Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

Chevy Volt, only $1,000 - Page 6

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by News on August 11, 2010, 12:27 pm

 The review noted that it would be an
inferior option. But I wanted to get a technical commentary into
it. Although you had given a pretty salient presentation.

It is "viable" they say. It all depends on the application. In city
stop-start driving using air as brake regen and slow troad speeds I'm sure
there is a case for compressed air: taxis, utility vehicles, runabouts, etc.
They should last and last as there are no expensive limited life electric
batteries. They should be cheap to make.

The industry (the corps) has locked itself into electric or hybrids. That is
where their R&D money is going.

Posted by News on August 11, 2010, 12:19 pm

MDI uses a petro/air hybrid all in one engine unit. You could clearly not
understand it.  Charging the tanks via the grid also meant cleaner and
cheaper running in towns. They were also looking at brake regen using air.

They were on the right track.

If batteries had not progressed so much you would have seen air propelled
cars or the petro/air hybrid type.

Many are waiting to see what way it all pans out. An example is the British
Department for Transport. They advised the last government not to get
involved in expensive cross-country overhead wire electrification projects
as fuel cell technology appeared to be advancing fast and may lend itself
viable for trains. In short, wait a few years and see, as the diesel locos
may be replaced with a superior promising technology not needing hundreds of
miles of ugly overhead lines through pretty British countryside.

About 18 months ago they dropped this view, after pressure from rail groups,
and  full overhead wire electrification projects were announced replacing
diesel trains. Electric trains do not need fuel storage and the facilities
to refuel the trains. They are lighter as they do not carry heavy engines
and fuel and safer in tunnels.  They are simpler and last longer.  They are
1/3 cheaper to run and cheaper to build.

But they need maintenance teams to see to the countless miles of over wires
and support stanchions.  Electrifying hundreds of miles of track is not
cheap at all, although the train maintenance side is a lot cheaper. There
has been suggestions to eliminate parts of the wires in downward sections.
Or have the wires only in sections just longer than the train with a wire
pickup at each end of the train. I am not sure if these will be taken up.

If the fuel cell does advance in the next few years, the electrification
will be cancelled on many lines.

Posted by Josepi on August 11, 2010, 3:10 am

Others do not say it will work and your link is no exception.
If have trouble reading  a top posted argument it would be unlikely you
could read the document you posted.

The document only addreses energy density of compressed air, continually
redirects the topic to nitrogen compression and does **NOT** address any of
the negatives vaughn stated, namely economy or ecologically sound exergy.

Very poor example and argument.

Others say it could work. In a technical fashion.
But ignore it, because it's a top posting.

Posted by Michael B on August 11, 2010, 10:57 am

Not trying to go for or against it, just noting other info.
There is a prospect of it coming into the marketplace,
but as an inferior presentation.
A lot of the battery push is going to be lithium based,
but the availability of lithium is potentially volatile. So
there may be other alternatives to come along. But I
would see compressed air directed to other applications
first, to get better development.
No argument here.

Posted by News on August 11, 2010, 12:29 pm


Not trying to go for or against it, just noting other info.
There is a prospect of it coming into the marketplace,
but as an inferior presentation.

You mean a niche presentation.

This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread