makers of Hispanic cheese and other dairy products. Many Hanford residents work for other nearby employers such as NAS Lemoore, the U.S. Navy’s largest master jet base located 15.5& mi (25& km) WSW of Hanford and for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation which operates three state prisons in Kings County.

Hanford has not escaped the effects of the late 2000s recession. The unemployment rate in May 2010 was 13.4%, up from 8.8% in July 2008.

According to the United States Census Bureau, median household income in Hanford was USD 37,582 and 17.3% of the population was living below the poverty line in 1999, including 23.6% of those under age 18 and 6.0% of those age 65 or over. The median income for a household in the city was USD 37,582, and the median income for a family was USD 41,395. Males had a median income of USD 37,120 versus USD 25,971 for females. The per capita income for the city was USD 17,504.

The homeownership rate was 59% in 2000.

Hanford shopping

Hanford has variety of shopping including:

Hanford Mall-an indoor 625,580 feet mall complex anchor by Sears, Forever 21, JCPenney and Cinemark Movies 8.

Walmart Supercenter Plaza- which includes three restaurants, Sonic Drive-In, El Pollo Loco, and Farmer Boy Hamburgers.

Hanford Historic Downtown -which is home to unqiue restaurants, events, stores and small shops .

Michaels, Old Navy, Petsmart, Home Depot, Target, Lowe’s and Marshalls are among other retail outlets in Hanford.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Hanford, California, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

In July 2007, General Motors stated that it would have the Volt on the U.S. market in 2010, and in early June 2008, they confirmed that production had been approved, with a target of getting the Volt into showrooms by the end of 2010. Following the conclusion of the 2007 UAW-GM contract talks, assembly of the Volt was assigned to Detroit/Hamtramck Assembly. Initially the gasoline engine will be imported from the Opel engine plant in Aspern, Austria. GM announced an initial production for calendar year 2011 of 10,000 Volts and production for 2012 will be 45,000 units, up from the 30,000 units initially announced.

Scheduled roll-out

The Volt will be sold initially only in California, Washington Metropolitan Area, Michigan, Texas, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. The first cars will be available in Washington D.C., the New York City metropolitan region, California, and Austin, Texas. During the first quarter of 2011 the market will expand to Michigan, the rest of Texas and to all of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. The restricted roll-out is due to limited production, as GM planned production for 2011 is only 10,000 units. Nationwide availability in the U.S. and Canada is scheduled to begin in late 2011 until mid 2012.

Price, tax credits and other incentives =

United States

In the U.S. market, the retail price of the Volt will start at which includes all destination charges but before any tax deductions or subsidies. Due to the capacity of the Volt’s battery pack it qualifies for the maximum federal tax credit as specified in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. Also several states have additional incentives or rebates available for plug-in electric vehicles. More than 600 Chevrolet dealers in the seven launch markets will begin taking orders beginning July 27, 2010. Available options on the Volt include three different colors of premium paint, chrome wheels, rear parking assist and heated leather seats. The Volt price including all available regular production options will be (including destination charges and before tax credits or any subsidies)

The Volt will also be available through a lease program with a monthly payment of for 36 months, with due at lease signing, and with an option to buy at the end of the lease. Although the Volt’s retail price is higher than its main competitor, the Nissan Leaf, the lease rate for the Volt is almost the same as its competitor, except that the Leaf has a lower initial payment. General Motors explained that “”the apparent disparity between the Volt’s sticker and lease prices is a reflection of the company’s calculation that the vehicle will maintain a very high residual value after three years—significantly higher than that of the LEAF”.”

The 2011 Volt was not submitted for application to the California Air Resources Board’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Project rebate and therefore is not required to meet the 10-year 150.000 mile battery warranty requirement for partial zero-emissions vehicles (Enhanced AT-PZEV). The Volt team explained that for the launch GM decided to go with a common national package which includes an 8-year 100,000 mile battery warranty.A configuraton which qualifies for the CARB Enhanced AT-PZEV package is scheduled for a later release. Also a third package under development with an E85 flex-fuel engine will be launched at some future date. The engineering team commented that “”introducing two or three packages of an entirely new technology set and platform at the same time wasn’t an option.””

Canada

The Volt is expected to be made available in Canada sometime in 2011.

The Volt is being endorsed by the Ontario government in Canada. The province will provide a CAN$10,000 subsidy for consumers; and it will purchase 500 Volts for the Ontario public service fleet. These measures are part of Premier Dalton McGuinty’s plan that, by 2020, 5% of all the cars in his province will be electrically powered.

Europe

At the British International Motor Show in July 2008, GM stated that they were considering building all of the Volts for the European market, branded Chevrolet, Opel and Vauxhall, at their Vauxhall plant in Ellesmere Port on the other side of the River Mersey from the Jaguar car plant in Liverpool, United Kingdom. In August 2008 GM stated that the Volt would be available for sale in Europe in 2011. In the UK market the indicated price is around .

The European version of the Volt, the Opel Ampera, was unveiled at the Geneva Auto Show in March 2009 and also was exhibited at the 2009 Frankfurt Auto Show. The price is still not yet firm but could be around EUR€40,000. Opel is developing the battery control modules for the Opel Ampera at the Opel Alternative Propulsion Center Europe in Mainz-Kastel, Germany. The Opel Ampera will benefit from several subsidies and tax breaks available for plug-in electric vehicles in several European countries.

Other markets

At the Sydney Motor Show in October 2008, Holden stated that the Volt would be available in Australia by 2012 for “more than AUD$30,000″.

In September 2010, General Motors unveiled the Chevrolet Volt to the Chinese press and potential consumers under its Chinese name of 沃蓝达 (Wo Lan Da) and delivered the first two Volts for use as part of Expo 2010 Shanghai China’s transportation fleet. The Volt is scheduled to go on sale in China in 2011.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Chevrolet Volt, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Telematics education

A project entitled the European Automotive Digital Innovation Studio (EADIS) has been awarded 400,000 Euros from the European commission under its Leonardo programme. EADIS will use a virtual work environment called the Digital Innovation Studio to train and develop professional designers in the automotive industry in the impact and application of ‘vehicle telematics’ so that they may integrate new technologies into future products within the automotive industry.

Leonardo da Vinci is a European Community programme which aims to support national training strategies through funding a range of transnational partnership projects aimed at improving quality, fostering innovation and promoting the European dimension in vocational training. The programme promotes transnational projects based on co-operation between the various players in vocational training – training bodies, vocational schools, universities, businesses, chambers of commerce, etc. – in an effort to increase mobility, to foster innovation and to improve the quality of training. The Leonardo da Vinci programme aims at helping people improve their skills throughout their lives.

“The European automotive industry is losing competitiveness as challengers from lower-cost economies have increased their share of world automotive markets” (CLEPA, European Association of automotive supplier’s White paper 2005). As a European solution to this problem, EADIS will develop training and infrastructure to enable European companies to operate more innovatively and efficiently.

This project is executed in partnership with:

* Coventry University (CEPAD), UK

* Oulu University of Applied Sciences, Finland

* Munster University of Applied Sciences, Germany

* Turin Polytechnic, Italy

* Technical University of Delft, the Netherlands

An Advisory panel made up of industry representatives including RDM automotive, Ricardo and MIRA has been set up to evaluate the project. All the partners are looking forward to developing the project and using it as a platform for building relationships and collaborating internationally with other universities and industry partners.

Vehicle tracking

Vehicle tracking is a way of monitoring the location, movements, status and behaviour of a vehicle or fleet of vehicles. This is achieved through a combination of a GPS(GNSS) receiver and an electronic device (usually comprising a GSM GPRS modem or SMS sender) installed in each vehicle, communicating with the user (dispatching, emergency or co-ordinating unit) and PC- or web-based software. The data are turned into information by management reporting tools in conjunction with a visual display on computerised mapping software. Vehicle tracking systems may also use odometry or dead reckoning as an alternative or complementary means of navigation.

Trailer tracking

Trailer tracking is the technology of tracking the movements and position of an articulated vehicle’s trailer unit, through the use of a location unit fitted to the trailer and a method of returning the position data via mobile communication network or geostationary satellite communications, for use through either PC- or web-based software.

Cold store freight logistics

Cold store freight trailers that are used to deliver fresh or frozen foods are increasingly incorporating telematics to gather time-series data on the temperature inside the cargo container, both to trigger alarms and record an audit trail for business purposes. An increasingly sophisticated array of sensors, many incorporating RFID technology, are being used to ensure that temperature throughout the cargo remains within food-safety parameters.

Fleet management

Fleet management is the management of a company’s vehicle fleet.

Fleet management includes the management of ships and or motor vehicles such as cars, vans and trucks. Fleet (vehicle) Management can include a range of Fleet Management functions, such as vehicle financing, vehicle maintenance, vehicle telematics (tracking and diagnostics), driver management, fuel management and health & safety management. Fleet Management is a function which allows companies which rely on transportation in their business to remove or minimize the risks associated with vehicle investment, improving efficiency, productivity and reducing their overall transportation costs, providing 100% compliancy with government legislation and Duty of Care obligations. These functions can either be dealt with by an in-house Fleet Management department or an outsourced Fleet Management provider.

In 2010, the Association of Equipment Managers brought together the major telematics providers in the heavy equipment industry and successfully developed the industry’s first Telematic Standard [http://www.telematicstandard.org].

Satellite navigation

Satellite navigation in the context of vehicle telematics is the technology of using a GPS and electronic mapping tool to enable the driver of a vehicle to locate a position, then route plan and navigate a journey.

Mobile data and mobile television

Mobile data is use of wireless data communications using radio waves to send and receive real time computer data to, from and between devices used by field based personnel. These devices can be fitted solely for use while in the vehicle (Fixed Data Terminal) or for use in and out of the vehicle (Mobile Data Terminal). See mobile Internet.

Mobile data can be used to receive TV channels and programs, in a similar way to mobile phones, but using LCD TV devices.

Wireless vehicle safety communications

Wireless vehicle safety communications telematics aid in car safety and road safety. It is an electronic sub-system in a car or other vehicle for the purpose of exchanging safety information, about such things as road hazards and the locations and speeds of vehicles, over short range radio links. This may involve temporary ad hoc wireless local area networks.

Wireless units will be installed in vehicles and probably also in fixed locations such as near traffic signals and emergency call boxes along the road. Sensors in the cars and at the fixed locations, as well as possible connections to wider networks, will provide the information, which will be displayed to the drivers in some way. The range of the radio links can be extended by forwarding messages along multi-hop paths. Even without fixed units, information about fixed hazards can be maintained by moving vehicles by passing it backwards. It also seems possible for traffic lights, which one can expect to become smarter, to use this information to reduce the chance of collisions.

Further in the future, it may connect directly to the adaptive cruise control or other vehicle control aids. Cars and trucks with the wireless system connected to their brakes may move in convoys, to save fuel and space on the roads. When any column member slows down, all those behind it will automatically slow also. There are also possibilities that need less engineering effort. A radio beacon could be connected to the brake light, for example.

Network ideas are scheduled for test in fall 2008, in Europe where radio frequency bandwidth has been allocated. The 30& MHz allocated is at 5.9& GHz, and unallocated bandwidth at 5.4& GHz may also be used. The standard is IEEE 802.11p, a low latency form of the Wi-Fi local area network standard. Similar efforts are underway in Japan and the USA.

Emergency warning system for vehicles

Telematics technologies are self-orientating open network architecture structure of variable programmable intelligent beacons developed for application in the development of intelligent vehicles — with target intent to accord (blend, or mesh) warning information with surrounding vehicles in the vicinity of travel, intra-vehicle, and infrastructure. Emergency warning system for vehicles telematics particularly developed for international harmonisation and standardisation of vehicle-to-vehicle — infrastructure-to-vehicle — and vehicle-to-infrastructure real-time Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) systems.

Telematics most commonly relate to computerised systems that update information at the same rate as they receive data, enabling them to direct or control a process such as an instantaneous autonomous warning notification in a remote machine or group of machines. By use of telematics as applied to intelligent vehicle technologies, instantaneous direction travel cognizance of a vehicle may be transmitted in real-time to surrounding vehicles traveling in the local area of vehicles equipped (with EWSV) to receive said warning signals of danger.

Intelligent vehicle technologies

Telematics comprise electronic, electromechanical, and electromagnetic devices — usually silicon micromachined components operating in conjunction with computer controlled devices and radio transceivers to provide precision repeatability functions (such as in robotics artificial intelligence systems) emergency warning validation performance reconstruction.

Intelligent vehicle technologies commonly apply to car safety systems and self-contained autonomous electromechanical sensors generating warnings that can be transmitted within a specified targeted area of interest, say within 100 meters of the emergency warning system for vehicles transceiver. In ground applications, intelligent vehicle technologies are utilized for safety and commercial communications between vehicles or between a vehicle and a sensor along the road.

On November 3, 2009 the most advanced Intelligent Vehicle concept car was demonstrated in New York City. A 2010 Toyota Prius became the first LTE Connected Car. The demonstration was provided by the NG Connect project, a collaboration of automotive telematic technologies designed to exploit in-car 4G wireless network connectivity.

Car clubs

Telematics technology has allowed car clubs to emerge, such as City Car Club in the UK. Telematics-enabled computers allow organisers to track members’ usage and bill them on a pay-as-you-drive. Car Clubs such as Australia’s [http://www.charterdrive.com.au Charter Drive] use telematics to monitor and report on vehicle use within pre-defined geofence areas, in order to demonstrate the reach of their transit media car club fleet.

Auto insurance

”See also PAYD and Auto insurance risk selection”

The basic idea of telematic auto insurance is that a driver’s behavior is monitored directly while the person drives and this information is transmitted to an insurance company. The insurance company then assesses the risk of that driver having an accident and charges insurance premiums accordingly. A driver who drives long distance at high speed, for example, will be charged a higher rate than a driver who drives short distances at slower speeds.

Telematic auto insurance was independently invented and patented by a major U.S. auto insurance company, Progressive Auto Insurance and a Spanish independent inventor, Salvador Minguijon Perez ([http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=EP0700009&F=8&RPN=EP0700009&DOC=cca34af1984f0dc47b32e9a9722ad1a148 European Patent EP0700009B1]). The Progressive patents cover the use of a cell phone and GPS to track movements of a car. The Perez patents cover monitoring the car’s engine control computer to determine distance driven, speed, time of day, braking force, etc. Ironically, Progressive is developing the Perez technology in the US and European auto insurer Norwich Union is developing the Progressive technology for Europe.

Trials conducted by Norwich Union in 2005 have found that young drivers (18 to 23 year olds) signing up for telematic auto insurance have had a 20% lower accident rate than average. [http://www.aviva.com/index.asp?PageID=55&year=&newsid=2840&filter=corporate,csr,uklife,intlife,ukgeneral,intgeneral,morleyfm,intfm]

Recent theoretical economic research on the social welfare effects of Progressive’s telematics technology business process patents have questioned whether the business process patents are pareto efficient for society. Preliminary results suggest that it is not, but more work is needed.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Telematics, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Advantages and disadvantages

Advantages include:

* lower running cost of locomotives and multiple units

* lower maintenance cost of locomotives and multiple units

* higher power-to-weight ratio, resulting in

**fewer locomotives

**faster acceleration

**higher practical limit of power

**higher limit of speed

* less noise pollution (quieter operation)

* reduced power loss at higher altitudes (for ”power loss” see Diesel engine)

* lack of dependence on crude oil as fuel

Disadvantages include:

* upgrading brings significant cost,

** especially where tunnels and bridges and other obstructions have to be altered for clearance

** alterations or upgrades will be needed on the railway signaling to take advantage of the new traffic characteristics

Trade-offs include:

* Maintenance costs of the lines may be increased, but many systems claim lower costs due to reduced wear-and-tear from lighter rolling stock. . There are additional maintenance costs associated with the electrical equipment, but if there is sufficient traffic, reduced track and engine maintenance costs can exceed the costs of this maintenance.

* Network effects are a large factor with electrification. When converting lines to electric, the connections with other lines must be considered. Some electrifications have eventually been removed because of the through traffic to non-electrified lines. If through traffic is to have any benefit, time consuming engine switches must occur to make such connections or expensive dual mode engines must be used. This is mostly an issue for long distance trips, but many lines come to be dominated by through traffic from long-haul freight trains (usually running coal, ore, or containers to or from ports). In theory, these trains could enjoy dramatic savings through electrification, but it can be too costly to extend electrification to isolated areas, and unless an entire network is electrified, companies often find that they need to continue use of diesel trains even if sections are electrified. The increasing demand for container traffic which is more efficient when utilizing the Double-stack car also has network effect issues with existing electrifications due to insufficient clearance of overhead electrical lines for these trains, but electrification can be built or modified to have sufficient clearance, at additional cost.

Additionally, there are issues of connections between different electrical services, particularly connecting intercity lines with sections electrified for commuter traffic, but also between commuter lines built to different standards. This can cause electrification of certain connections to be very expensive simply because of the implications on the sections it is connecting. Many lines have come to be overlaid with multiple electrification standards for different trains to avoid having to replace the existing rolling stock on those lines. Obviously, this requires that the economics of a particular connection must be more compelling, and this has prevented complete electrification of many lines. In a few cases, there are diesel trains running along completely electrified routes, and this can be due to incompatibility of electrification standards along the route.

Summary of advantages and disadvantages:

* Lines with low frequency of traffic may not be feasible for electrification (especially using regenerative brake), because lower running cost of trains may be overcome by the higher costs of maintenance. Therefore most long-distance lines in North America and many developing countries are not electrified due to relatively low frequency of trains.

* The power range of diesel locomotives begins at the power of the strongest steam engines, while the power range of electric locomotives begins at the high end of diesel locomotives. For passenger operation it is theoretically possible to provide enough power with diesel engines (see e.g. ‘ICE TD’), but at higher speeds this proves costly and impractical. Therefore, almost all high speed trains are electric.

* The high power of electric locomotives gives them the ability to pull freight at higher speed over gradients, in mixed traffic conditions this increases capacity when the time between trains can be decreased. The higher power of electric locomotives and a electrification can also be a cheaper alternative to a new and less steep railway if trains weights are to be increased on a system.

Energy efficiency

There is a significant amount of published material that concludes that electric trains are more energy efficient than diesel-powered trains, and with proper energy production can have a smaller carbon dioxide footprint. Some of the reasons for this are given below:

* electric trains may be powered from a number of different sources of energy (e.g. hydroelectricity, nuclear, natural gas, wind generation etc.) as opposed to diesel trains that are reliant on oil.

* under certain conditions (see below) trains can return power to the network (see ”Regenerative brake”), further increasing efficiency.

* electric trains do not have to carry around the weight of their fuel unlike diesel traction.

In order for trains to return power to the network, both the rolling stock and the network must be prepared to do so. Presently the energy returned by vehicles is not sent back to the public network, but made available for other vehicles within the network. Regenerative braking is therefore often implemented in tram networks, where the density of vehicles per powered section is high, but is more difficult with trains, especially where the voltage is relatively low, hence the sections are small.

According to widely accepted global energy reserve statistics the reserves of liquid fuel are much less than gas and coal (at 42, 167 and 416 years respectively). And most countries with large rail networks do not have significant oil reserves, and those that do, like the United States and Britain, have exhausted much of their reserves and have had declining oil output for decades. Therefore there is also a strong economic incentive to substitute oil for other fuels. Rail electrification is often considered an important route towards consumption pattern reform [http://setv.irib.ir/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=559&Itemid=71] [http://www.leader.ir/langs/en/index.php?p=contentShow&id=5048].

External cost

The external cost of railway is lower than other modes of transport but the electrification brings it down further if it is sustainable.

Also energy from well to wheel, and the necessity to reduce pollutions and greenhouse gas in earth according to the Kyoto Protocol.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Railway electrification system, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Heavier armament

As the 7.5& mm Reibel machine gun was only effective against the lightest armour at a very short distance because its AP-bullet could just penetrate eight millimetres of armour at fifty metres, several efforts were made to provide some more serious antitank-capacity to AMR units. The first was to uparm the main production run vehicles with a heavier machine-gun. The second was to fit the vehicles with the 25& mm antitank-gun; to this effect both a tank (the ZT 2) and a self-propelled gun (the ZT 3), were developed. The 25& mm gun vehicles were primarily intended for the reconnaissance units, the ”Groupes de Reconnaissance de Division d’Infanterie”, of the motorised infantry divisions; these were part of the Infantry, but the Cavalry provided the reconnaissance elements. On 22 July 1936 it was decided to assign four of such 25& mm vehicles to each GRDI. The decision to design two types, despite the very small production batches, was motivated by the desire to let them operate in pairs; the low inconspicuous self-propelled gun would directly ambush enemy vehicles and the higher tank, fitted with a radio set, would be more behind in an oversight position, also with its rotatable turret covering the flanks.

However, the Cavalry at first also intended to eventually acquire the ZT 2 for the other AMR units; the general failure of the AMR 35 project ended these plans.

AMR 35 à mitrailleuse 13,2

The heavy machine-gun vehicle featured the ”Modèle réglementaire AVIS-2” turret fitted with a ”Hotchkiss 13,2 mm Modèle 1930 mitrailleuse”, which could penetrate 20& mm steel at 500 metres. To accommodate the larger machine-gun, the turret was made higher, more so at the left where the commander/gunner was seated and from which side the gun was fed — normally this was done vertically, but to reduce height the gun had been rotated to the left — giving it an asymmetrical and skewed appearance. This heavier type was produced parallel to the 7.5& mm machine-gun vehicles of the first production batch in a number of eighty; it was originally seen as the normal combat version, four of which would be present in a platoon of five. Later however, production was discontinued: though in 1934 even many battle tanks had been so lightly armoured as to be vulnerable to 13.2& mm fire, such a weapon had already become obsolete for this rôle in 1936. The gun had an ammunition stock of 1220 rounds: 740 in 37 magazines of twenty and another 480 in cardboard boxes.

ZT 2

The ”Renault ZT 2” was a tank with a larger octagonal welded steel APX 5 turret equipped with a shortened 25& mm SARF gun, which had a penetration of forty millimetres at five hundred metres. Despite the name, which reflects that it had been designed by the ”Atelier de Puteaux” forge, the one-man turret, with a weight of 650 kilogrammes, was fabricated by the ”Atelier de Rueil” (ARL), an APX off-shoot based at Rueil. It had also been intended to equip the AM 39 armoured car (the Gendron-SOMUA). and the colonial version of the Panhard 178, but apart from the ten ZT 2 vehicles was only fitted to five Panhards, so the planned production of at least 259 remained limited to fifteen.

The plan to produce a ZT 2 was first conceived in June 1935. On 12 December 1935 Renault had been ordered to produce a ZT 2 prototype, on a chassis to be taken from the first order of a hundred, but this was annulled when the ZT 2 was made part of the second order in a number of five. On 27 October 1937 the Renault factory estimated that all ten ZT 2s could be produced simultaneous to the second order production run and on 14 January 1938 it was thought that ZT 2 production could be ended in June 1938. Perhaps this was indeed accomplished as regards the first series of five, N° 95860 – 95864. The last five, N° M 3031 – M 3035, would only be assembled in December 1938. This just pertained to the hulls: none of these had yet been fitted with a turret. A first wooden mock-up of one, had been delivered on 13 July 1938. Only at the end of 1939 enough funds were made available to produce the turrets and finish the tanks at Rueil, a process that probably extended well into 1940.

The hull of the ZT 2 was largely identical to that of the “ZT 1″. Apart from the 25& mm gun, having a stock of fifty rounds, the turret was fitted with a 7.5& mm machine gun, with 2250 rounds. The turret had both a large roof hatch and a smaller hatch in the back right facet. It had been intended to equip at least one ZT 2, in a ZT 2/ZT 3 platoon of four, with a radio set, but it is uncertain whether any was so modified.

ZT 3

The ”Renault ZT3” was a tank destroyer with the same 25& mm gun in a superstructure on the hull. The development of the ZT 3 took place parallel to that of the ZT 2: a first plan in June 1935, followed by a request to Renault to produce a prototype on 12 December 1935. However, given the absence of a turret there was no need to wait for its development: Renault was instructed to quickly construct a first vehicle by adding a boiler plate superstructure to the old third AMR 35 prototype, and then sent it to Rueil where a gun could be built in and a cast commander cupola fitted.

APX indicated on 6 April 1936 — the plan to build just a single prototype already having been discarded when the second order was placed — that it desired to have five vehicles ready for the September manoeuvres of 1936. That was a very optimistic assessment, especially given the fact they themselves had not yet sent the superstructure blueprints to Renault. On 26 October Schneider announced that the five empty hulls could not be delivered before the end of April 1937 — the blueprints had not yet been received. On 27 October 1937 — the hulls at Schneider are nearing completion — APX demanded that between 15 and 20 November a “prototype” (not the original one of 1935) would be provided for acceptance. On 26 April 1938 APX approved the hull but only informed Schneider of this on 5 May.

Meanwhile between April 1936 and July 1937 Renault and the French government had had a major disagreement over the question which company should be given the order to supply the cast cupola; eventually this would be Batignolles-Châtillon. Only on 13 June 1938 Renault assembled the first vehicle (from the first series N° 95865 – 95869), that then went to Rueil to be fitted with the gun. On 9 December it was finished and Renault could begin the manufacture of the last nine vehicles (including the series M 3036 – M 3040) of the two hundred Renault ZTs: the second hull was delivered by Schneider on 31 October. The deliveries will have extended into 1939; op 2 September 1939 all GRDIs had attained their organic ZT 3 strength.

To create sufficient room with the ZT 3 the hull was raised somewhat; the roof plates on the sides and front sloped towards the apex of the vehicle where a cast rotatable copula provided the commander some height to observe his surroundings, in what was otherwise a very low and sleek construction. The gun was placed to the right of the driver with to its left a co-axial 7.5& mm machine-gun. There was an ammunition stock of eighty shells and 1200 bullets. As the position of the normal air intake was now occupied by the gun, a large roof ventilation grille was present above the third crew member, the gunner/loader. The fighting compartment was very cramped. No radio was present.

Radio communication vehicles=

Renault ADF 1

While AMR platoon commanders used an AVIS-1 vehicle with an ER29 radio set — in theory 57 were equipped with one, though in practice it was often absent — squadron commanders were in need of a vehicle with two sets: one to communicate with the platoons, the second to contact higher command levels. On 15 June 1934 Renault was asked to design a single prototype, to be delivered before 1 February 1935. On 15 October 1934 a second was demanded and eventually in 1934 eight such vehicles were part of the first order, N° 87438 – 87445. The second order in 1936 included a further five vehicles, N° 95870 – 95874, bringing the total to thirteen.

The type was to resemble the standard gun tank, to avoid making it conspicuous: command vehicles are a standard priority target of enemy fire. For that reason the enlarged radio compartment was in the form of a superstructure that looked like a rotatable turret — having the general form of the AVIS-2 but without the asymmetry — but in reality was fixed to the hull. In the front of the “turret” a small gun mantlet was present, that normally lacked any armament but in an emergency situation could be fitted with the portable FM 24-29 machine-gun that was part of the crew equipment. To make sufficient room for an added third crew member, the radio operator, the gear box was moved to the front of the vehicle.

The project was accordingly originally called the ”ZT avec boîte à l’avant” (“ZT with front gear box”) but later received the Renault designation ADF 1, again a meaningless code: Renault had run out of two letter codes. The army, for security reasons, seems not to have used any special name, which led to a later confusion with the Renault YS.

Due to a delay in the formulation of the exact specifications for the radio equipment, construction of the first vehicle only began on 14 June 1938. The first two vehicles were sent to Satory on 1 and 2 August 1938. After delivery the Army built in the radio sets; this process was finished for all ten vehicles in the Spring of 1939. The first vehicle used two ER29 sets; the others, conforming to a decision already made in 1936, used a combination of the ER29 and the ER26 ter; in the latter case the effort to remain inconspicuous was rather spoiled by a very prominent large horizontal radio antenna frame fitted on top of the “turret”.

Renault YS

The Renault YS was a version with a large superstructure but without turret, serving as a higher command vehicle. The specifications for such a type had been issued on 9 January 1931: it was then named the ”Type M”. Renault had built two prototypes of boiler plate, based on the AMR 33 chassis, in 1933. General Darius Bloch, head of the technical section of the supreme command, had formed a favourable opinion on these in September 1933 and during a session of the ”Conseil Consultatif de l’Armement” in January 1934 had desired that a dozen be acquired. On 10 April 1934 the order was signed for ten ”voitures de reconnaissance tous terrain blindés”, to be delivered before 31 December 1934, the uncommon term “all-terrain armoured reconnaissance vehicles” intending to obscure the fact that they were command vehicles. They had the factory designation Renault YS.

The prototypes had already been rebuilt with the AMR 35 suspension: to avoid a future disappointment Renault explicitly established in the contract that due to the more robust and heavier AMR 35 chassis to be used, the series vehicles would have an inferior performance: the weight would increase from 3.5 to 4.3 tonnes and maximum speed would drop from 60 to 55& km/h; average road speed from 40 to 35& km/h.

The ten vehicles, N° 84252 – 84261, were only delivered between 14 and 16 December 1937, after having been tested between 1 September and 22 November 1937 by the ”Commission de Vincennes”. The delay of three years could not be entirely be blamed to Renault: the different Arms for which the YSs were intended each had special requirements for the combinations of (short and long range) radio sets to be built in. Some of the latter even yet had to be developed — the first specifications were only issued in June 1935 — and afterwards for each subtype a special interference suppression had to be applied and thoroughly tested. For these tests the original two prototypes were used.

Of the ten, the Cavalry received four vehicles (reduced from an original planned allocation of six) using the so-called “Type C” equipment: a combination of the ER (”Émitteur-Recepteur”)26 ter and the ER29. Two of these were assigned to the 2nd and 3rd GAM (”Groupe de Automitrailleuses”) each. The Infantry also received four. Two of these had the “Type G” equipment: a combination of the ER51 modèle 1935 and the R15 (the last a receiver set only). These so-called ”type chars” vehicles, intended for tank units, were assigned to the ”507e” and ”510e Régiment de Chars de Combat”. The two others used a “Type E” equipment with a combination of the ER 26 ter and the R15; these were assigned to mechanised infantry units, the ”5e” and ”17e BCP” (”Bataillon de Chasseurs Portés”). Two Type E-vehicles were also received by the Artillery Arm and assigned to the ”1er” and ”42e Régiment Artillerie”.

The versions differed externally in the type of antennae (frames) used. As a whole the type had a very different configuration from that of the AMR 35: in the raised front and superstructure the engine was placed in the front, the driver was seated to the right with the vehicle commander to his left; and behind was a large compartment for two radio operators with a high double hatch in the back. The Artillery used only a single operator in exchange for more supplies. The unloaded weight was considerably higher than predicted, at 5950 kilogrammes. Fully loaded, including about 0.8 tonnes of radio equipment, weight increased to about 7.5 tonnes, hundred kilogrammes higher than the acceptable suspension maximum indicated by Renault. Despite the fitting of a second fuel tank, the range decreased to 150 kilometres and the reliability of the type was low with much breakage of the road wheel axles.

Renault YS 2

The Renault YS 2 was an artillery observation vehicle with advanced telemetric optics, among which a rangefinder turret. On 20 July 1936 it was dedided by the Artillery to acquire such a type, called the ”voiture blindée tous terrains d’observation d’artillerie”. On 11 August Renault was contacted to build a full scale wooden mock-up of a vehicle capable of accommodating the ER26 ter and R14 radio set, a large number of telephone cable connections and on top an optical rangefinder turret with a base of 160 centimetres. The Renault tank design bureau estimated that such a mock-up could be created for the negligible sum of just 6500 French franc and thus on 21 September made the counteroffer to rebuild one of the YS prototypes for ₣ 195,000, apart from supplying the mock-up for ₣ 9500. However, the ministry of defence refused this offer, just ordering the mock-up on 12 October.

However, on 5 November Jean Restany, head of the Renault design bureau, decided to rebuild the prototype anyway. On 26 January 1937 the rangefinder was received, but it proved, with a width of 160 centimetres, simply too wide for a chassis that itself was no wider than 170 centimetres, though an attempt was made to place it in a wooden dummy turret. On 2 April a commission of artillery officers visited Renault and these suggested to use the smaller standard rangefinder used by machine-gun units that had a base of 125 centimetres. This was built in a steel cupola, that also featured a central pair of binoculars and binocular diascopes at the sides and back, that could be protected by armoured shutters. On 22 June Renault offered to sell this vehicle for the discount price of ₣ 150,000 (mock-up included). On 31 July the Army agreed; the contract was signed on 7 October 1937.

The vehicle, N° 58993, had already been sent on 8 August and was for field tests assigned to the ”309e RATTT” (”Régiment d’Artillerie de Tracteurs Tous Terrains)”. Though the ”Atelier de Rueil” in the Spring of 1938 began to study the possibility of fitting an improved turret, no further YS 2s were ordered, despite a continued demand for such vehicles: the Renault YS 2 was considered rather mediocre.

ZT 4

On 9 October 1936, 21 ”Renault ZT4”s, a tropical version with improved cooling, were ordered for the colonial troops to replace their obsolete Renault FT 17′s, that were not very suited for the rôle of long range surveillance, typical of colonial conditions. As these troops still used the Hotchkiss 8 mm machine gun as their standard weapon, they wanted six ZT4 vehicles with the same to be produced in France; it was decided in the motherland however that it would be cheaper to install the old colonial FT 17 machine-gun turrets on new hulls of the AMR 35, so the latter were to be produced only. Likewise twelve 37& mm FT 17 turrets could be placed; only three vehicle would thus have the more expensive AVIS-1 turret and this was only allowed in 1937. As the colonies refused this solution — but gave Renault no indication of an alternative — deliveries were to be strongly delayed. The first order, destined for Indo-China, N° 6693 – 66953, had to be delivered between April and 9 July 1937, but not a single vehicle had been built at that date. The same year a second order was made, again of three AVIS-1 vehicles, bringing the total to 24. In May 1938 Renault tested the fitting of a 37& mm FT 17 turret on an AMR 35 chassis but no series production materialised. However, he went into negotiations with Brazil about a “considerable” export of ZT 4s. In the Autumn of 1938 the colonies made a third order of 31 ZT 4s, all with the AVIS-1, bringing the total to 55. Though Renault now had sufficient production capacity, the standard AMR 35 order having been finished, the labour and financial problems with his factory, combined with a lack of funding by the government, prevented any ZT 4 manufacture to start.

Only after the beginning of the Second World War, when more means were made available, slowly production started: three units were made in February 1940, nine in March, fifteen in April and thirteen in May. On the forty hulls produced, not a single turret had been fitted however. After the German invasion an emergency plan was considered to equip them with a 25& mm gun; in the end some were in June sent to the front armed only with a make-shift machine-gun mount and others remained at the factory. That month probably about another seven hulls were finished.

The ZT 4s differ from the “ZT 1″ in having large ventilation grilles at the sides and by a changed back, without stowage box, with a different rear-light and a shortened exhaust pipe.

Airborne tank

In 1936 the French Army began planning to execute, in case of war with Germany, offensive airborne operations on the enemy flanks (Netherlands, Switzerland) or hinterland. As no serious artillery support could be given, it entertained the thought of providing fire support to the infantry by airborne tanks, to be landed on captured airfields. A note by the ”1er Direction” (the ”Section des Chars de Combat” of the ”Direction de l’Infanterie”), dated 18 May 1936, shows that Renault had already begun to study the technical feasibility of such a project. On 26 May 1936 the Renault research bureau offered a possible solution. It proposed to design a light airborne tank, based on the Renault ZT. To save weight several innovative technologies would be applied: the use of light alloys; replacing the original chassis and turret using riveted armour plates with a cast hull and welded dome-shaped turret; the use of sloped armour and finally the use of the turret configuration already in development for the Char G1, featuring a gun mount on the bottom of the tank, obviating the need to install a heavy gun mantlet. By these measures Renault hoped to limit weight to 5040 kilogrammes for a maximum armour of thirteen millimetres or 5400 kilogrammes if the Army desired the higher protection level of twenty millimetres. The height would be 180 centimetres. To make room for a 37& mm gun, the minimal calibre to provide HE fire support, the turret would have a cross-section of 136 centimetres. A hundred shells could be carried and three thousand rounds for the 7.5& mm machine-gun. The crew would be two.

As France at the time had no cargo planes large enough that a tank might drive over a ramp into their cargo rooms, Renault proposed to replace part of the bottom of a Bloch MB 300 bomber with a platform on which the ”Char Légère transportable per avion” could be placed; it would have to be lowered and hoisted by cables. No prototype was ever built

Adapted from the Wikipedia article AMR 35, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Conventional rockets have been used for most lunar exploration to date. The ESA’s SMART-1 mission from 2003 to 2006 used Hall effect thrusters. NASA will use chemical rockets on its Ares V booster and Lunar Surface Access Module, being developed for a planned return to the Moon around 2019. The construction workers, location finders, and other astronauts vital to building, will be taken in NASA’s Orion spacecraft.

On the surface

Within the colony it will be difficult to set up a public transport system. However a system of Escalators, moving walkways and elevator can be used to quickly transport people and cargo around.

Lunar colonists will also want the ability to move over long distances, to transport cargo and people to and from modules and spacecraft, and to carry out scientific study of a larger area of the lunar surface for long periods of time. Proposed concepts include a variety of vehicle designs, from small open rovers to large pressurised modules with lab equipment, and also a few flying or hopping vehicles.

Rovers could be useful if the terrain is not too steep or hilly. The only rovers to have operated on the surface of the Moon are the three Apollo Lunar Roving Vehicles (LRV), developed by Boeing, and the two robotic Soviet Lunokhods. The LRV was an open rover for a crew of two, and a range of 92& km during one lunar day. One NASA study resulted in the Mobile Lunar Laboratory concept, a manned pressurised rover for a crew of two, with a range of 396& km. The Soviet Union developed different rover concepts in the Lunokhod series and the L5 for possible use on future manned missions to the Moon or Mars. These rover designs were all pressurised for longer sorties.

If multiple bases were established on the lunar surface, they could be linked together by permanent railway systems. Both conventional and magnetic levitation (Mag-Lev) systems have been proposed for the transport lines. Mag-Lev systems are particularly attractive as there is no atmosphere on the surface to slow down the train, so the vehicles could achieve velocities comparable to aircraft on the Earth. In addition achieving the extremely cold temperatures necessary for the superconducting magnets that levitate and drive the Mag-Lev trains would be much easier to achieve than on Earth due to the lack of an atmosphere. One significant difference with lunar trains, however, is that the cars would need to be individually sealed and possess their own life support systems. The trains would also need to be highly resistant to derailment, as a punctured car could lead to rapid loss of life.

For difficult areas, a flying vehicle may be more suitable. Bell Aerosystems proposed their design for the Lunar Flying Vehicle as part of a study for NASA. Bell also developed the Manned Flying System, a similar concept.

Surface to space =

Launch technology

A lunar base will need efficient ways to transport people and goods of various kinds between the Earth and the Moon and, later, to and from various locations in interplanetary space. One advantage of the Moon is its relatively weak gravity field, making it easier to launch goods from the Moon than from the Earth. The lack of a lunar atmosphere is both an advantage and a disadvantage; while it is easier to launch from the Moon because there is no drag, aerobraking is not possible, which makes it necessary to bring extra fuel in order to land. An alternative, which may work for supplies, is to surround the payload with impact-absorbing materials, something that was tried in the Ranger program. This can be efficient if the impact protection is made of needed lighter elements that are absent from the Moon (Ranger used balsa wood)

One way to get materials and products from the Moon to an interplanetary waystation might be with a mass driver, a magnetically accelerated projectile launcher. Cargo would be picked up from orbit or an Earth-Moon Lagrangian point by a shuttle craft using ion propulsion, solar sails or other means and delivered to Earth orbit or other destinations such as near-Earth asteroids, Mars or other planets, perhaps using the Interplanetary Transport Network. If a lunar space elevator is ever built, it could transport people, raw materials and products to and from an orbital station at Lagrangian points or .

Launch costs

*Estimates of the cost per pound of launching cargo or people from the Moon vary and the cost impacts of future technological improvements are difficult to predict. An upper bound on the cost of launching material from the Moon might be about $40,000,000 per kilogram, based on dividing the Apollo program costs by the amount of material returned. At the other extreme, the incremental cost of launching material from the moon using an electromagnetic accelerator could be quite low. The efficiency of launching material from the Moon with a proposed electric accelerator is suggested to be about 50%. If the carriage of a mass driver weighs the same as the cargo, two kilograms must be accelerated to orbital velocity for each kilogram put into orbit. The overall system efficiency would then drop to 25%. So 1.4 kilowatt-hours would be needed to launch an incremental kilogram of cargo to low orbit from the Moon. At $0.1/kilowatt-hour, a typical cost for electrical power on Earth, that amounts to $0.16 for the energy to launch a kilogram of cargo into orbit. For the actual cost of an operating system, energy loss for power conditioning, the cost of radiating waste heat, the cost of maintaining all systems, and the interest cost of the capital investment are considerations. David R. Criswell believes that there is a potential for the cost of electrical power on the Moon to become enough less than the cost on Earth for electrical power to be exported from the Moon to Earth by microwave.

*Passengers cannot be divided into the parcel size suggested for the cargo of a mass driver, nor subjected to hundreds of gravities acceleration. However, technical developments could also affect the cost of launching passengers to orbit from the Moon. Instead of bringing all fuel and oxidizer from Earth, liquid oxygen could be produced from lunar materials and hydrogen should be available from the lunar poles. The cost of producing these on the Moon is yet unknown, but they will be more expensive than on Earth. The situation of the local hydrogen is most open to speculation. As a rocket fuel, hydrogen could be extended by combining it chemically with silicon to form silane, which has yet to be demonstrated in an actual rocket engine. In the absence of more technical developments, the cost of transporting people from the Moon will be an impediment to colonization.

Surface to and from cislunar space

A cislunar transport system has been proposed using tethers to achieve momentum exchange. This system requires zero net energy input, and could not only retrieve payloads from the lunar surface and transport them to Earth, but could also soft land payloads on to the lunar surface.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Colonization of the Moon, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.