Gas-free car

[Liar]

Roll on nothing but air.

http://gadgetophilia.com/airpod-cars-are-here-to-take-you-up-up-and-away/

I wonder if there's any calculation of how much energy it takes to compress the air for it....

...yeah, I'm a party-pooper.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

You mean you're not supposed to fill them up with the bicycle pump before you go?

 

[Liar]

Oh that would be awesome. or I'll hook up a compressor to the treadmill. Lord knows I need the workout.

 

[epiphany65]

There are also kits you can buy to convert your car to run on ethanol or even water.

 

[Weird Harold]

There are also kits you can buy to convert your car to run on ethanol or even water.

Pure Ethanol fuel conversions are fairly simple and straightforward, but make sure you'r getting the EPA approved conversion package or you won't be able to register your car anywhere there is a smog check required.

The water=as-fuel conversions are scams and ripoffs -- there simply is no technology, even theoretical technology that can convert H2O to kinetic energy or motive force that can be applied to an internal combustion engine powered vehicle.

Liar, as I understand it, cars that run on compressed air or compressed nitrogen are on;y about 10% efficient when all of the energy transformations are considered and they are strictly short-commute vehicles.

 

[epiphany65]

Pure Ethanol fuel conversions are fairly simple and straightforward, but make sure you'r getting the EPA approved conversion package or you won't be able to register your car anywhere there is a smog check required.

The water=as-fuel conversions are scams and ripoffs -- there simply is no technology, even theoretical technology that can convert H2O to kinetic energy or motive force that can be applied to an internal combustion engine powered vehicle.

Liar, as I understand it, cars that run on compressed air or compressed nitrogen are on;y about 10% efficient when all of the energy transformations are considered and they are strictly short-commute vehicles.

Quite often a car's fuel sensors have to be adjusted when running with alohol. You can buy a water conversion kit here: http://www.hhowater4gas.com/
The producer of a radio show I listen to bought one to test it. He got slightly worse mileage but it did work and water is cheaper than gas.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

It's a golf cart anyway you look at it.

 

[Weird Harold]

Quite often a car's fuel sensors have to be adjusted when running with alcohol.

There's more than fuel sensor adjustment required to convert to pure alcohol, but not much more. More importantly, alcohol (aka ethanol) is a genuine alternative fuel with a long history of science and practical experience behind the conversions.

You can buy a water conversion kit here: http://www.hhowater4gas.com/
The producer of a radio show I listen to bought one to test it. He got slightly worse mileage but it did work and water is cheaper than gas.

That site sell mostly "enhancement" or "augmentation" systems rather than fuel conversions and the one full conversion they tout is flatly impossible. It is impossible to generate enough energy to separate water into Hydrogen and Oxygen AND propel a car at the same time. The physics and chemistry involved have been understood and for long time and the exact amount of energy required for theoretically ideal conversion efficiency can be calculated precisely.

The radio producer is either a shill or an idiot -- if he got worse gas milage, the product did exactly the opposiste of what the website claims; he was supposed to double his gas milage instead of halve it. (perhaps he installed it backwards. )

 

[neonlyte]

Roll on nothing but air.

http://gadgetophilia.com/airpod-cars-are-here-to-take-you-up-up-and-away/

I wonder if there's any calculation of how much energy it takes to compress the air for it....

...yeah, I'm a party-pooper.

It's about one Euro to recharge. I'll believe its debut when it finally arrives, I've had my name down for one for four years during which time the company has divided and two seperate versions are being produced by two seperate companies. Last month, they offered me a pre-production electrical version (with reduced performance except speed) for a shade under €6,000. It has a very limited range circa 65km - the air powered version is not likely to arrive before 2010.

 

[Vermilion]

My father in law (an engineer) is rabidly promoting hydrogen powered cars. The main problem is containing the hydrogen and transporting it apparently, everything else would be easy, you can even easily convert currently petrol powered cars.
Just don;t ask me how.

The only waste products are water and oxygen I believe. though I am brain dead this morning and may have mis-remembered that.
x
V

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I wonder if there's any calculation of how much energy it takes to compress the air for it....

...yeah, I'm a party-pooper.

No. Thermodynamics is the party pooper. A good rule of thumb is that everytime you have to convert energy from one form to another, you're going to lose a good bit of efficiency, so going from

electricity-->compressed air-->motion (a compressed-air car)

is going to be significantly less efficient than just going

electricity -->motion. (An electric car)

That's the basic problem with hydrogen cars now too. The overall process for a hydrogen-fueled car is:

coal/oil-->electricity-->hydrogen-->motion

Whereas a gasoline engine is just:

oil (=gas)-->motion

The one-step gasoline process is much more energy efficient than the 3-step Hydrogen process.

The compressed air car's going to be a lot simpler and lighter than an electric car though, and a hell of a lot cheaper too.

 

[sutherngent985]

I really cant see the oil companies allowing this to happen on any scale. Even the current offerings from the car manufacturers need gas some of the time. I can see big oil either buying out any company that really gets an alternative fuel car going on any kind of large scale (large numbers as well as economical to buy). They would either buy the company out, get an injunction against the company or have the pols they own do something in a legal sense to squash it.

 

[Liar]

Question there then is:

Energy efficiency aside...

Is it cheaper than gas? Depends on the price of electricity and the price of gas, but yeah, probably much cheaper per mile.

Is it better for the environment? Depends on how you generate the electriciy to drive the compressors. But yeah, most probably.

Is it cheaper/better/smarter than an electric car? For one, it's a simpler machine. You don't have to haul a battery around. But ineffective compared to an electric motor. So time will tell.

Is it the second coming? Nah.

Is it a totally pansy looking car? You bet.

 

[Liar]

I really cant see the oil companies allowing this to happen on any scale. Even the current offerings from the car manufacturers need gas some of the time. I can see big oil either buying out any company that really gets an alternative fuel car going on any kind of large scale (large numbers as well as economical to buy). They would either buy the company out, get an injunction against the company or have the pols they own do something in a legal sense to squash it.

I think the problem here is "fuel" avaibility. Fuelling stations must be installed on every gas station (or other outlet you can drive to) before the cars can become popular. And gas stations won't invest in air pumps until they see that there's a demand from air car owners.

 

[rgraham666]

An interesting article by Paul Krugman on supply and demand.

 

[neonlyte]

...

Is it a totally pansy looking car? You bet.

It's only a pansy looking car until it's on the road - witness the re-styled Fiat500, I keep tripping over them

 

[epiphany65]

There's more than fuel sensor adjustment required to convert to pure alcohol, but not much more. More importantly, alcohol (aka ethanol) is a genuine alternative fuel with a long history of science and practical experience behind the conversions.



That site sell mostly "enhancement" or "augmentation" systems rather than fuel conversions and the one full conversion they tout is flatly impossible. It is impossible to generate enough energy to separate water into Hydrogen and Oxygen AND propel a car at the same time. The physics and chemistry involved have been understood and for long time and the exact amount of energy required for theoretically ideal conversion efficiency can be calculated precisely.

The radio producer is either a shill or an idiot -- if he got worse gas milage, the product did exactly the opposiste of what the website claims; he was supposed to double his gas milage instead of halve it. (perhaps he installed it backwards. )

The difference in mileage was less than 5 mpg. with the kit installed and this was with no adjustments to fuel sensors, the choke or whatever else regulates fuel consumption. He certainly didn't halve his mileage. Let me put it this way: you can choose to pay $4 or $5 per gallon for gas, or go to your sink, turn the tap on and fill a jug of water. It's your money... To complain that you don't double your mileage when your using water instead of petrol really is looking a gift horse in the mouth.

 

[Pure]

6600 mpg--but a bit cramped for space, going 15 mph.

http://www.netcomposites.com/news.asp?3291
---------------


84 mpg

http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/article/futures/36200
In 2006, former rally driver James Sutherland won by achieving 83.44 miles per (UK) gallon in a Toyota Aygo 1.4 Diesel. That’s equivalent to roughly 3.4 litres/100 km or 69 miles per US gallon. This year, first prize went to a Toyota Yaris 1.4 Diesel, which achieved 84.66 mpg. The quoted combined fuel economy for the Yaris is 62 mpg, or 4 litres/100 km.
===
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/us/13eco.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

wood burning car: take a saw along

Race Starts With Little Fuel, and Goes Uphill From There

BERKELEY, Calif. — It is a classic road rally, 600 miles from the liberal embrace of Berkeley to the anything-goes lights of Las Vegas. No speeding is allowed, or in some cases even possible. And if you stop to refuel, it had better be in someone’s trash.

On Saturday, five teams began the Escape From Berkeley, maybe the world’s most eco-friendly motor race, driving all manner of alternative-fuel-burning jalopies, roadsters, and even a frying oil-fueled Mercedes-Benz, with a single goal: to complete the race using no petroleum.

“Gentlemen, start your whatever they are,” the M.C. shouted to begin the race, which offers the winner $5,000.

The final catch of the race is that participants — artists, environmentalists and even a cattle farmer from Alabama — have to find or scavenge their go-go juice, whether it is used vegetable oil from restaurants or twigs and sticks from the side of the road. All the vehicles, which had to be street legal, were allowed to start with a single gallon of whatever fuel they used.

“We’re just going to hang out in front of Ace Hardware and beg,” said Ben Wedlock, who was riding a two-man bicycle, augmented by a one-horsepower electric motor that runs on ethanol.
===


vegetable oil: wave of the future?

YES!!

follow up:
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/10/veggie-oil-lotu.html

Veggie-Oil Lotus Wins Alt-Fuel Race to Vegas

By Chuck Squatriglia October 14, 2008 | 3:05:17 PM


A veggie-oil-burning Lotus clone from Oregon beat a wood-burning pickup from Alabama in a madcap alt-fuel race to Las Vegas that included a 200-mile detour and saw three of the five teams drop out before reaching the finish line.

Jack McCornack and Sharon Westcott rolled across the finish line at the Sahara Hotel-Casino 1,418 minutes after leaving Berkeley, California, having driven their topless Lotus 7 replica more than 800 miles to collect the $5,000 first-place prize in Escape from Berkeley.

"We signed up to do this before we even knew there was money involved," McCornack, who sells the biodiesel-burning cars through his company, Kinetic Vehicles, told The New York Times. "It just seems like great fun."

The race mashed up Mad Max and Cannonball Run and threw in a touch of the Darpa Grand Challenge and Burning Man. The only rules were you couldn't use petroleum and you had to scavenge your fuel along the way. Even the race organizers are amazed anyone finished at all.

"The basic premise is build a vehicle out of junk, we'll give you the equivalent of one gallon of gas and you have to drive 600 miles to Las Vegas. Oh, and you can't buy any fuel along the way," says Jim Mason, the artist and inventor behind the race. "That's a pretty heavy stone to carry."

The stone proved too heavy for most of the teams to carry. Ten were expected to participate, but only five made it to the starting line when the race started Saturday. Three more dropped out along the way, leaving only McCornack and Wayne Keith, an Alabama rancher who hasn't bought gasoline in five years. He was favored to win the race in his wood-gas-burning Dodge Dakota, but a flat tire and a load of wood that didn't burn properly cost him some time Sunday. He finished about three hours behind McCornack when the race ended Monday night. "Normally we can get 60 or 70 mph on this," he told the Times, "but we had so many hills and such headwinds we spent a lot of time in the 40s."

The route took the vehicles over the highest mountain range in California — where a snowstorm at the 9,943-foot Tioga Pass forced everyone to take a 200-mile detour — and through Death Valley National Park. It proved to be too much for the veggie-oil-burning Mercedes Benz, the human-electric tandem bicycle and the steam-powered trike with wooden wheels. But then, a challenging route was the entire point. "We want to show it's a viable solution, and show you can travel vast distances on anything," says Jake Haskell, another race organizer.

Mason is already planning next year's race, which is slated for Memorial Day Weekend and will end somewhere in Mexico. Be sure to check out our first post, "Mad Max Meets Cannonball Run in Alt-Fuel Race to Vegas," for more info about the race, the teams and why anyone would want to Escape from Berkeley

 

[trysail]

No. Thermodynamics is the party pooper. A good rule of thumb is that everytime you have to convert energy from one form to another, you're going to lose a good bit of efficiency, so going from

electricity-->compressed air-->motion (a compressed-air car)

is going to be significantly less efficient than just going

electricity -->motion. (An electric car)

That's the basic problem with hydrogen cars now too. The overall process for a hydrogen-fueled car is:

coal/oil-->electricity-->hydrogen-->motion

Whereas a gasoline engine is just:

oil (=gas)-->motion

The one-step gasoline process is much more energy efficient than the 3-step Hydrogen process.

The compressed air car's going to be a lot simpler and lighter than an electric car though, and a hell of a lot cheaper too.

Zoot,

Thank god there's somebody in the whole of Lit who understands basic physics!

Why is it that in the early 21st-century there are still people who believe in perpetual motion machines and free lunches?

 

[THROBBS]

No. Thermodynamics is the party pooper. A good rule of thumb is that everytime you have to convert energy from one form to another, you're going to lose a good bit of efficiency, so going from

electricity-->compressed air-->motion (a compressed-air car)

is going to be significantly less efficient than just going

electricity -->motion. (An electric car)

That's the basic problem with hydrogen cars now too. The overall process for a hydrogen-fueled car is:

coal/oil-->electricity-->hydrogen-->motion

Whereas a gasoline engine is just:

oil (=gas)-->motion

The one-step gasoline process is much more energy efficient than the 3-step Hydrogen process.

The compressed air car's going to be a lot simpler and lighter than an electric car though, and a hell of a lot cheaper too.

I have it!
One LESS step for maximum efficiency!

MOTION

I will just move it, move it..I like to move it move it.

 

[Liar]

Zoot,

Thank god there's somebody in the whole of Lit who understands basic physics!

Why is it that in the early 21st-century there are still people who believe in perpetual motion machines and free lunches?

Yannow, it's not about physics.

The question is economic and environmental effect.

Transforming power grid electricity to compressed air and then to proulsion is less efficient than burning gasoline. How much less?

Using power grid electricity is cheaper per amount of energy. How much cheaper?

If cheaper > less effective, Air Car wins.

Roughly half of my country's electricity comes form dams. 30% comes from nukes, 15% from coal and oil and 5% from wind. But 100% of my car's propulsion comes from oil. Tapping a dam and running a nuke power plant is (for the sake of the argument) better for the environment per amount of energy than burning gasoline. How much better is it?

If less harmful > less effective, Air Car wins.

 

[Liar]

http://urban-fairies.com/images/CUMOOTERpics/cumooter.studio.3quartrfron.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e394/mi_liar/mentosfuelfo1.jpg

 

[THROBBS]

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e394/mi_liar/mentosfuelfo1.jpg

I'm tellin ya!

 

[neonlyte]

No. Thermodynamics is the party pooper. A good rule of thumb is that everytime you have to convert energy from one form to another, you're going to lose a good bit of efficiency, so going from

electricity-->compressed air-->motion (a compressed-air car)

is going to be significantly less efficient than just going

electricity -->motion. (An electric car)

That's the basic problem with hydrogen cars now too. The overall process for a hydrogen-fueled car is:

coal/oil-->electricity-->hydrogen-->motion

Whereas a gasoline engine is just:

oil (=gas)-->motion

The one-step gasoline process is much more energy efficient than the 3-step Hydrogen process.

The compressed air car's going to be a lot simpler and lighter than an electric car though, and a hell of a lot cheaper too.

And the Air-Car does not need expensive and polluting batteries. The version I favour has a flywheel driving a small electric compressor, i.e. it uses spare motion induced kinetic energy to refuel itself, extending the vehicle range. It's 'refulled' from a standard air compressor plugged into an ordinary electrical outlet, a 50km refuel is supposed to take 5 minutes, a full charge takes 15-20mins.

 

[trysail]

Yannow, it's not about physics.

The question is economic and environmental effect.

Transforming power grid electricity to compressed air and then to proulsion is less efficient than burning gasoline. How much less?

Using power grid electricity is cheaper per amount of energy. How much cheaper?

If cheaper > less effective, Air Car wins.

Roughly half of my country's electricity comes form dams. 30% comes from nukes, 15% from coal and oil and 5% from wind. But 100% of my car's propulsion comes from oil. Tapping a dam and running a nuke power plant is (for the sake of the argument) better for the environment per amount of energy than burning gasoline. How much better is it?

If less harmful > less effective, Air Car wins.

Liar,
The U.S. is not blessed with either Sweden (and Norway's) abundant hydropower or Iceland's easily-tapped sources of thermal energy. I don't have to tell you that a century of relatively inexpensive fossil fuels resulted in a U.S. infrastructure predicated on cheap energy.

The problem in the U.S. is:

We aren't allowed to build electricity-generating dams (that kills fish),
we aren't allowed to build nuclear-generating facilities (Not In My Back Yard, a/k/a "NIMBY"),
we aren't allowed to use our abundant coal ( trysail rolls eyes and shakes head)
we aren't allowed to use the petroleum that naturally seeps from the ocean floor off California,
we aren't allowed to explore for the petroleum believed to exist in ANWR (only Dr. Drillbit knows for sure),
we aren't allowed to explore for petroleum in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico or within 50 miles of the Left or LEast Coasts.

People do not comprehend the magnitudes of energy that are fundamental economic inputs to the U.S. economy.

I'm not going to do the math for you. As Zoot suggests, the conversion efficiency of taking a primary energy source (be it fossil fuel or nuclear) and turning it into compressed air is very, very low.