Seen This Car at Wal-Mart

I don't think that you are going to get the advantages that you want without some batteries. Even with a generator setup, the batteries get you two things.

1. You recapture some of the energy lost in braking. Instead of all of it going to heat the pads and rotors, some of it can be used to recharge the batteries.

2. Batteries can supply extra power for acceleration, allowing you to use a smaller generator.


Otherwise, I doubt a generator/motor setup can do better than a continuously variable transmission.

True, but you would not need a battery pack large enough to run the entire car for 40 miles on battery alone. In the 1970s a guy used a 1950s tractor engine, a generator head, a jet starter and three standard car batteries to build a serial hybrid that netted 70MPG all day long at 45MPH. If this guy could cobble together crap parts and get that kind of power and fuel efficiency off a 36V system, then a purpose built 360V serial hybrid should be able to see a full size car get 100+MPG at highway speeds and be capable of running 140MPH. The battery pack only needs to be large enough to provide full power for the time period between when the operator calls for power, and the time it takes for the generator to respond. You wouldn't need a battery pack any larger than what would allow the car to run on battery only for more than 2-3 miles when set up as a serial hybrid. Knocking the 800-1000lbs that the huge battery pack is oversized by would also allow you to run a smaller generator set, which would get even better fuel economy.
 
Yes, the battery pack could be a lot smaller, or maybe even just use capacitors (very expensive though).
 
forget electric, ng, and diesel.
burn hydrogen created from electrolysis of water at an oscillating frequency and drive from the atlantic to the pacific on about ~25 gallons of water using the exact same cars we are driving everyday
google: Stanley Meyer
 
forget electric, ng, and diesel.
burn hydrogen created from electrolysis of water at an oscillating frequency and drive from the atlantic to the pacific on about ~25 gallons of water using the exact same cars we are driving everyday
google: Stanley Meyer

To date, no peer review studies of Meyer's devices have been published in the scientific literature. An article in journal Nature described Meyer's claims as one more "water as fuel" myth.

His "water fuel cell" was later examined by three expert witnesses in court who found that there "was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and that it was simply using conventional electrolysis." The court found Meyer guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered him to repay the two investors their $25,000.

How is this good?
 
Hydrogen is very unstable. Might as well have some plutonium.
 
Hydrogen is also an energy-intensive fuel. In the future an advance in technology may make cracking hydrogen out of water cost effective, but at our current technological level it is not worth the effort. The most cost effective, energy efficient method we have today for motive power would be the serial hybrid using a turbodiesel generator set. A natural gas generator might be as efficient, but the infrastructure is not in place for widespread natural gas use in automobiles.
 
Very true!
Solyndra, A123 and Fisker; worse investments ever made. Don't know how many more billions need to be wasted, to understand the technology isn't there yet.
If, any of them projected prominent vision, many private equity firms would have bought and capitalized on them.

Indeed, some obvious gigantic failures there, caused mainly by the misguided delusions of a few Democrat politicians who in their quest for "clean transportation" threw away hundreds of millions in US taxpayer money in Fisker alone.

Most European midsize luxury cars equipped with the diesel engines, such as the 5 series, E class and the like, produce up to 60mpg. Importing those to US would make the king of Dubai too upset, as we wouldn't be as reliant on oil.

THIS! Those cars are amazingly efficient and work well in every possible way. They're much less complicated and cost much less than the mostly useless and otherwise extremely boring hybrids that the US auto industry is trying to shove down the throats of gullible consumers. Buying, say, a Lexus RX hybrid instead of a regular V6 one costs something like 10 000$ more, at least here in Canada... that requires about 250 000 miles before the lower gas costs compensate for the higher buy price. Not many Lexus buyers keep their car at that mileage.. hell, at that mileage most have probably disintegrated.

But I suppose that diesel will never trump hybrid in North America... for three simple reasons:

1) A lot of attention whores like to buy hybrids in order to prove their "love for the environment", they don't care about fuel economy. These are the same people who bought H2 Hummers 10 years ago. It's all about the image that's fashionable at the moment.

2) Hybrids are pointlessly expensive, so the industry will favor them in order to milk more money from consumers.

3) As you said, the gasoline industry. The very unfavorable taxation imposed upon diesel in the USA basically means that someone somewhere doesn't want them to become popular. It could be American car manufacturers, or it could be oil companies... or a mix of the two. But this leads to some very, VERY strange marketing: consider the Chrysler 300; in Europe it's sold as the Lancia Thema, and it can be bought with a V6 diesel. That diesel V6 Chrysler/Lancia is built... in Ontario! Yet North Americans cannot buy it.

On another note, i have liked the alluring styling on the Fisker, as i find the Tesla to be austere. Too bad, it's not the other way around.

Yeah, the Fisker does look good... its styling is unique and really makes it shine out on the road today. Too bad the company is basically belly-up.
 
To date, no peer review studies of Meyer's devices have been published in the scientific literature. An article in journal Nature described Meyer's claims as one more "water as fuel" myth.

His "water fuel cell" was later examined by three expert witnesses in court who found that there "was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and that it was simply using conventional electrolysis." The court found Meyer guilty of "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered him to repay the two investors their $25,000.

How is this good?

im not gonna claim to have any clue how it works; but if you do some more research outside wikipedia on not only stanley meyer, but some of the folks who have done the same/similar projects with hydrogen, electrolysis, etc. it will make you wonder what is really going on.

in terms of the ppl on the record saying stan meyers stuff is illegitmate: he was not a wealthy guy and refused to show a lot of his technology to most of the ppl who could copy it or steal it. he dedicated his life to creating things like this and was offereda whole lot of $$ to stop his work altogether by the arabs, oil industry and god knows who else. these people and their friends legitimately run everything in this world and have enslaved us all to money, and can legitimately control the masses. for anyone to say it is not possible, is smoking crack bc im certain none of us have tried.

hydrogen is all around us (humidity), so i dont know if he found a way to capture and convert without use of significant amount of energy (think condensation/evaporation) or what but if you dont think everybody with a smart idea nowadays that could turn the world upside down doesnt have about a million rich mofos and everyone working for them wanting to poison the guy outside of a crackerbarrel restaurant then i kind of feel sorry for you and your naivete
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top