There are so many possible solutions that need investigating. What I
like about the compressed air solution is its simplicity both in
operation and in refueling. All you need for refueling is an
electrical outlet and some time or less time, a minute or so, and
already compressed air at an air station. No pollution at the air
station, no pollution in distribution and none with the vehicle.
Everything polluting is concentrated in the electrical grid which can
be any of a hundred different power sources all contained and
distributed.
Bob Miller
On 6/7/07, Barry Wilkins <barry.barrywilkins@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have had a long interest in the concept of a vehicle that operates
(gets
> its energy from) the oxidation of aluminium. I imagine you all know that
> aluminium is an extremely reactive element and that it is only because
an
> instantaneous very thin impervious layer of oxide film forms on exposed
> metal that saves it from totally combusting in the presence of oxygen in
> air. As Aluminium has a similar energy to weight ratio as petrol when
> oxidized (burnt) it would appear to be a very stable and practical
> alternative to fossil fuel.
>
> Of course the original energy is derived from the electrolysis of
aluminium
> oxide to the metal and this process has its losses and requires
electrical
> energy which may perhaps be derived from an original fossil source.
>
> In my country's situation though, New Zealand's only aluminuim smelter
is
> operated from hydro power and so is eco friendly. Furthermore, the
> conversion of high quality aluminium oxide (the result of the oxidation
in
> powering the vehicle) back to aluminium is far more efficient than that
> process where the raw material is bauxite, which requires pre-refining.
Note
> that this is a completely cyclical process where the aluminium is simply
an
> energy carrier. Once a certain quantity of this material is inserted
into
> the cycle, it is not wasted.
> The oxidation of aluminium to power a vehicle can be carried out in such
a
> way that it regenerates electrical power, i.e. as in an aluminium/air
fuel
> cell, or it can be oxidized in the presence of water (by the water) to
> effectively split the water molecules to generate hydrogen. In this
latter
> way the aluminium provides the energy required for hydrolysis. This is
to me
> the safest way to operate a hydrogen vehicle as the hydrogen can be
> generated on demand without residual. Again there are energy conversion
> losses in the splitting in the form of considerable heat generation. The
> trick is to make use of the heated water and the liberated hydrogen to
> produce traction. Here you may be amused but I have a practical solution
-
> use the heat of oxidation to generate steam and then burn the hydrogen
to
> superheat the steam. Operate a small steam turbine/electric generator to
> drive electric motors and charge a small high energy cell. There are
losses
> in this conversion scheme but interestingly, they do not amount to any
in
> excess of a typical internal combustion engine under normal operating
> conditions. The benefits are: It generates no local pollutants, the
energy
> carrier is recyclable, the aluminium is relatively abundant as an
element,
> it is a concentrated yet stable and safe energy storage material which
has
> an energy/weight ratio competitive with petrol. Note you must include
the
> other reactant (water) in the total energy/weight calculation.
> The typical shortcut considered by many is to simply burn the hydrogen
in an
> internal combustion engine. Problem is, you have already lost some
energy in
> the splitting process and internal combustion engines run on hydrogen
run so
> hot that valves and pistons are destroyed. So for these reasons an
external
> combustion process (which is cleaner burning) and makes use of the heat
of
> reaction would be preferred. The electric cell/motors are required for
> instant demand as a turbine has a slow acceleration rate and should be
> operated at optimum revs continually.
>
> I imagine there will be any number of objections to this little scheme
and I
> am keen to hear them. The thing is, no other alternative power system I
know
> of meets all of the criteria I have mentioned. Perhaps some, not all.
>
> Regards
> Barry Wilkins
>
>
>
> On 6/7/07, Bob Miller <robmxa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Air power is another solution. It could rely solely on the electric
> > grid where we can more efficiently control emissions and work toward
> > centralized power sources that are renewable.
> >
> > http://www.theaircar.com/
> >
> > Ironically air conditioning is no problem but heating is.
> >
> > Bob Miller
> >
> > On 6/6/07, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx > wrote:
> > > When I hear "reinvent" or "take to the next level," my BS alarm goes
> > > off.
> > >
> > > I've always been a fan of fuel cell cars, because they take the
battery
> > > out of the electric car, and it's the battery that kills electric
cars.
> > > But betting on fuel cells hardly "take[s] the automobile totally out
of
> > > the environmental debate."
> > >
> > > Fuel cells require H2. And H2 is either extracted from water with
> > > electrolysis, or it could be extracted from hydrocarbon molecules.
> > > Either process needs energy. Extracting and transporting H2 will
somehow
> > > or other have an impact on greenhouse gas emissions, or wildlife, or
> > > nuclear waste, or the beauty of the landscape, or most likely all of
the
> > > above. And they all fall under "the environment."
> > >
> > > The EV-1 was always a non-starter. It was PR, best used by Hollywood
> > > actors in search of virtue. And the so-called "plug-in hybrids" are
no
> > > better. They simply place a greater load on the power grid than
hybrids
> > > do, while at the same time shortening battery life compared with
> > > hybrids, by drawing the charge way down every time you leave the
> > > driveway.
> > >
> > > At best, all of these supposed solutions are just minor tweaks to
the
> > > bigger environmental picture. Hardly solutions. Some probabably
create a
> > > worse mess than we have now. Cold fusion might be a solution.
> > >
> > > Bert
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------
> > > GM exec: Time to reinvent the automobile
> > >
> > > Brian Fuller
> > > (06/05/2007 10:51 AM EDT)
> > > URL:
> http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199901250
> > >
> > > SAN DIEGO - The man who runs R&D for General Motors said it's time
to
> > > reinvent the product that's made his company what it is today: the
> > > automobile.
> > >
> > > "We want to take the automobile totally out of the environmental
> > > debate," Larry Burns, vice president of research and development and
> > > strategic initiatives, said Monday (June 4). He delivered the first
> > > keynote at this week's 44th annual Design Automation Conference
here.
> > >
> > > "We literally have an opportunity to reinvent the automobile around
> > > these exciting technologies." Burns spoke a few feet from a
Chevrolet
> > > Sequel vehicle-one of two GM has manufactured-that runs entirely on
> > > hydrogen fuel cell technology. GM officials recently drove it 300
miles
> > > on a single fuel cell charge emitting only water vapor.
> > >
> > > The next step for the technology is to move it into the Chevrolet
> > > Equinox, where about more than 100 fuel-cell-only models will be
> > > marketed in Los Angeles, New York and Washington, D.C. initially.
> > >
> > > For some, GM's fuel-cell move is a bet-the-farm strategy that
insiders
> > > hope doesn't end up like the abortive EV-1 all-electric project that
GM
> > > killed after making and leasing about 800 vehicles.
> > >
> > > "It's one basket we've put eggs into, but actually our strategy is
to
> > > displace petroleum," Burns said in an interview before the keynote.
He
> > > pointed to continuing work on all-electric vehicles (the Chevrolet
Volt)
> > > and other initiatives.
> > >
> > > Burns also sketched out an automotive future in which cars begin to
> > > communicate with each other in vehicle to vehicle networks to
improve
> > > safety and the driving experience.
> > >
> > > "Beyond that it sets up a future in which vehicles can drive
> > > themselves," he said.
> > >
> > > Because GM engineers take a top-down view on design and must blend
> > > mechanical and electrical systems at a high level of abstraction,
Burns
> > > said auto manufacturers are relying on the design automation
industry to
> > > continue to deliver tools to enable them to design at such levels.
> > >
> > > "Math-based tools are very much at the heart of virtual engineering
and
> > > virtual vehicle development," he said, noting the Sequel was
designed
> > > from the ground up in 18 months. You truly are on the pathway to
making
> > > this future happen through the tools you're making."
> > >
> > > All material on this site Copyright 2007 CMP Media LLC. All rights
> > > reserved.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> > >
> > > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings
at
> FreeLists.org
> > >
> > > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the
word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >
> > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
> >
> > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >
> >
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
