Without being too negative I reckon if that was really any good, someone would have had him bumped off by now!
more media hype - zero emissions. How can it run on zero emissions? Compressed air is what, like plucked out of thin air? No!
somewhere along the line energy would have been used to compress the air with resulting emissions.
Just like electric car, so the car does not emit pollutants but the power station does.
Next we'll be discussing the flywheel motor.
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
more media hype - zero emissions. How can it run on zero emissions? Compressed air is what, like plucked out of thin air? No! somewhere along the line energy would have been used to compress the air with resulting emissions.
Just like electric car, so the car does not emit pollutants but the power station does.
Next we'll be discussing the flywheel motor.
Are they suggesting we drive around with those huge air cylinders hung under that little plastic car! Have they never seen Jaws II ? Imagine a motor way crash…there’d be craters left in the road!!
Nothing was said about the range of the car
The thing is zero emission cars are designed for city's to reduce local pollution. They don't help with climate change, in fact they
probably do the opposite due to the inefficiency of converting energy from one form to another. ...
You would be surprised as to how many lives are effected by local pollution, aerosols (particulates) for example reduce life expectancy by a few years
(in the UK, not some third wold country)..
It's a balance, less local pollution and longer lives, or climate change, you choose...
Dan
[Edited on 13/2/08 by Bluemoon]
It's like the kind of thing you'd see on 'Brainiac'
what trully a daft idea and a terrorists dream come true, crash it and it takes out the whole block.
Warning - Keep out of direct sunlight!
it has a petrol burner to heat the air ,
it wont do damage it will have a guilt in weak section to take the blast unlike metal cylinders.but you ears will hurt lol
quote:
Originally posted by thunderace
it has a petrol burner to heat the air ,
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
more media hype - zero emissions. How can it run on zero emissions? Compressed air is what, like plucked out of thin air?
quote:
Originally posted by thunderace
it has a petrol burner to heat the air ,
it wont do damage it will have a guilt in weak section to take the blast unlike metal cylinders.but you ears will hurt lol
quote:
Originally posted by AdamR
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
more media hype - zero emissions. How can it run on zero emissions? Compressed air is what, like plucked out of thin air?
What if the power is generated by a wind turbine?
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
so making a wind turbine, prepraing the gound, installing it, making the cables to connect it to the grid etc. will product no emissions?
big scalelectrics cars, that's what we need
and of course theyre made from GRP - which is made from oil .
they should make em like peugeots , theyd be a lot lighter then .
quote:
Originally posted by Bluemoon
You would be surprised as to how many lives are effected by local pollution, aerosols (particulates) for example reduce life expectancy by a few years (in the UK, not some third wold country)..
Dan
[Edited on 13/2/08 by Bluemoon]
I was listening to southern counties radio this morning and they had the dude that invented the wind up radio speaking. He is inventing a wind up mobile for release this year. Maybe next year he will invent a wind up car?
quote:
Originally posted by AdamR
It's (almost) just about possible to believe in the government plan that in 30 years we'll have enough renewable energy capacity to power all non-industrial consumption in the UK.
Bah Humbug: I think these sort of ideas are more a mechanism for getting money from uninformed investors 
than about the environment.
Anyway the energy cost of moving X lbs Y miles at Z speed remains the same no matter what you use, and the energy to compress the air in this case
will most likey come from some polluting source.
Away from the environmental arguments, I suppose the method of energy storage looks preferable to heavy and hugely expensive batteries. Also in the
event of a serious accident, which is more dangerous - a highly flammable liquid, highly corrosive sulphuric acid, or potentially explosive compressed
air! I'm hedging my bets on that one....
As already mentioned though, the word 'range' seems to have been avoided in that report, I wonder why.....!
quote:
As already mentioned though, the word 'range' seems to have been avoided in that report, I wonder why.....!
I can't understand why whenever someone comes up with a progressive idea on this front masses begin crying foul!, lies!, halve truth! etc.
Progress only happens with new thinking.
While it is certainly true that you don't get something for nothing, the development of a vehicle that runs on compressed air which can be
generated by any number of sources seems to be of enough worth to explore. If nothing else it 'could' continue to be used even if oil
sources dry up. Further while the raw energy needed to compress the air may in fact pollute it is possible that it may be done more efficiently, we
all know that in a traditional internal combustion engine a signifigant portion of the energy produced is lost as heat.
What benefit may be gained by improving air quality in cities?
Go ahead flame away.
T
The easiest solution would be to have 100% nuclear/renewable energy system. Get rid of gas for heating, petrol for cars etc and have as much as
possible powered by electricity. The CO2 produced would drop very quickly. However which is better to die of high sea levels and worse weather or
nuclear radiation?
Another problem is if every car in the UK went electric over night, the government would lose billions in lost tax.
I have no doubt it works, it's a very simple system after all and based on some quite ancient technology.
The points in dispute were the zero emissions claim, when the companies own diagrams clearly show a burner being used. The usable range such a system
would provide (not given as far as I could see) and my point about the safety issue of carrying large cylinders of compressed gas on a light weight
platform. All quite valid and not deliberately negative at all.
As for where the energy comes from to first compress the gas, your right, even a coal fired power station is producing far less emissions for a given
about of burned fuel as these plant's have to process and clean their emissions before realised.
I don’t consider nuclear as a viable option. Reserves of uranium are already getting low not helped by the amount used in weapons manufacture. Do a
search on uranium mining and have a look at the miners who have to extract the ore. I also fail to see the logic in positive environmental claims for
nuclear when they have the most dangerous waste pollutant of anything so far invented. Reactors are deadly for over 100,000 years, hugely expensive to
deal with and any mistake end’s up with another Chernobyl (so infamous that actually comes up in my spell checker). Easy it is not.
quote:
Originally posted by I love speed :-P
...
Another problem is if every car in the UK went electric over night, the government would lose billions in lost tax.
no no, they would find another way they cant afford not to, its called road pricing i.e. £1 a mile at rush hour etc but what I meant they go on
about cutting CO2 in cars etc but they don't really want to because of all the easy cash they get from it.
[Edited on 13/2/2008 by I love speed :-P]
Its basically powered by a steam engine, except that compressed air rather than compressed steam drives the pistons. The engine, then, has the
potential to be very efficient and has the steam engine's advantage of delivering full torque at zero speed.
The disadvantages are that at full throttle, it is quite inefficient with air and that as your air runs low, so does the pressure, and therefore the
torque.
Overall, the scheme has merit. I suspect that the compressor / engine combination is more efficient than internal combustion, but power for the
compressor is another story.
Personally, I'd like to see a diesel fuelled compressor driving it. A couple of horsepower ought to do it. Automotive power is all peaks and
troughs and designing an engine that is good at all speeds severely limits the efficiency. Marine diesels turn at 1 speed for days on end and are
tuned for excellent efficiency at that one speed. A compressor motor could do the same. Being a hybrid, you could also run it in "stealth"
mode if needed. Though it sounded noisy in the film, that's all down to the silencer.
The thing that always strikes me is that whenever anyone designs a new type of power train, they always fit it to an ugly noddy car. Why? Why would
you do that?
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
and my point about the safety issue of carrying large cylinders of compressed gas on a light weight platform
quote:
Originally posted by jambojeef
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
and my point about the safety issue of carrying large cylinders of compressed gas on a light weight platform
What are the safety implications of carrying tanks of compressed air?
Are they worse than me carrying around 65 litres of liquid petroleum gas in my spare wheel well?
the idea has some merit, but to discuss it it would be easier to seperate the arguments out. This is just another form of displaced emission vehicle.
So one argument is comparing normal cars, ie petrol and diesel powered, to those that produce no emissions in use by using stored power, ie fuel
cells, compressed air, rubber bands etc. Then another argument is about the best of the different types of DECs (sorry, i made that acronym up 
)
I think the fuel cell is the best idea of those listed, you have stored chemical energy which must surely be more joules per cc of energy storage than
compressed air? Also more efficient as compressing air would produce lots of heat that would need scavanging to keep efficiency high, and also gets
super cold when you decompress it in the car.
There might be some merit in the idea of using regenerative braking via heat, warming up the next batch of compressed air.
rant over