Car Tech: What's your favorite alternative fuel?
- 4/24/07 5:45 PM
You would expect all Europe to use it because......
by Helldiver - 5/2/07 10:58 PM In reply to: Electricity is more palooting by writeleft..........When I fill up the tank of my little car (compare to the American type), I never manage to pay less than 60 dollars!
Man! 4 dollars for a full tank that's a bargain! Forget the green stuff, let's go on the real polluting stuff!
Just to stress that even if in Europe the price are sky high people didn't change their habits because the green car are still too expensive and the pump in the countryside are nowhere to be seen.
You've got to be kidding me!!
by floorhor - 5/3/07 4:13 AM In reply to: Electricity is more palooting by writeleftAll you need is sunlight and water??? 'Hey honey, go out back and russle me up some hydrogen...I've got to go to work.' Come on writeleft, you definitely write left. Get off you're left wing agenda and 'use your brain'. Hydrogen would have to be produced, distributed, and used. All of these produce $...yes evil profits. Its just not viable at this point and until the market says so, its not going to be viable.
Also, why are the polar ice caps on other planets melting, or does the answer skewer the sacred cow of man-made global warming?
Peace...
ummmm close but not quite...
by keyguy - 5/3/07 4:25 AM In reply to: Electricity is more palooting by writeleftHydrogen doesn't just spontaneously appear when you have sunlight and water 
It takes electricity to break down hydrogen from water. I agree that hydrogen is the best alternative for the next 20 years but it really IS still experimental.
Electricity does not pollute
by FredMars - 6/26/07 4:29 AM In reply to: Electricity is more palooting by writeleftIt's not electric that creates pollution, it's the arcane ways in which electric is used. Electricty does not require fuel for it to exsist. It's already there. The problem is that to get that energy, we need to think about physics differently.
Theer is no more abundant energy in the universe that electrical energy. Electrons flow through every atom and through the spaces between.
Many physicists have experimented with resonant frequencies that begin to "create" electricity" Daniel McFarland-Cook patented a device in 1871 that generated electric with two concentric coils. Henry T. Moray demonstrated several "radiant energy" devices that powered lights, clothes iron, and built an electric car that ran with an antenna instead of batteries. Nikola Tesla did the same, and further stated that he could transmit that electric power wirelessly like radio waves without danger to animals or humans. MIT just dmonstrated the wireless transmission of electric to power a 6- watt bulb. Tesla did this with dozens of bulbs. In fact, he ran his entire lab with "wireless and free" electricty. He recieved it from "the cosmos" or the "Sea of Energy" that Moray wrote about.
18th and 19th century physicists called it the Aether, but along came Albert Einstein, and Relativity. Using the Michelson-Morley experiement as proof, light became a fixed maximum speed, and nothing could travel faster.
Nothing can give us space travel like electric can. It powers the universe. Tesla estimated that space emits millions of volts without current, constantly now and forever. He was able to capture it and trandform it to utility power.
He designed his WardenClyffe Tower to do just that. J. P. Morgan didn't like that idea, but George Westinghouse could not afford to pay Tesla for what he had done under contract let alone finance such an endeavor. Tesla lab was destroyed and the rest as they say is history.
The technology to rid us of "our oil addiction" as President Bush labeled it, is here with us and has been for years. It's suppressed for the benefit of the industries that stand to lose the most.
Just as we don't have real healthcare, we won't have real energy freedom unless everyone one of us starts to take action. Otherwise you're just part of the problem.
In the time it took you to write about what doesn't work, and my telling you what will, Exxon-Mobil will have made hundreds of millions of dollars, terrorists will have received weapons from laundered oil funds, and many more lives will have been lost.
Someone wrote that such energy technology would fall into the wrong hands and that is the reason its not made public. That is such a crock. If we were able to stop all use of oil and oil products next month, do you know how that will effect global terrorism?
If you could drive to work, take a bus or train, and no fuel is burned, no pollution is generated, less noise than diesels and holes in mufflers and manifolds, no empty oil containers littering all over the streets and sidewalks at Auto Zone or Pep Boys, or, hey wait! There would be no need for all those auto stores! Guess they will have to get jobs at fast food joints.
Elecricity
by Beaters - 5/2/07 10:53 PM In reply to: Electrons. by R. Proffitt
Oddly enough, I suspect you're on to something there.
In a nutshell, most of the other alt fuels have a problem with rspect to the laws of thermodynamics. In the end there are three sources of energy to be used on this planet: solar and its derivatives, geothermal, and nuclear (i.e. conversion of matter to energy).
Aside from nuclear and geothermal, every source of energy derives from solar. Fossil fuels are stored solar energy. So are fuels such as biodeisel and alcohol: some plants convert solar energy to carbohydrates, fibers, alcohols, lipids, whatever. These are all essentially stored solar energy.
If we want to tackle the energy problem we have to convert and use energy efficiently. Indirect use of solar energy is simply inefficient. Somewhere along the line we have to reach the point where the per capita use of energy exceeds that which can be reclaimed from the amount of solar energy that reaches our planet per unit of time. We may have reached that point already. After that the only solutions are either reduce energy consumption per capita or reduce the capitas.
Not a pretty picture, eh? ***, go forth and multiply all ye dumb arses, and cart your doomed kids around in your SUVs.
Lets think Hydrogen first!!
by gymnast - 5/3/07 1:26 AM In reply to: Electrons. by R. Proffitt
I have to agree that some form of combined, or all electric car seems the right route forward in the short term, but I find it strange that Governments around the World have not given more direction toward Hydrogen as an altarenataive fuel. As a planet it seems obvious that we are going to have to rely more and more on Atomic power stations for the rapid increase in our energy needs. These mainly will be beside areas of sea, this allows for excess power to be used for water de-salination, and Hydrogen production, as well as electricity, all in one plant. This will help to supply clean water in areas of greatest need, along with electricity to growing economies, and a fuel that is easy to transport, and when used produces water as its only polution. By keeping the powers stations and production plants in one area, the pollution is controlled and security is easier. The latest design of Light Water Reactors can be made in quite small sizes that would be small enough to supply single towns or communities. This stops the need for vast arrays of energy consuming electricty distribution systems, which in themselves cause pollution and destruction of resources. The problem with Hydrogen is the popular memory of films of airships burning. The most volatile chemical handled every daty is Gas (Petrol). The vapour alone is so explosive that if it is handled in a laboratory situation, it comes under incredably strict Government safety controls. Yet millions of gallons a day is pumped at Gas stations with people smoking, talking on phones, all ignoring the dangers. Hydrogen would be deliverd like LPG is now, if it accidently vents the vapour instantly rises, instead of pooling at ground level, and it dissipates very quickly. The liklehood of explosion is much lower than with ordinary Gas (Petrol).
My vote ---- easy, lets go HYDROGEN, the planet has more Hydrogen than all the humans could consume in the next two or three hundred thousand years, plus we get the water we are about to run out of..
Jonathan Ryan
hydrogen last
by impala - 5/3/07 2:32 PM In reply to: Lets think Hydrogen first!! by gymnastLets first use new nuke plants and solar energy to meet new electricity demand, then shutdown existing fossil fueled power plants. After all that you can begin talking about using excess electricity to produce hydrogen for transportation. that is a long, long way off in the future.
... not to mention popular memory of Challenger explosion....
Hydrogen must be stored at extreme pressure. I don't want it venting anywhere near me after a car crash. I'll take my chances with the slower burning and more stable biodiesel.
The planet has a lot of water, not free hydrogen. Saying "the planet has more hydrogen than all the humans..." because we have a lot of H2O is like saying "the planet has more free carbon than all the humans ..." because we have a lot of CO2.
H2O and CO2 are the waste product, not the energy source.
Alternate fuels
by WAArnold - 5/3/07 7:45 AM In reply to: Electrons. by R. Proffitt
"On top of that it is then possible to have solar, wind, other collectors at home"
I agree with you R. Proffitt, this would be great. However, the problem you have is as always, it's great for producing energy, it's also GREAT due to the fact you have what is called Home Owners Associations, You know, those few individuals that think they are God's gift to mankind!! They wont like it because IT RUINS THE LOOKS OF MY PROPERTY. Get rid of groups like that and you can make advances in alternate fuels. Until then, you have a few individuals that will rule what you do. You know, the squeaky wheel gets the grease!!
homeowners associations
by guybert - 5/4/07 2:00 PM In reply to: Alternate fuels by WAArnoldThe fact is, a minority of people in this country (less than 60 million) are affected by homeownes associations, and with those that are, it is by choice. The real problem at this time with photovoltaics is thier high cost. But in the not-too-far-distant future that is likely to change as the collectors become cheaper, and the energy supplies that they replace become more expensive. Which will the cost return faster and will create a greater demand for them.
Solar Electric Panels.....
by bonafide49 - 5/3/07 8:27 AM In reply to: Electrons. by R. Proffitt
.... should be sold with nearly every EV. Plunk them on the roof, in the back yard, on top of the car port, etc. While the vehicle is at home and parked, it can be charging (for FREE as long as the sun is out). There will be people who park underground or can't put up solar panels but those would be the exceptions, not the rule. The panels may not supply all of the needed recharge power but they would definitely make a difference.
The transition to any alternate fuel sources will take time and a lot of PR work. People are going to want an incentive to go to the extra trouble and expense. In it's current form, the hybrid vehicle is too expensive and provides too little real advantage to make it worth while to me. Give me an EV (possibly with a small IC engine to charge the batteries in a pinch). I can stop for a coffee break while it's charging.
Most importantly, we need to consider the greenhouse gas problem. Many of the alternatives reduce the output of CO2 but not enough to make a real difference in our atmosphere. We need to use fuels which produce little to no CO2 and the production of those fuels needs to follow that same thinking. To produce ethanol takes as much energy as what it can provide. It's only real advantage is to stretch the supply of gasoline a little further. Hydrogen takes energy to create it. The best options are nuclear power plants, solar plants and to some degree, hydroelectric and wind power. None of these power sources produce CO2. We need to get over the scares of the past about nuclear power. With todays technology it can be done safely and the waste is far less hazzardous than what we are currently doing to this planet. Perhaps even that waste can be put to work in lower level power production.
Why are honey bees disappearing? They are our number 1 source for crop pollination and their numbers are dropping rapidly. No one knows for sure why this is happening. Perhaps it because atmospheric CO2 levels are rising at an alarming rate. Perhaps the slight temperature rise on the planet is killing them off. Humans are very durable creatures. Many other animals, insects included, are not. Something to consider. It's not just about saving a few bucks, it's about keeping our planet alive as well. We have to look at the BIG picture.
Sun being out
by thomasaddley - 5/6/07 4:50 PM In reply to: Solar Electric Panels..... by bonafide49Solar panels charge when the sun is in your part of the world, whether you can see it for the clouds or, they work off the different UVs, and whether or not it is raining, snowing, clouded over or the sun is bright and shining the panels will produce electricity.
The sun only has to be over your head, does not matter if you can see it or not, if it is there, it is producing UVs and there-fore will produce electricity
No new car for me.
by Tobybear - 5/3/07 9:30 PM In reply to: Electrons. by R. Proffitt
First off Im not buying a hybrid just because gas goes up $1 a gallon, or even $2. Even if I had a big SUV with a 30 gallon tank (those are the people who complain that it took $100 to fill their tanks at $3+ a pop, do the math, but they dont mind spending $35,000+ on that SUV!), which I dont! Even if gas went up $2 a gallon and I filled a 30 gallon tank once a week, thats only an extra $240 to $300 a month! Yes I said only, because thats what a new car note would be, if not more, and you still need gas after that. Getting a a new car makes even less sense with my 15 gallon tank that I fill up every other week!
Now, if I were in the market for a new vehicle anyway, I would definitely buy an alternative fuel vehicle. Either ethanol or a hybrid. Detroit has been making Ethanol (E85) powered vehicles for about a decade now, way longer than Japan has been offering hybrids. E85 is an option in all types of vehicles, small cars, mid sized, pickups and full sized SUV's, if E85 isnt available it will still run on unleaded gas.
I think I recall hearing there are about 15 million new vehicles sold in the U.S. every year. People can talk and vote all they want, but until automakers see large percentages of new vehicle sales screaming for alternatives not much will change at a fast pace!
THIS IS A REAL ANSWER TO THE ENERGY CRISIS & GLOBAL WARMING
by TheSalemCat - 5/6/07 6:19 PM In reply to: Electrons. by R. Proffitt
Global Warming - is it caused by mankind, and how can we stop it ?
Hurricanes - they destroy homes and oil refineries. Can we do anything about them ?
Oil - we need it to grow food and to heat our homes. How can we reduce our need for it ?
Fortunately there is a near-term technology that can cure all three - Solar Shields.
Imagine an enormous shield in space, a shield that could deflect sunlight away from earth. Most Scientists agree that even a 2 percent change in the sunlight falling on earth would have a major long term effect on climate.
Polar Ice Caps melting ? Shield them.
Hurricane forming ? Shield it. Without the energy of sunlight the storm would cool off and die.
Oil Supplies in doubt ? Take a Shield and instead of using it to deflect the light, use it as a Mirror to focus the sunlight onto Solar Energy Plants on earth. These would generate any electric need - electricity that could be used to power our civilization in an economic and environmentally sound way.
Would these shields be heavy and impossible to build ? No. They could be formed of membranes of micro-thin plastic. In the vacuum and low gravity environment of space, these structures could be extremely lightweight yet remain practical.
Ever see a child's soap bubble toy ? A micro-thin wire could be used to create a 50 mile circle. As the wire is extended, it would pull out a metalized liquid that forms an ever-increasing liquid membrane.
Tiny computer controlled positioning engines can be deployed at appropriate locations. By releasing tiny amounts of compressed gas, or sputtering ions, they would slowly stretch out the shield, as well as position it.
Crazy impossible Sci-Fi ? Hardly. Compared to the Strategic Defense Initiative slow moving Solar Shields are strictly low tech. And their construction is so light, I'm estimating a section fifty miles across could be lifted with a single Space Shuttle.
And the cost ? I'll bet it would be far less than what we've spent in Iraq.
Electrical cars will overload our current grid sytem
by sexydarin - 5/6/07 7:07 PM In reply to: Electrons. by R. Proffitt
all those cars charging. The grid can't handle it.
charge at night
by Zpunk - 5/8/07 6:27 PM In reply to: Electrical cars will overload our current grid sytem by sexydarinMost people will be out during the day and recharging at night. The grid load drops by 2/3ds at night
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
|
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
