Michigan Installs First Wireless EV Charging Road In US (electrek.co) 97
The first wireless charging public roadway in the United States has been installed in Detroit's Corktown neighborhood. Electrek reports: Wireless charging provider Electreon provided inductive-charging copper coils that were installed below the road's surface. The coils will charge EVs equipped with Electreon receivers as they drive over the road. The road's charging segments transfer electricity wirelessly through a magnetic field, which is then transferred as energy to the vehicle's battery, charging it. Detroit's wireless charging roadway is a pilot that will test and aim to perfect the wireless charging technology in a real-world environment. Researchers are using a Ford E-Transit equipped with an Electreon receiver.
The plan is to open it up to the public in the next few years. MDOT and Electreon have entered a five-year commitment to develop and pilot the electric road system on Michigan roads. The pilot is on a quarter-mile stretch on 14th Street between Marantette and Dalzelle Streets in Detroit's historic Corktown. It runs alongside the Newlab at Michigan Central Building, home to more than 60 tech and mobility startups, where the wireless charging tech will be further tested and developed beginning in early 2024. In 2024, MDOT will begin seeking bids to rebuild part of Michigan Avenue (US-12) and will install additional inductive charging.
The plan is to open it up to the public in the next few years. MDOT and Electreon have entered a five-year commitment to develop and pilot the electric road system on Michigan roads. The pilot is on a quarter-mile stretch on 14th Street between Marantette and Dalzelle Streets in Detroit's historic Corktown. It runs alongside the Newlab at Michigan Central Building, home to more than 60 tech and mobility startups, where the wireless charging tech will be further tested and developed beginning in early 2024. In 2024, MDOT will begin seeking bids to rebuild part of Michigan Avenue (US-12) and will install additional inductive charging.
This sounds like it will be cool. (Score:2)
Because it's in Michigan, get it? : D
Re: (Score:3)
If the road attracts cats to sit on it because it gets warm, that would be bad.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com... [smithsonianmag.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Only for the cats. They're not big enough to cause much damage to the cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Haven't priced a bumper cover or a condenser lately huh?
Hey look! (Score:2)
Hey look, free cat! https://teamjimmyjoe.com/wp-co... [teamjimmyjoe.com]
Sounds awfully wasteful (Score:5, Interesting)
Magnetic field strength falls off as the CUBE of distance. That's what helps Near Field Communications devices to be (relatively) secure. But it hurts transmission of energy - I'd be interested to know just how much power that's put into the coils in the road doesn't make it to the batteries / motor in the vehicle.
Re:Sounds awfully wasteful (Score:5, Insightful)
The good news is this won't suck up tons of energy. Because Michigan has a 'road building season' for a reason. Roads in freeze/thaw/heavy salt environments don't last long. Potholed, ripped up roads that to repair now also need rewiring? It's a ridiculous idea fueled by sunny SoCal demos.
Building infrastructure in a rapidly degrading environment just means you have to rebuild frequently. Which is a terrible way to do infrastructure.
Re: (Score:1)
lolz, more capacity when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine?
Storage is a more important problem to solve before this pie-in-the-sky hairbrained nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're not paying for the fuel...infrastructure is a basic one time expense, you build more capacity 'once' and use it for years. You can absorb massive efficiency losses on conversion because it's not reflected in our output. 8000:1 ratio of solar in a year to all human power usage in a year is a hell of a lot of inefficiency before we even notice.
However the point is
Re:Sounds awfully wasteful (Score:4, Informative)
It sounds like you are painting a picture where roads in Michigan last one season or something.
Roads that don't get much heavy truck traffic regularly last 30 years before having to be redone, and roads that have heavy truck traffic last 20. Residential roads typically don't get redone for 40-50. That is plenty of usable time for a demonstration system and even a good amount of time before electronics fail.
Highways are being redone every 20 years because they allow super heavy traffic constantly. Michigan also has lower standards for concrete in highways (and up to recently they rarely check on what contractors were putting in, and the substandard stuff was falling apart in 5-8 years).
Re: Sounds awfully wasteful (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That pothole you filled had a wire in it that no longer works. That's the problem. Roads do need to get repaired frequently. Currently the fix is literally just stuff in some asphalt (repeatedly most times) till spring/summer. Now, with an 'electric' road, you need to do far more intensive repairs to keep the system functioning.
That's the problem with putting infrastructure in a degrading environment like an road und
Re: (Score:3)
infrastructure is a basic one time expense, you build more capacity 'once' and use it for years.
Amortize much? It's not a "one time expense" if it's good "for years".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So no potholes for 20 years? That's amazing.
Who said "no potholes" - no one, that's who. After 20/30 years roads become unusable - before they reach that point they get pot holes, and the pot holes get filled, and the road is still useful.usable...
Re: (Score:2)
That pothole you filled had a wire in it that no longer works. That's the problem. Roads do need to get repaired frequently. Currently the fix is literally just stuff in some asphalt (repeatedly most times) till spring/summer. Now, with an 'electric' road, you need to do far more intensive repairs to keep the system functioning.
That's the problem with putting infrastructure in a degrading environment like an road under dai
Re: (Score:2)
in theory, if you're entire energy supply is fuel free, i.e. solar, wind etc, then you can absorb significant losses by just building more capacity. In theory.
And in practice we can consider such waste once our energy is 100% decarbonised.
Re: (Score:2)
in theory, if you're entire energy supply is fuel free, i.e. solar, wind etc, then you can absorb significant losses by just building more capacity. In theory.
In theory, yes, but in practice, no.
I've never seen free solar, wind, hydro, or thermal generation plants.
Let's imagine it has 50% efficiency, that means we'd have to over-build the power generating facility by 100% - that literally doubles the cost of the electricity that actually makes it into the EV battery.
Re:Sounds awfully wasteful (Score:4, Interesting)
So every solar plant you've seen...pays for it's sunlight? You *Pay* for the wind to blow? Rivers to flow?
All systems have some cost obviously. Renewables do NOT have on going fuel input costs. Is that so hard to understand?
Re: (Score:2)
I had a look at their website and it seems that they put their coils under the asphalt layer, so it is possible to resurface the road without disturbing them. As such they should be more permanent than the road surface.
That said, it remains to be seen how durable they are.
As for efficiency, there have been wireless EV chargers in use in Europe, for taxis waiting for fares. Efficiency is surprisingly good, in excess of 85%, which isn't that far off wired when you factor in losses in the wiring. Apparently th
Re: (Score:2)
Probably need a foot before it's really viable, but that's still a very impressive achievement.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd be interested to know just how much power that's put into the coils in the road doesn't make it to the batteries / motor in the vehicle.
Well, a 1/4 mile stretch, 30mph, so 30 second charge time at the shown rate of 16kW should charge my EV by 0.2% of capacity so there isn’t much waste because there isn’t any charging happening. They would be better off putting them in parking spaces so at least the charge time would be longer. But the reality is charging roadways won’t make financial sense, both for the cost of installation, maintenance, additional touchy gear under the vehicle, on and on including the waste in transmis
Re: (Score:2)
Based on that analysis, a 100% charge would take 125 miles. The implication is that this could actually be a good technology for freeways and Interstate's. These are the roads where greatest range is needed, where fencing and limited access keep pedestrians and other equipment off the roadway, and where the roads are built to be more durable. For city street driving though, your concerns make a good point, perhaps not much value or profit electrifying them. It also makes me wonder, if the 1/4 mile test
Re: (Score:2)
I propose this real-world test:
Build a 100 mile charge road.
Run a fully-charged EV over the 100 mile charge road.
Measure the charge in the EV after driving 100 miles.
Repeat the last two steps at faster, slower speeds and take the same measurement.
I'd be impressed if the EV can end up at the end of the 100 mile run at 100% charge, but I seriously doubt that would happen for any typical highway speed.
Re: Sounds awfully wasteful (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's see now. Looking up tesla, they get about 4.5 miles per kilowatt hour. So 30 seconds @16 kw provides enough power to go 0.6 miles. And since that's over a distance of 0.25 miles, it sounds like a win to me. Let's increase the speed to 60 mph. That still means that the energy gained over that quarter mile is enough to travel 0.3 miles, so that's pretty much break even. Put that system on the Interstate and if it has the capability of supplying 16 kW continuously to each vehicle running on it and range becomes a non-issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Let's see now. Looking up tesla, they get about 4.5 miles per kilowatt hour. So 30 seconds @16 kw provides enough power to go 0.6 miles. And since that's over a distance of 0.25 miles, it sounds like a win to me. Let's increase the speed to 60 mph. That still means that the energy gained over that quarter mile is enough to travel 0.3 miles, so that's pretty much break even. Put that system on the Interstate and if it has the capability of supplying 16 kW continuously to each vehicle running on it and range becomes a non-issue.
Except you ignore costs. Yes, let’s take the efficiently gains of EV and roll them back to fossil fuel vehicles through poor coupling of high energy systems. People complain the grid can’t be expanded for EV because it’s too expensive and yet this is at a cost three to five orders of magnitude higher in supplying power. Where is the need for such a system? battery costs have gone done 90% in the last 15 years with all EV being sold easily able to handle even brutal commutes, this syst
Re: (Score:2)
There are some very specific use cases, like taxi ranks, where this can work. For the most part though, I think commercial vehicles will settle on just charging the normal way with a cable. Battery swaps might also be used for some users like haulage. Nio already has that working for cars, and it takes 6 minutes at a fully automated swap station.
Re: (Score:2)
That's enough to deice the roads for that section a little bit. It might end up being the only decent stretch of road in the state in the winter. And with frequent maintenance and tech upgrades it will also be under constant summer construction, making it a prime example of Michigan highways.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's absolutely scam rubbish that they got government funding for I guess? Yes there will be tons of wasted electricity. But, "wireless is cool, right"? LOL.
Re: (Score:2)
EEVBlog loves this topic (Score:2)
I can't wait to see Dave (and likely Thunderfoot) make fun of yet another attempt at this nonsense in the US!
Re: (Score:2)
Thunderf00t doesn't understand space!
https://planetocracy.wordpress... [wordpress.com]
Guys, wear lead pants (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Induction coils don't emit any kind of radiation, not microwaves, not x-rays. Just a magnetic field.
Re: (Score:2)
Induction coils don't emit any kind of radiation, not microwaves, not x-rays. Just a magnetic field.
They do emit radio waves.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, they can emit radio waves under specific conditions. https://physics.stackexchange.... [stackexchange.com].
If you're worried about radio waves, you need to find a different planet to live on. We are literally bathed in radio waves, from TV, radio stations, wifi, cell towers, and who knows what else. Even before technology came along, we were constantly saturated in radio waves from space. So if that's your concern, you'd better wear those lead pants (and shirt and helmet) for the rest of your life.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say radio waves are especially dangerous, just being pedantic that's all.
Re: Guys, wear lead pants (Score:2)
Magnetic fields ARE radiation. That's why it's called "electromagnetic radiation".
Re: (Score:2)
To produce electromagnetic radiation, it is necessary for electrons to pass through a magnetic field. A magnetic field on its own, is not in itself, radiation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Another example of the ultimate impacticality (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And since charging stations can be in almost any parking lot, I predict a lot of employers will one day offer charging to employees because the best time to charge BEVs is during peak solar output.
Why? Why would any employer take on the added expense of wiring a parking lot with EV chargers? What do they get out of it but complaints from employees over worn and broken chargers?
What do the employees get out of this? Presumably they are wise enough to get a car that can take them to work and back home in case there's a problem with charging at work. If the intent is to draw power from the parked vehicles to get this "increased grid stability" then are the employees getting compensation for the adde
Re: (Score:2)
Why would any employer take on the added expense of literally anything not mandated by law? Free coffee in the break room? Employee picnics/luncheons? Holiday bonuses?
The mind boggles!
Oh wait, employee satisfaction actually does matter in some places and providing amenities is a low cost way to improve that. Also, EV charging is good PR especially if your business is related to government, environmental, or energy related industries.
Normally I'd say this isn't difficult to imagine but...
=Smidge=
Re: Another example of the ultimate impacticality (Score:2)
The 'some places' must not be in the UK. Here, employers do not provide anywhere to park, let alone provide a charging point. They can't even be arsed to provide a dedicated spot to park the works forklift for charging, in my experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would any employer take on the added expense of literally anything not mandated by law? Free coffee in the break room? Employee picnics/luncheons? Holiday bonuses?
You didn't answer why the employees would care whether or not the employers offered EV charging at work.
Why would an employee care if their employer offered EV charging? Even if it were free? Are they so stricken with range anxiety that they'd not work there otherwise? If I were an employer then I'd have questions about the intelligence and/or sanity of someone that demanded that I offer charging for their BEV as a condition of them accepting any job offer.
The proposed idea was that this would be some ki
Re: (Score:2)
> Why would an employee care if their employer offered EV charging?
You didn't ask that. You asked, and I quote: "Why would any employer take on the added expense of wiring a parking lot with EV chargers?" Are we really going to play THAT game?
But to answer this question as directly as possible, since you seem either incapable or unwilling to imagine why anyone would want anything:
- If an employee owns an EV, then it's obvious why that employee might care their employer offers EV charging at work.
- If an
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't ask that. You asked, and I quote: "Why would any employer take on the added expense of wiring a parking lot with EV chargers?" Are we really going to play THAT game?
Did you read the line after what you quoted? "What do the employees get out of this?" There was more than one question in the comment.
If an employee owns an EV, then it's obvious why that employee might care their employer offers EV charging at work.
- If an employee cares about promoting alternatives to gasoline and diesel vehicles, for any reason, then they might care their employer offers EV charging at work.
- If the company operates in alternative or green energy, or related technologies/industry, employees might care their employer offers EV charging at work because it demonstrates a deeper commitment. Employees tend to enjoy working for a company with a vision (See: Google prior to their IPO for example)
- Even if business is completely unrelated to anything remotely related to energy tech, and nobody who works there drives an EV, it's still at the very least a demonstration of commitment; see above.
You could have just written "virtue signalling" and be done.
Maybe it's not about cost? Maybe it's about convenience? For example:
> I would assume ... they have a suitable charger at home
I am 99.999% certain you have argued against BEVs citing that not everyone is capable of charging at home. Don't bring this weak-ass shit anymore, m'kay? Gotta earn your paycheck.
If people can't charge at home then what are they doing with a BEV? Presumably they drive places besides work. Presumably they return home with regularity, it's kind of how we define "home". If they are so adamant on owning a BEV without a charger at home then presumably they have plans to charge besides going t
How many times do you have to drive over it? (Score:2)
Quarter mile? Gonna have to drive over it a whole lot to charge the car?
Re: (Score:2)
Their first customers will be elderly people driving their E-Rascals.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't have to fully charge the car. Any amount of recharging while driving, will allow electric cars to stay on the road longer between charging stops.
Only for moving vehicles? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I assume that the vehicle has to be moving over the road in order for an alternating current to be induced in the vehicle's on-board pick-up coil. Otherwise, the road will be just like another static magnetic field. Which raises a more interesting question for me -- will my compass still work when driving over or in the vicinity of this road? Hmmm, me thinks not.
If you are in motion then your GPS receiver will be able to tell your direction of travel. That is potentially more accurate than a compass.
I remember as a kid watching some movie on TV where one character told another how to tell directions with a clock and watching the sun/shadows. I remembered that because I found the idea fascinating, and used that knowledge on occasion to navigate over unfamiliar territory. This was an important skill to have in at least one point in the movie since the two protagon
What? No solar freakin' roadways? (Score:2)
At least they aren't trying to make this about solar power in or above the roads. We don't need solar freakin' roadways.
If you have such "range anxiety" from driving a BEV that you need to charge up while driving then that is a sign that BEVs aren't for you, possibly aren't for anyone. I like the idea of a BEV and I know people that are quite pleased with theirs. What they don't do is beg for a means to recharge while driving, or demand outlets to charge while parked outside where they work or shop. Wha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Range anxiety is barely a thing anymore
Then why is anyone thinking it necessary to put wireless charging in roads?
Itâ(TM)s going to be at most another 15 years and battery costs and technology will be to the point gas and diesel vehicles wonâ(TM)t be cost competitive at all.
Hardly. I expect basic supply/demand market forces to keep ICEVs, BEVs, and PHEVs at near parity for TCO for a long time. Individual buyers might rarely consider TCO in their buying decisions but businesses that operate large fleets of vehicles will be buying enough to keep pricing competitive. It's these large purchases that will drive prices more than individuals looking for some conspicuous consumption. Businesses will look at
Re: (Score:2)
Range anxiety is barely a thing anymore
Then why is anyone thinking it necessary to put wireless charging in roads?
Because the world is full of scams that prey on fear and ignorance. Where money exists, like funds for public roadways, there will always be thieves.
Hardly. I expect basic supply/demand market forces to keep ICEVs, BEVs, and PHEVs at near parity for TCO for a long time.
It’s fuel prices that are driving them to be uncompetitive, plus auto manufacturing is extremely lean already while economies of scale haven’t even kicked in for EVs. Plus maintenance costs which won’t improve because it’s mature technology. when battery prices drop another 50-90% and the energy/power density climbs even more its g
Re: (Score:2)
Itâ(TM)s fuel prices that are driving them to be uncompetitive, plus auto manufacturing is extremely lean already while economies of scale havenâ(TM)t even kicked in for EVs. Plus maintenance costs which wonâ(TM)t improve because itâ(TM)s mature technology. when battery prices drop another 50-90% and the energy/power density climbs even more its going to be unaffordable to pay 5-10x the cost per mile when the vehicles have the same sticker price, right now I pay one third the cost per mile for my ev compared to a similar ICE vehicle on a fuel mileage basis.
Why would you assume the same sticker price? I recall someone pointing out the following...
Because the world is full of scams that prey on fear and ignorance. Where money exists, like funds for public roadways, there will always be thieves.
The prices on BEVs will rise if fuel prices rise. This is because demand for BEVs will rise. This is basic supply vs. demand stuff. The people involved don't have to be thieves looking to scam people with fear and ignorance but that will play into things, it can be a basic TCO calculation that anyone can do with all kinds of freely available information on what things cost now and how people are bidding on future
Re: (Score:2)
Range anxiety is barely a thing anymore
I give you the guy who had a 5-digit UID [slashdot.org] who was afraid to travel a 160 mile roundtrip because he had an EV. Anecdotal? Sure. Common? You bet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's almost like politicians should talk to real engineers and physicists instead of marketers from scam companies.
Re: What? No solar freakin' roadways? (Score:2)
Real engineers and physicists to not have a budget for fancy restaurants, envelopes full of cash etc, thus politicians will never meet them.
Cost? (Score:2)
WTF spend a fortune on charging roads when most cars spend most of their time parked? I'm a big fan of BEVs and vocally pan hydrogen proponents because the their numbers don't stack up, but crazy ideas like this are just a whole new level of crazy.
The closest real use case is overhead lines for trains. That is expensive too but, pays for itself over a reasonable time frame. Powered roads would never pay for themselves
Re: (Score:2)
Pilot tests are always expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
How about this one https://www.theguardian.com/en... [theguardian.com]. Much simpler just tracks in the road instead if copper loops. It is €1m per km, at scale.
There is about 64,285,009 km
Re: (Score:2)
First, we don't know yet whether a factor of 10 in cost savings can be achieved by building this technology at scale. It could be less, or it could be more. Somebody might figure out that these things can be 3-D printed at 99% less cost, who knows!
It will surely never be cost-effective to build this technology into rural dirt roads. But there are certain kinds of locations where it might make sense. As your article points out, the cost for that project is "50 times lower" than an urban train line.
Re: (Score:2)
A better use of money is investing in street side charging for people who can't charge at home.
People that can't charge at home should have a PHEV or ICEV than a BEV.
I recall in some comments on similar Slashdot discussion advocating for e-bikes as a solution for those that don't have a garage or such to charge at home. The idea was that an e-bike is small and light enough to be taken inside an apartment or whatever to recharge. I can imagine that working for some, but that's hardly a solution for everyone that can't charge a car at home. I could see people keeping an e-bike around as a back-up an
Re: (Score:2)
Subsidies were are good idea to get the ball rolling, pity they didn't apply when I brought my car. I think we have reached a point where they can now be reduced and phased out over the coming year.
Re: Cost? (Score:2)
I wonder if it would ever be practical (and cheap) to have numerous removable batteries that can be brought inside for charging.
Using current numbers, a Model 3 is about 1000 lbs. If that was 10 removable batteries, each 100 lbs, and you did light commuting (33 miles), that comes close to allowing you to bring in one battery pack each night for charging.
100 lbs is too much, and batteries are not designed to be removed. But those facts aren't necessarily permanent.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if it would ever be practical (and cheap) to have numerous removable batteries that can be brought inside for charging.
I've seen this done for electric scooters.
Using current numbers, a Model 3 is about 1000 lbs. If that was 10 removable batteries, each 100 lbs, and you did light commuting (33 miles), that comes close to allowing you to bring in one battery pack each night for charging.
100 lbs is too much, and batteries are not designed to be removed. But those facts aren't necessarily permanent.
100 pounds is a bit much. While growing up on the family farm we'd have animal feed, seed corn, and various other items come in 50 pound blocks or bags. That is about the limit that someone could carry with regularity. I recall from somewhere that there's OSHA rules, or something, that anything over 70 pounds is considered a two person lift. A quick look at some of the scooter batteries and they appear to be something like 20 to 30 pounds, so something light eno
From the Medical Department (Score:2)
From the AIP, December 1, 2373.
A century ago, there was concern that people living under electrical transmission lines had a greater risk of brain cancer. Now, with much of the population driving over transmission lines, the rise in ass cancer has brought scrutiny to current road technologies. The companies making these transmission systems have dismissed such concerns suppositorily.
As bad an idea as the solar roadways (Score:2)
How efficient is this? Any inductive pickup in the car is at least, say, 10 inches away from the road surface. How much energy will really be transferred?
Who pays for maintenance? Just like the stupid solar roadway ideas, this is far more expensive to maintain and restore after inevitable road construction than simple concrete or macadam roadways.
This is a stupid idea all around.
Re: (Score:2)
No, this idea is significantly worse.
I'll believe it when I see it (Score:2)
We'll see if it survives the winter, let alone copper looters.
Parking (Score:2)
This would be much more useful for charging in urban on-street parking situations than for charging while driving. This is not likely to provide much more power than is used to drive on the road in question, but charging for people who park on the street is a real problem in some areas. It's a much easier proposition to sell an EV to someone who can charge it at home every night.
Overhead Conductive Charging (Score:3)
Charging through overhead wires seems much more efficient, has higher charging rates, is substantially cheaper.to install, and much easier to fix.
This can be done at-rest: SAE J1305 [wikipedia.org]
Or, since the early 1900's, while in motion: Trollybus [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
"much easier to fix"
Except failures are going to be less localized with OLE. An individual driver's poorly maintained pantograph is going to pull down a mile of cable at a time, which also creates a live electrical hazard for everyone.
Battery swap machines (Score:2)
Aren't battery swapping machines/technology like 1,000x more beneficial than this? I don't understand...
Re: Battery swap machines (Score:2)
I'm probably wrong about this, but why? (Score:2)
A couple of things bug me about wireless charging roads:
First, we're basically talking about an air-core transformer with the primary winding just below the road surface and the secondary winding mounted to the bottom of the EV. This seems like a very low efficiency energy transfer. So a lot of the power put into the road is just going to be radiated off as heat. Could be a benefit in clearing snow in a Michigan winter, I guess, but expensive overall. And the energy consumption on a road with significan
$8 million per mile (Score:2)
Can this become real, or is it a long slow pump and dump?
Might bring back Friday night "cruising" (Score:1)
\o/ (Score:1)
There are plans for an additional road within five years which will dispense healthcare to drivers and passengers as they traverse the road.
Put them at stop signs and lights (Score:1)
Imagine putting them at stop signs and turn them on during yellow and red lights.. people might actually come to a complete stop or even wait to turn left instead of pulling into the intersection a second before it turns red.
Copper? (Score:1)
Isn't there already a question of limited copper supply? Seems like larger scale implementations of this would deplete it entirely.
induction cookware (Score:1)
i wonder if my induction cookware can be set in the passenger floorboard and cook soup while im driving home? Other than burning the carpet of course.