Car Tech: What's your favorite alternative fuel?
- 4/24/07 5:45 PM
Diesel is the way
by money11465 - 5/3/07 1:29 PM In reply to: What's your favorite alternative fuel? by wcunning
First and foremost, I think the US should support good public transportation, such as in almost all other developed countries, especially Europe and Japan. That's the answer to a lot of fuel problems, and also to kids always asking their parents to drive them places. However, seeing as how a lot of Americans wouldn't use these systems, they'd be too expensive, and cars must be used. I think the best type of alternatively fueled car is diesel. Diesel may not be cheaper for the end-user, but it's cleaner and much more efficient, so there's no extra cost, except possibly the initial cost for the engine. I like diesel better than hybrids because it's cleaner (similar gas mileage, cleaner fuel) and higher performance. Also, many hybrids look unusual, something that doesn't attract me. For example, there are diesel versions of many normal-looking cars, like Mercedes or BMW.
you're correct
by impala - 5/3/07 9:21 PM In reply to: Diesel is the way by money11465How about a small hybrid turbo diesel? A miniature locomotive! This makes much more sense than hybrid gasoline cars.
Add biodiesel fuel and you have a carbon neutral car. Perfect.
Diesel locomotive?
by FredMars - 5/3/07 10:28 PM In reply to: you're correct by impalaLocomotives are NOT powered by diesel. They are powered by electric motors. The diesel engines drive generators to make the electricity. Now why they don't also install batteries (capacitors) that can store that electric I cannot say. I'm sure it can reduce the amount of diesel required to power those 600 horsepower electric motors.
I got to step in here and make some rumors go away. Elctricity is NOT actually generated in the sense that we are mking it out of something else. Electromagnetism is a universla energy that is there all the time. We have just managed to use some albeit primitive methods to extract that energy from the quanta (aether). Einsteinians will cringe at the though that there is an aether source of energy, but it's the only thing that makes sense as compared to the four-space, string-theory, and gravity being a "warp" created by mass in space-time.
Gravity is an effect of the energy/aether equalizing the electromagnetic polarities that would normally have like charges repelling one another as they do with common bar magnets. I also do not subscribe to Einstein's theory that C= the maximum speed of light in a vacuum.
"Spent" nuclear fuel is only used up based on the method(s) used to extract it's energy. Just as IC gas/diesel engines waste more fuel than they actually use, the spent nuclear fuel has so much radioactive energy they want to bury it for 100,000 years in a facility at Yucca Mtn.
You don't need a jackhammer to open a coconut, why use such brute force to power your auto? The obvious answer is becaue that is what we have, and the logic behind it can be summed up in a single quote , credited to J. P. Morgan when Nikola Tesla wanted funding to produce power from "radiant energy from the cosmos" to produce free electric. Morgan said, "I'm in the business of selling energy, not antennae." And hence we have been a captive audience since.
Now to all those who will now tell me what Newton's Law, Maxwell, Plank, and Einstein postulated, I say to you, real innovation begins where we stop looking at what everyone else has done before and we do what they did not believe was possible.
You want to know what really happened to the 100 MPG carburetor or the electric car, just follow the money trail. You may actually find a cancer cure along the way that has been suppressed for over 75 years. But that is a topic for another blog.
Fred Mars
Corvallis, OR
yes they are diesel.
by impala - 5/3/07 11:26 PM In reply to: Diesel locomotive? by FredMarstake the diesel out of a locomotive and how fast does it go? It cannot move.
locomotive:
turbo diesel engine running at constant rpm drives electric generator which drives an electric motor which produces more torque more efficiently over a wider speed range than a conventional transmission can.
hybrid turbo diesel auto:
small turbo diesel engine running at constant rpm drives electric generator which CHARGES A BATTERY and/or drives electric motor. generator and/or battery drive electric motors which produce much more torque more efficiently over a wider speed range than the small turbo diesel could attached to a transmission. Under low power requirements the battery allows engine to shutdown.
Notice a theme? no direct drive. diesels especially like to run at near constant rpm.
In fact, the one unique feature of the typical gasoline engine is it's relatively flat torque curve over a wide rpm range. I'm talking chevy not F1. But at the expense of efficiency.
Batteries powered make ZERO sence.Hydrogen or BioDiesel does
by wfcarrigan - 5/3/07 2:01 PM In reply to: What's your favorite alternative fuel? by wcunning
I have been watching the alternative energy trends for about 30 years, and IMHO unless one has there own free energy generation system such as wind or solar, battery powered vehicles don't make sense. All they do is have the pollution created in another location fed by coal, natural gas and nuclear.
Where I see the best possibilities for alt energy for vehicles is in hydrogen fueled or bio-diesel. Both use far less energy to 'manufacture/extract' the energy then any other commonly available source.
Yes, there is an argument against hydrogen principally because of the lack of infrastructure, but one could have said the same for Henry's jalopy when he first built the assembly line outside of Detroit. Look at the problems that the first gasoline powered car owners had finding fuel.... not many after just a few years of cars being on the road...
And as far as growing crops for a gasoline alternative (such as E-85), this is just insane. It takes more energy to plant, grow, harvest, and distill than the net result... Therefore it is a negative energy source that will suck our resources dry and raise the price of food so that not only will the wealth be the only ones to be able to afford fuel, but they will be the only that will be able to buy variety of foods without having to sacrifice elsewhere (such as do we eat or do we buy gas to get to X)...
BioDiesel yes, hydrogen NO WAY!
by impala - 5/3/07 9:25 PM In reply to: Batteries powered make ZERO sence.Hydrogen or BioDiesel does by wfcarrigancarbon neutral hydrogen is less efficient than batteries for transportation power.
You said "Where I see the best possibilities for alt energy for vehicles is in hydrogen fueled or bio-diesel. Both use far less energy to 'manufacture/extract' the energy then any other commonly available source."
That is absolutely false for carbon neutral hydrogen once packaged as a transportation fuel. If you're talking sealed fuel cell, that's more like a battery.
note: hydrogen stripped from hydrocarbons is not carbon neutral at all. Might as well burn the hydrocarbon.
IF they can get ethanol from cellulose, you will not have much impact on the food supply.
biodiesel is the best.
Hydrogen powered makes Zero Sense. Batteries or Biofuels do.
by albizzia - 5/8/07 2:08 PM In reply to: Batteries powered make ZERO sence.Hydrogen or BioDiesel does by wfcarriganWhere do you get the hydrogen? There are several methods, but all are expensive and inefficient. The cheapest method is to react a fossil fuel (natural gas, coal, petroleum) with steam at high temperature to get CO2 and H2. Not very good if you are trying to reduce fossil fuel consumption or CO2 production.
Electrolysis requires electricity. Water electolysis is only 60% efficient, fuel cells are only 50% efficient, plus it takes energy to compress or liquify H2 for storage, overall efficiency is 24% or less. Compare that with 85% efficiency for charger and batteries, 3x better than H2. Why waste most of your electric energy with H2, especially when some electric plants are still powered by fossil fuels? Don't waste renewable energy, choose the efficient option.
While Ethanol has much less energy per gallon than gasoline, Butanol is almost equal to gasoline, and Butanol can run in existing cars without modification. Butanol can be made from the same feedstocks, including switchgrass cellulose, and is a great option for most older non-electric vehicles.
Air
by dopestgingah - 5/3/07 2:47 PM In reply to: What's your favorite alternative fuel? by wcunning
While the concepts of Hydrogen, BioDisel, Electricity are good options, they all have costs to them. They all cost money to make or produce. I, like every single person who drives a car, am sick of having to pay to fuel my car so often. The BioDisel is probably the best option for high power, performance cars in the next 50 years or so. There was a "Pimp My Ride" recently where a 1965 Chevrolet Impala was modified to have a 850 horsepower engine, and had BioDisel. The Impala beat a regular gas powered Lamborghini in a drag race! (http://domesticfuel.com/?p=1876) However I like the idea of an air powered car the best. Since this car will have a truly never ending resource (it just emits air!), they can never charge money for this! While the car on their site might not look like the most appealing, their will certainly be improvements. They might not go 200 mph right now, but the technology will get better. We really needs to bring this to the attention of everyone! http://www.theaircar.com/
no air car
by impala - 5/3/07 9:27 PM In reply to: Air by dopestgingahusing compressed air to store energy is extremely inefficient.
Cars of the future
by jjijonc - 5/3/07 3:04 PM In reply to: What's your favorite alternative fuel? by wcunning
Looking at the future with a telescope -and you don't need a very powerful one- the first thing you should look for is the whole collection of technologies that ended up in the museum of interesting but not too useful ideas.
One, and most notable, is the hybrid car: it was neither this nor that, or rather it was like asking people to buy twice and get two halves. Next is the hydrogen fueled car. Hydrogen is totally clean when burning (note, when burning), it's fairly portable, and it packs a lot of energy. But is badly inefficient with respect to the energy required for its production. There are also important concerns as of the environment in large scale production. The trouble with hydrogen is that you don't find it lying around on earth or undergroud, nor does it grow naturally on solar energy. It must be extracted either from fossil fuels (a misdoer) or from water, which takes more energy than the extracted hydrogen can deliver.
Bio-fuels (ethanol or biodiesel) are good alternatives for fossil fuel replacement as they are renewable. There will always be a need for burning fuels and the bio alternatives will certaily grow. Although burning bio-fuels also produce as much carbon dioxide as burning any other type of carbon fuel, the advantage found here is that the growth of the bio mass needed to make ethanol or biodiesel takes the same amount of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. A good recycling scheme. However, from an evironmental point of view, that would be true only if the land used for growing that bio-mass was otherwise not covered with forests. Cutting rain forests down to grow bio-fuel producing plants would have an overall negative effect.
So, out of the museum of good tries, one can only see battery-packed energy as a durable mean of transporting energy. For the original production of the electrid energy packed in batteries, mass production methods, such as nuclear reactors, are cleaner and environmentally friendly. Security measures for the environment can much more easily enforced in a few large plants than at the consumer level. Solar, wind, tide or waves sources will also be used, but are unlikely going to suffice to replace fossil fuels.
The big chalange of the near future is in the design of better, lighter and more capable batteries (or close-by substitutes).
Jacinto Jijón-Caamaño
Ecuador
biofuel better than you think
by impala - 5/3/07 9:31 PM In reply to: Cars of the future by jjijoncyou certainly can produce biodiesel in a desert, or possibly on the ocean. arable land not required. Just add water and nutrients.
if they can get ethanol from cellulose then it will have minimal impact on rain forests or food production.
I keep hearing how Brazil is razing their rain forest. Are they doing it to produce sugar cane for ethanol? Or just for the lumber?
Human Power
by jonjon1946 - 5/3/07 3:09 PM In reply to: What's your favorite alternative fuel? by wcunning
I LIKE TO RIDE A BIKE AND BURN CALORIES AS AN ALTERNATE FUEL.
I love my electric car!
by olsond3 - 5/3/07 3:10 PM In reply to: What's your favorite alternative fuel? by wcunning
I've been driving a 2000 Ford Ranger Electric Pickup truck for a year now. I'm living the dream baby! It is fully charged and ready to go every morning. No need to waste time driving to a stupid gas station. No need to wait for new fangled batteries. This thing runs on lead acid batteries. The two times a month I need to drive farther than it will go, I trade cars with my wife. As Ed Bagley said "Electric cars only have sufficient range to meet the needs of 90% of the population". To all the sceptics out there, until you have owned one for a while, you just won't get it.
Who cares which car fuel.
by Chris_T52 - 5/3/07 3:12 PM In reply to: What's your favorite alternative fuel? by wcunning
While in many places the use of a private car is the only practical solution, many of us use cars when more energy efficient mass transit is available, or would be available if more people were willing to use it.
Hydrogen and electicity are merely means of distributing energy produced (released from) somewhere else. Biodiesal? Hmm, I'm thinking about how much gas I use and about how much food I eat; I burn more gallons than I consume. Therefore, assuming that is a general trend, farming production would have to more than double in order for there to be enough biodiesal. Do we have that much farmland?
If you are worried about being green, (reducing carbon footprint), you should be more concerned about how energy is produced than how it is distributed for consumption. Sure, the electric and hydrogen engines release less CO2 than their fossil fuel counterparts, but I wonder how much CO2 is released in the process of generating, transporting, and storage of electricity/hydrogen. From a thermodynamics/entropy perspective, adding steps between production and use always involves energy loss. Biodiesal is nice because it relies on solar energy (plant growth).
you're on the right track
by impala - 5/3/07 9:38 PM In reply to: Who cares which car fuel. by Chris_T52you're on the right track. In the case of hydrogen production for transportation use, there are a LOT of steps.
Read this why a hydrogen economy doesn't make sense.
Problems with producing H2 are just the beginning.
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
|
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
