High Speed Steam Powered Car

CodeWanker wrote in to tell us about a story about new steam powered vehicles that are aiming to set speed records. The car is kind of goofy looking, but more eco friendly (which works for the Prius ;) Don't expect to see anything like this at your local dealer any time soon tho.

Comments

It seems that...

[slashdevslashtty]

Valve has done something right.

Regression

[lordkuri]

It seems that lately a lot of stuff has started to regress to older tech. Steam power, hand labor being of higher value craftsmanship, blowing up "those damn arabs" (ok, that last one was a potshot, sue me)

Is this just history repeating itself, or are we really going to start progressing towards an almost dark ages type society where we ressurect old tech and reuse it constantly?

Re:Regression

[DrEldarion]

are we really going to start progressing towards an almost dark ages type society where we ressurect old tech and reuse it constantly?

Is that such a bad thing assuming the old tech can be made to perform better than the new tech?

Re:Regression

[superstick58]

Old technology should not be completely ignored. Many times a new technology will come along that leads to the abandonment of current technology. However, over the years improvements in materials, design tools, etc. can lead to much more efficient designs of "old" tech.

If it's not broke, don't fix it. I like to see new technology being developed as much as anyone else, but I believe we also need to keep enough of an open mind that we do not overlook great ideas that have already been made and improve on those ideas. Old tech can easily become new tech through basic improvements in efficiency, reliability, affordability, etc.

Re:Regression

[iggymanz]

steam power is and has been alive and well - most of my state's electricity comes from steam heated by nuclear reactor or fossil fuel, the navy runs ships powered by steam turbines (and catapults airplanes into the sky from carriers with steam to bomb those d.a. that don't like other d.a. getting rich selling their oil to us, hahahah). Internal combustion engines are a century old too.

Re:Regression

[CrankyFool]

In general, hand-made stuff was always highly prized when the hands involved were those of a master artisan -- the industrial revolution wasn't about producing something better than the best artisans could do, but something more _cheaply_ (and still pretty good -- the old 'bang for the buck' thing) than it would cost a master artisan to do.

That this practice continues to today (A few years back I was looking into getting a sword commissioned as a wedding gift and only seriously looked at hand-made swords, because there are no good factory-made swords -- there's not enough of a volume for good swords to justify an entire factory) is not regression.

Oh, and with regards to your sig, I think you want to say "woman-centric." The hyphen makes a difference.

Re:Regression

[AvitarX]

Doesn't that closer describe the renaissance?

Re:Regression

[b374]

It seems that lately a lot of stuff has started to regress to older tech. Steam power, hand labor being of higher value craftsmanship

Hmmm... I always thought the Flinstones cars were kind of cool... very ecological too.

Re:Regression

[saintp]

Did you ever consider that we're not regressing, but rather standing on the shoulders of giants? Admitting, as it were, that perhaps people who didn't live in the past twenty years had something valuable to contribute?

The dark ages were characterized by a total lack of scholarship and invention. The Englightenment, you may recall, occurred not when people donned blinders to the past and started looking forward, but when they were willing to look further back than others had done. And, by building on Greek and Roman scholarship that was thousands of years old, they were able to usher in the environment of inventiveness that helped create the Industrial Revolution.

Hell, we still learn things from Plato. Or would you consider that "regression" as well?

Re:Regression

[Tenebrious1]

It seems that lately a lot of stuff has started to regress to older tech. Steam power...

So when we finally get portable fusion reactors, will it be "old tech" since it's been happening on the sun for billions of years?

Yes, it's steam. It's superheated steam used to turn a turbine. Pretty much the same technology used in nuclear power plants. Of course power plant turbines turn at a constant speed to deliver constant power, which is why this is a new use for a steam turbine.

... hand labor being of higher value craftsmanship

Hand craftsmanship has always been valued over mass produced items by those who see quality as more than the sum of the parts... and are willing to pay more for such quality. We've always been around and will always be. Perhaps the dominance of Walmart has made more people turn towards supporting local artists and craftsmen, but it's certainly not a new fad.

Re:Regression

[AviLazar]

Hand labor has always (at least in the past 50-60 years) been of more value then craftsmanship. Actually, hand craftsmanship never lost its value - because it takes so much manpower...these days because the whole "it was made by hand" commands a higher price, even though the hands might be of a 10 year old in Malaysia working for 10 cents a week.

I hope you were not trying to be a troll, in all honesty, since you were around for a while. Through-out history there are records of us using older techniques (look at plastic surgery, how it uses techniques from India culture of over 4000 years ago).

Re:Regression

[jacksonj04]

Sword as a wedding gift, nice one.

It's a shame that code is no longer recognised as something requiring skill, just a load of badly paid students working overtime to churn it out.

Re:Regression

[AviLazar]

Please accept my appologies - the above post is probably the most poorly worded post I have ever written. Thats what I get for writing and doing tech support at the same time.

Re:Regression

[Duhavid]

In researching and exploring bringing something towards commercialization, there seem to be many paths, in the early days. Some of these paths lead to problems that require certain breakthrus that just dont happen when needed to bring the concept to reality. So, other, easier, paths are followed. Later, those breakthru's can happen in other ways, or other fields that make those other paths that were abandoned back towards viablity, and even, sometimes, making a better path to the concept.

Re:Regression

[Anonymous Coward]

the industrial revolution wasn't about producing something better than the best artisans could do, but something more _cheaply_

It was also about repeatability. If all the parts are custom crafted, then I need a master craftsman to effect repairs to it. The bores on Smiths flintlocks might be slightly off the bores of Wesson's, meaning musket balls that fit one might not work in the other. This sort of standardization allowed the introduction of cartridges, which allowed the intoduction of carbines, which allowed... While the asthetic beauty of a master made flintlock might pale in comparison to a mass produced carbine, its far less effective at its job.

Mass production can turn out far higher quality items than a master craftsman, specialized jigs, refinements in design, etc can all contribute to producing more items of higher quality far cheaper than a lone master craftsman, or even a craftsman and a shop full of apprentices. A master craftsman would have a hard time producing 100 10-mmx60mm stainless steel bolts that were all nearly identical, yet I can walk into my local hardware store and buy a box for under $10.

Oh, and with regards to the grandparent's sig, I think you want to say "The hymen makes a difference."

Re:Regression

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a shame that code is no longer recognised as something requiring skill, just a load of badly paid students working overtime to churn it out.

You act as if it has not always been this way. You must be old. Of course, in the old days, code had to be written for even the most mundane things. I remember having to write code to scroll text on the screen. Of course, at the time, I was a badly paid student (though not working overtime, and making better than my peers, so not *that* badly paid). I think most coding projects *can* be done by badly paid students, and those that can't require the expertise displaced by the badly paid students to identify.

Seriously, if something can be accomplished cheaply, with acceptible results, then it will. Unfortunately, while the difference in skill requirements are obvious to the lay person when it comes to building a planter vs. building a skyscraper, it isn't when it comes to coding projects of varying complexity. It's a great failure of software engineering that the market can even use code monkeys. Some shit is so easy that you hire code monkeys for... and yet, nobody has found a good way to automate the process.

The market has found other ways to deal with complexity. It used to require some skill to build a responsive GUI. Some of us cried at the loss of richness when everything started moving toward web apps. But you know something? Even though the web apps are feature poor, badly paid students working overtime can stamp them out consistently. XUL, PHP, ASP.Net, JSP, etc. are all geared at making relatively crappy GUIs that can be built by badly paid students working overtime. And for the most part, they can do just as good a job as an old, expensive expert. (and issues like security, scalabiltiy, etc. are being handled by the underlying technology, and are completely transparent to the cheap labor).

Is this a bad thing? It is for me (a coder who likes making decent money). But I don't see how it is bad for Mr. Business Owner who wants a web app but isn't in the technology business.

Re:Regression

[Anonymous Coward]

Scholarship, the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution have never helped to make people happier. People were happier before each arrived.

Re:Regression

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that such a bad thing assuming the old tech can be made to perform better than the new tech?

I would actually question if it even IS old-tech, if new technology is used to refine it. It's an old IDEA, not old techology. If steam engines can become more efficient and "cleaner", they will probably become mainstream, and gas engines will die out. Until someone comes up with a novel idea to get 50MPG+ out of a single eye-dropper of gasoline, and then internal combustion engines will be new-tech all over again. Gas engines are over 100 years old too. New/Old is not really relevant in this discussion.

Re:Regression

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually that's all a bit of a myth.

Europeans were learning from the past long before the Enlightenment; even long before the Renaissance.

And that past wasn't all that, either; oft times we had to unlearn the things from the past that were revered merely for being ancient, but which were in fact not true.

We had to learn to disregard a lot of what the ancients had believed about physics, math, science, geography, astronomy, chemistry, the arts, architecture, etc., before we could develop our own unique Western approach which has taken us in significantly different directions than what the ancient Greeks, or the Romans, or the Arabs were ever capable of.

Finally, the "dark ages" are a bit of a myth, and in any case are only a few centuries long, ending with the beginning of the middle ages circa 1000 AD or so, by which time Western Europeans were founding universities and laying the foundations for Western science and Western technology.

The roots of modern science and the industrial revolution are in medieval Europe, not in ancient Greece. There was an early "industrial revolution" in medieval Europe, and modern math and physics (for instance) have their origins in the medieval universities.

Rediscovering the past was important, but not as important as people think. We had to unlearn a lot of things, that were "ancient" but erroneious, too.

The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Enigma_Man]

The gas mileage you can get with a hybrid is far less than what you can get with a good diesel engine. Hybrids are a bad idea, twice the weight (batteries, two motors), half the interior room. Diesel-engined cars have been getting 50+ MPG for years and years. Unfortunately the stigma in the US over "diesel" prevents them from being brought over here.

-Jesse

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Momoru]

Diesel = Great for gas mileage

Diesel = Terrible for the environment

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

BioDiesel = does not exist because of stupid taxes

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[SkyMunky]

This may change when ultra-low sulfur diesel is more widely available in the U.S.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[lobsterGun]

Why not a diesel hybrid then?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Jeff DeMaagd]

The stigma really isn't so bad anymore, as another poster pointed out, there are emissions concerns with diesel, with nitrates, sulfates and particulates. I like the tech, but the environmental reasons do have merit.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[LWATCDR]

"Diesel = Terrible for the environment"
No not really if the US would adopt low sulfur diesel then it would not be much different than gas. Plus the one thing that people do not think about on electric and hybrids is the batteries. They are a nightmare to dispose or recycle.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[AviLazar]

the hybrid car designs (small interior) are not the result of the engine, but of the designers. In their attempts to get a new look they did a butcher job. It is almost like they wished to sabotage the chances of hybrids taking off - figuring nobody would buy such a small vehicle (it was the honda i believe that had the first one) - and if nobody buys it then they can say the tech sucks and we should remain with gas.
Diesl, i believe is very bad for the environment, but don't quote me on that.

The purpose of hybrids is to help conserve gas and to help the environment.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[YU Nicks NE Way]

BioDiesel == still bad for the environment because:

• High compression/temperature == High NOx
• High compression, short combustion == high soot production
• High compression, high hp, low RPM == low efficiency during start/stop driving == high fuel consumption in city driving == more pollution/mile traveled.

Yeah, biodiesel produces less marginal CO2 than dinodiesel, but the doesn't solve the problems implicit in a diesel engine.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Junior J. Junior III]

You still have the excess weight and consequential lack of space problem.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Enigma_Man]

I don't think that a hybrid system adds all that much to the vehicle... If you removed the batteries + electric motor from a Prius, you'd save a lot of weight, and I'd bet you'd probably get almost the same gas mileage as you did before, just using the 1.2 (or whatever it is) liter gas engine.

-Jesse

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[ArsonSmith]

Twice the weight? unless you have a 50lbs car then it is far less than twice the weight.
Half the interior room? Unless you have 1.2 cubic foot of space in your car then it takes up far less than half the space.

Why do hybrids get such criticism? The technology is sound, it is not married to petrol engines and could easily be used on Diesel. In fact it would be ideal for diesel engines to be hybrids. It does help improve mileage. What has a hybrid car done to you, and others who criticize this way?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[jandrese]

You would probably get even better gas milage on the highways actually. The problem would be that your car would accelerate terribly and have trouble getting up to highway speeds. The advantage of the Hybrids isn't so much that it makes compact gas-sippers more efficent (it doesn't do a particularly good job of that), but rather it makes them perform like regular cars so regular people will be interested in them. People don't like taking a minute to get to highway speeds, which is one of the big reasons Diesals had such a bad rap early on (have you ever driven one of those Diesal Rabbits? It's no fun.).

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

" The gas mileage you can get with a hybrid is far less than what you can get with a good diesel engine."

That's because we measure mileage using miles/gallon, and *diesel has more energy per gallon than gasoline*. About 30% more, in fact. That's like saying that a P-M is better than an Athlon 64 because it gets more work done "per clock". That's not the unit you need to be evaluating.

"Unfortunately the stigma in the US over "diesel" prevents them from being brought over here."

It's not the stigma, it's the envrionment. Even "clean" diesel engines rank horribly on particulate, NOx, and other nasty emissions.

The Prius *wasn't* designed to get the best gas mileage period. It was designed to reduce emissions *and* get good fuel economy. The Prius actually burns gas when it doesn't have to so that the catalytic converter stays hot (it doesn't work otherwise).

"Hybrids are a bad idea, twice the weight (batteries, two motors), half the interior room."

That's bullshit. The entire THSD - including the batteries and motor - is around 800lbs. This is *easily* offset by the fact that the Prius doesn't need a wasteful transmission. You might be able to save 400lbs using a vehicle with a manual transmission, but that's not really comparable to the automatic Prius, is it?

Oh, and your precious diesel cars? They weigh more than their gasoline counterparts because diesel engines need stronger components (much higher compression).

And, half the interior room? What kind of crap is that? The batteries in the Prius don't take up much room at all - and the engine compartment isn't any bigger than the one on any other medium-small car.

"Diesel-engined cars have been getting 50+ MPG for years and years."

The Prius hits 50mpg in real-world testing, too, with fuel that has 30% less energy than diesel.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[I8TheWorm]

What stigma? I see diesel chugging 1-ton pick-ups all over the place here!

Ok, humor aside, you're right. The problem, I think, was the crappy attempt by US auto makers at diesel cars in the late 70's early 80's. About the only decent diesel cars I know of that are readily available here are VW and Mercedes made.

As a matter of fact, I'm looking into a Jetta TDI now, as I'm working in downtown Houston again (40 mile commute) and currently I drive a full sized pickup myself.

If anyone has any suggestions for, and experience with, high MPG/MPK cars, I'd love to hear about them.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Enigma_Man]

Haha, actually I have driven a diesel rabbit :) I know what you're talking about though. The electric motor provides some low-end grunt, without sacrificing fuel.

-Jesse

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Better to use Ethanol E85, 85% Ethanol (alcohol) 15% gasoline and a cat to clean the gasoline. The alcohol are biofuel, clean recycleable etc,etc

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Eryq]

Plus the one thing that people do not think about on electric and hybrids is the batteries. They are a nightmare to dispose or recycle.

You're telling me! My car runs on 9,624 AA alkaline batteries. They only last about 30 miles, and when they conk out I have to use up the ones on my second car just to drive them to the dump...

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Enigma_Man]

It was obviously an exaggeration, mister "I.M.Clueless". I meant twice the weight of the propulsion system. A regular gasoline engine might weigh 400 lbs, but a gasoline engine plus batteries and an electric motor and all the adaptors necessary is going to weigh 800 lbs, and then it's going to take up twice as much room to store all the stuff. Hybrids get so much criticism because they don't increase gas mileage by enough of an amount to offset the amount of work that went into them. It's not a sound technology, it's the hip new thing from automakers to appease the clueless tree-huggers who don't actually know about the environment.

-Jesse

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Phreakiture]

You have also neglected the fact that a diesel engine can, with no modification, be run on biodiesel, which is refined vegetable oil. With mild modification, you can run a diesel engine on raw vegetable oil.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Tycho]

Yes diesel is really bad, but the pollution problem is being worked on. In the US diesel fuel has sulfur added to it for engine lubrication. Sulfur is supposed to be phased down from 500 ppm to 15 ppm in 2006. With that phase down, emission control systems can be added to reduce particulate matter emissions by 90% and Nitrous Oxides by 95%.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Enigma_Man]

It's not the stigma, it's the envrionment. Even "clean" diesel engines rank horribly on particulate, NOx, and other nasty emissions.

I suggest you look into new diesel engines. They can be even cleaner than their non-diesel counterparts with recent innovations in diesel catalytic converters and filters.

Oh, and your precious diesel cars? They weigh more than their gasoline counterparts because diesel engines need stronger components (much higher compression).

A diesel engine may weigh slightly more than a regular gasoline engine (not if you use modern materials), but it certainly weighs less than a gasoline engine, an electric motor, and a pack of batteries. To get an engine to deal with much higher compression doesn't take that much strengthening; better rods, pistons, and crank.

The Prius hits 50mpg in real-world testing, too, with fuel that has 30% less energy than diesel.

Some recent numbers from Honda/Acura's new diesel engine in their... I think it's the new Accord, but they don't call it that: 76 MPG, 130 MPH stop speed, 8 second 0-60 acceleration. That's amazing numbers, and better than any hybrid system out there.

I'm not a diesel fanatic, infact it hurts me to say that something involving electricity is worse (I'm an Electrical Engineer), but the fact remains that hybrids just aren't all the automakers crack them up to be.

-Jesse

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[PateraSilk]

(have you ever driven one of those Diesel Rabbits? It's no fun.)

I credit my 1981 Diesel Rabbit with making it physically impossible for me to wrap myself around a telephone pole while I was in high school.

Plus, in a car *that* underpowered, you learn true defensive driving very quickly!

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[ngkdc]

You'd better check the recycling rate for lead-acid batteries before you go on about how horrible it is to dispose or recycle them. With an approximate 94% recycling rate, the lead-acid battery industry is just about as good as it gets. Most of the batteries that don't get recycled are due to ignorance, not the lack of opportunity. ANY lead-acid battery reseller will accept old lead-acid batteries for recycling, since everything in the battery is fully recyclable, and has a strong market for the materials (plastic is reground and used to make new battery cases, the sulfuric acid electrolyte is neturalized and converted to food-grade sodium sulfate (a preservative), and the lead is smelted back into the appropriate alloy(s) for making new lead-acid batteries.
Further, the cycle of lead from smelter -> battery manufacturer -> consumer -> old battery to smelter is as tight a closed loop as you'll find (short of a cow in a pasture).

BUT, don't just take my word on it ... do some research!

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[PateraSilk]

Grrr!!! Rowr!!!

The "Bad Hybrid" trolls have been loud lately!

As a present hybrid owner, I'm perfectly happy with my car, thank you very much. As a former Diesel owner, I was very happy with that car, too.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

I was with you up until you mentioned needing a cat to clean the gasoline. Any particular breed?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Momoru]

If you removed the batteries + electric motor from a Prius, you'd save a lot of weight, and I'd bet you'd probably get almost the same gas mileage as you did before, just using the 1.2 (or whatever it is) liter gas engine.

This is what i've been telling people who want the Civic Hybrid....the Civic Hybrid has 93hp, costs $20k, and gets 40mpg. My 1991 Civic had 92hp, and got 40mpg, and you can get one now for $1500 or less. All car makers have to do to get better gas mileage is build lighter cars with small engines. Why does the average car in the USA these days have 200hp? Do we really need that much?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[ArsonSmith]

Ok, sense you are pulling numbers out of thin air let me give it a try.

400lbs engine + 200lbs transmission = 600

Now lets take that 600 lbs and add in
+ 50lbs battery
+ 100lbs electric motor/generator

we are up to 750lbs
well, we don't need a 400lbs engine anymore
-100lbs
we don't need the standard battery (technically there is but it is similar to a motorcycle battery and much much smaller and lighter)
-25lbs
we don't need a regular alternator (taken care of by the motor/generator)
-15lbs
we don't need a regular starter (taken care of by the motor/generator)
-15lbs
We can use a CV transmission that is much simpler and lighter than a manual or automatic
-50lbs

realistically everything averages out to a hybrid weighing about 50-75lbs more than an equivalent straight petrol car.

Plus you get the bonus of a brushless computer controlled electric motor that can run far longer than your starter and alternator in a standard car. Due to only one moving part and no dry rubbing brushes. My batteries have a 10 year warranty. I get an average of 42mpg when not trying by driving slower and accelerating slower. The worst I have ever got loaded with 5 people and luggage driving to Las Vegas (kinda kills your not enough interior room complaint) I still got 36mpg which is the best that a regular Civic will get.

I got a hybrid because I think the technology is useful now and that will increase in usefulness. I will most likely be trading in my civic for an accord hybrid next year so I can have a fast sports car hybrid.

Hybrid technology is not a flawed idea.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[epall]

You do realize that most hybrids (my Prius included) use NiMH batteries?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[jafac]

No not really if the US would adopt low sulfur diesel then it would not be much different than gas.

Unfortunately, if you take a realistic look at the oil industry in the US, it doesn't look like ULSD is going to happen. You can yell at and spank a spoiled, coddled child all you want, and they'll still whine and cry, kick and scream.

I think that the only long-term hope for Diesel technology in the US is a replacement of the current petroleum industry with a competitive supplier of Biodiesel. The technology for supplying biodiesel on that scale, does not exist. Yet. /Jetta TDI owner. Biodiesel consumer.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Timodious]

Quoth the poster: ...is around 800lbs. This is *easily* offset by the fact that the Prius doesn't need a wasteful transmission.

I have worked on lots of cars, and can't imagine how the transmission (even including the drive shaft, rear end, and axles) would make up 40% of the average small car weight. I think you might be exaggerating a little in your Prius advocacy.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[jellomizer]

They Start out with a small car. I think they just started off with small hybrid cars to actually improve the sales of these cars. Any starting technology will be more expensive then the older technology so by putting hybrid in small cars it makes them more afordable then say making a $40k SUV cost $50k vs. a $12k car a $18k car. So the prices are more targets to the buyers market. Second in order to really show off the Gas milage of the technology it is easer to give a Small Car 50 Miles to the gallon looks more impressive then an SUV with 30 Miles to the Gallon (The same of a current small car). Also it gives a good live test market to work out any bugs in the design before they implement the technonoly in different models. Ford is starting to release a Hybrid SUV as well as many other companies. Because the Hybrid technology has proven its worth thus is spreading.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[ngkdc]

I'd forgotten that, seeing some of the aftermarket lead-acid prototypes. NiMH is also recyclable, though not as easily as lead-acid. Thanks.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[ArsonSmith]

That's probably because your 1991 Civic was a two door light weight car with almost no options and wouldn't survive even the laziest of crash test standards today. Sure you can make a car 50% the weight be stripping out all the frame except what is needed to drive the car. Strip out all the options, electric windows, door locks, ABS, etc...

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[ArsonSmith]

And you get the socially advancing nick name of "French fry Boy" or would that be "Freedom fry Boy?"

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[phoenix321]

It will surely break the space constraints in a small vehicle, but what about the possibility to build a steam powered hybrid engine? That way the steam turbine can run either at optimal rpm or not at all, while the electric motor brings optimal torque for a "satisfying driving experience" and whatnot.

Twice the weight is a serious argument against this idea, though. Harmful lead in the batteries is not, as lead recycling is pretty efficient nowadays.

As steam turbines run on anything that can heat up water, we might see extremely versatile cars. Wood pellets are the last hype in heating small homes, as they are eco-friendly made from wood processing waste, can be fed mechanically into a burner and store a lot of energy per weight. But then, it could all be impractical...

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[sugar and acid]

So how about a hybrid with a diesel engine. Low sulfur fuel plus an engine tuned to run at a set rpm would go a long way to reduce local pollution from diesel engines, as well as being very efficient.

Anyway hybrids are a good idea, they take a very small underpowered but efficient engine and boost it's output for acceleration using an electric motor and some capacitor/battery for energy storage. Energy is recoverd by using regenerative braking instead of wasting it as heat (this is one reason hydrids do so well under stop start driving). The real benefit is right their, in regenerative breaking and the ability to use a small engine and still have decent acceleration. The powerplant could be anything really, petrol, diesel, steam turbine, or even hamsters, but a hybrid system allows you to get more efficiency from your powerplant and recover braking energy that would otherwise be lost as heat.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[i41Overlord]

That's bullshit. The entire THSD - including the batteries and motor - is around 800lbs. This is *easily* offset by the fact that the Prius doesn't need a wasteful transmission. You might be able to save 400lbs using a vehicle with a manual transmission, but that's not really comparable to the automatic Prius, is it?

I don't understand where you're getting your numbers. How much do you think an automatic transmission weighs?

My car has a small aluminum 4 cylinder with a lightweight transaxle (front wheel drive). The transmission weighs under 100 lbs. The engine/auto transmission combined weigh about 330 lbs.

Also, when you say conventional cars have "wasteful" transmissions, where do you get you get your efficiency figures? An automatic transaxle with a lockup torque converter has about an 18% loss between the crank and the drive wheels. What's the efficiency of the Prius's driveline? It has an engine turning a generator which makes the electricity to turn an electric motor. You lose some efficiency in the alternator, you lose some in the wires, and you lose some in the motor.

I don't think the unorthodox drivetrain is the main factor that makes the Prius so efficient, I think it's mainly the fact that it's a small, light, aerodynamic car without much horsepower. Similar small, light, low HP cars also get good gas mileage. A Geo Metro, for instance, got 50 mpg back in 1989, and it wasn't the most aerodynamic thing. I'm sure technology has improved since then. The Opel Corsa I rented when I went to Europe was pretty nice and it got 50+ mpg. And that was the gas version. The diesel version gets a little over 60 mpg.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Momoru]

Actually it was four door, had power everything including sunroof, and cruise control. No it didnt have airbags, but those don't add that much weight difference. The primary difference I can see is the displacement and weight. The new Civics have 1.7 liter engines and 15 inch alloy wheels, plus all kinds of body kitting and what not. While mine had a 1.5 and 13" wheels. I agree weight is a large part of why new civics get worse gas mileage, but their considerably more horse power is also a factor, so my original post was advocating lowering weights of cars and lowering their displacements. If we all drive slow light cars the accidents wouldn't be as bad in the first place.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Marxist Hacker 42]

OTOH- with this quote from TFA:

"But the problem of turbines is that to be efficient, they have to run at a predetermined speed.

A hybrid solution seems perfect for this problem- the turbine running at a predetermined speed, generates electricity to feed the bateries, which in turn feed the motors of the wheels. ALSO- using the new design (which the Prius doesn't, but that's beside the point) of a smaller electric motor in each wheel means that you can negate the weight difference by totally eliminating the transmission (to reverse, just reverse polarity), which also saves a good deal of power (the average automatic transmission actually eats about 50% of the power output of the egine).

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[blugu64]

I will most likely be trading in my civic for an accord hybrid next year so I can have a fast sports car hybrid.

Is this a joke or what?? What the heck? an Accord as a "fast sports car", I mean comon! Accords are the mother of all grocery getters. Seriously man, your argument is fairly sound (about engine weight) but I don't care who you are...Accords are NOT sports cars.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Where did you find the 14436 volt engine?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[FroMan]

It'd only be that voltage if they were wired in a series. It is possible to wire them parallel to not have such a high voltage.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[dabadab]

Please, stop this nonsense. Your numbers are way off and your knowledge on diesel engines seems to be outdated.

(Using data from the Citroen C4, which, I guess, is in the same size class as the Prius)

"You might be able to save 400lbs using a vehicle with a manual transmission"

The automatic version weighs only 74 kg (163 lbs) more.

"Oh, and your precious diesel cars? They weigh more than their gasoline counterparts because diesel engines need stronger components (much higher compression)."

The difference between the 1.6 gas and the 1.6 HDI is 57 kg (126 lbs).

In the end, the Prius and the C4 weigh about the same.

"Even "clean" diesel engines rank horribly on particulate, NOx, and other nasty emissions."

That's why the particle filter and the catalytic converter is used in diesel cars.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Phreakiture]

Fryboy will do fine, thanks :-)

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[chainsaw1]

I suggest you look into new diesel engines. They can be even cleaner than their non-diesel counterparts with recent innovations in diesel catalytic converters and filters.


Particulates will always be changing because of changing engine designs. However, one mole of diesel will always produce more exhause gas than one mole of gasoline because the average molecular weight is much greater despite being made of the same atoms. From http://hypertextbook.com/physics/matter/density/
we have:

diesel 800 kg/m^3
gasoline 803 kg/m^3

Since their densities are about the same, we can say one unit volume of diesel contains more stuff to burn than gas.

A diesel engine may weigh slightly more than a regular gasoline engine (not if you use modern materials), but it certainly weighs less than a gasoline engine, an electric motor, and a pack of batteries.

a) The engine in the hybrid is smaller, because it runs at one speed (full-out) if it is ever running. This means it does not need to be designed for low end power.

b) You forgot to include that despite the extra generator and batteries, we now get to remove the transmission and can, in the future remove the transfer case (awd/4wd), driveshaft (rwd), steering shaft & powersteering pump (electric replacement + drive by wire), power brake vacuum chamber (electric assist) because we now have an electric unit powerful enough to take care of all these things built in.

Some recent numbers from Honda/Acura's new diesel engine in their... I think it's the new Accord, but they don't call it that: 76 MPG, 130 MPH stop speed, 8 second 0-60 acceleration. That's amazing numbers, and better than any hybrid system out there.

As I said before, gas and diesel doesn't compare because a gallon of diesel produces energy (and emissions) equivellent to perhaps 2 gallons of gas.

I should also metion that the molecules in diesel's weight range are more likely overlapping with polymers and other organtic products which have other uses. Gas is more of a byproduct that doesn't have much function other than as a fuel (and thus is better spent that way)

What diesel engines DOES provide is alternatives to pumping form the ground entirely, which is sweet. However, this is separate from petrolium diesel fuel which is not good

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Duhavid]

If you are going to run at a set RPM, then a standard diesel or gasoline infernal combustion engine is not the way to go. Some turbine arrangement would be optimal there.

In fact, I think the main reason we dont see the hybrids going this way is

1: Servicing a turbine engine is something that the existing infrastructure is *not* ready for. ( there *may* be arguments for the idea that a turbine unit would not create enough "servicing oportunities" for its creators, but I digress )

2: As I understand it, the gas engine is used to provide part of the motive force for peak loading ( I.E. driving the wheels, not the generator ). An entirely electic drivetrain would lose that.

Some good thoughts, though.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[westlake]

If we all drive slow light cars the accidents wouldn't be as bad in the first place.

The problem is that North American driving conditions are so variable. Weather. Distance. Traffic. Terrain.
Drivers in the north can expect brutal cold, snow, ice and gale-force winds in winter. The ultra-light urban commuter car designed for L.A. doesn't cut it for them.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[LWATCDR]

I thought it was NiCADs not NiMH. Which are the hardest to recycle.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Altus]

Im a little confused by his talk of the efficient transmission.... its not like a Continually variable transmission cant be put into a conventional car or even a desiel car. In fact, dont they make civics with the CVT?

and arnt the manual transmissions more effective in terms of milage (probably because they weigh so much less)?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[spitefulcrow]

NiCd is out of date by a good while. I'd bet that the only major use of NiCd batteries is in consumer-grade rechargeables from the 90s.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[w42w42]

Ford (mercury) is apparently coming out with a diesel-electric hybrid in 2007, and it qualifies for near-zero emmissions.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"An automatic transaxle with a lockup torque converter has about an 18% loss between the crank and the drive wheels"

Even modern locking torque converters don't lock unless the driver maintains a farily constant speed. They aren't all that effective in stop-and-go driving.

"It has an engine turning a generator which makes the electricity to turn an electric motor."

Not quite. The HSD links both the electric motor and the gas motor directly to the drive system - with a single fixed gear ratio. The vehicle is driven by the electric motor, the gas engine, or both.

At low RPM, the electric motor allows the car to accelerate reasonably well (the crappy part of the gas engine's torque curve is offset by the electric motor's torque curve). At higher RPM, the engine drives the wheels directly, bypassing the gas > electric > power conversion altogether.

"I don't think the unorthodox drivetrain is the main factor that makes the Prius so efficient, I think it's mainly the fact that it's a small, light, aerodynamic car without much horsepower."

The Prius is larger and more powerful than a Geo Metro. It's similar in size to a VW Jetta.

If you are comparing to a Metro, the Insight is a better comparison - it consistantly gets 65+ MPG.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

"That's why the particle filter and the catalytic converter is used in diesel cars."

You can't use a catalytic converter with a diesel in the US because we have sulfur in our diesel. The sulfur emissions destroy the catalytic converter and render it inoperable.

Even with a catalytic converter, diesels emit far more NOx than the Prius, particularly during startup and in cold weather conditions.

Remember, the THS is about 800lbs. That includes the engine, the batteries, the drivetrain, and the motor. The motor plus the batteries are probably less than the 289lbs for the diesel + automatic transmission.

The 1.6L Citroen C4 HDi is 110HP. Not bad considering the torque curve of diesels, but it probably doesn't have the acceleration of the Prius.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[nathanh]

The gas mileage you can get with a hybrid is far less than what you can get with a good diesel engine. Hybrids are a bad idea, twice the weight (batteries, two motors), half the interior room.

They are not twice the weight. A hybrid Civic weighs 100kg more than a non-hybrid Civic.

They are not half the interior. A hybrid Civic has the same interior as a non-hybrid Civic.

And you cannot compare diesel MPG to petrol MPG. They are different fuels with different densities.

Think of it like this. Diesel powered trains are actually HYBRID vehicles. The diesel motor turns a generator to provide electrical power to the electric engines. If hybrid was such a damn stupid idea compared to straight diesel do you think diesel-electric trains would be cost effective? The existence of diesel-electric trains should be a great big fucking clue.

Diesel-engined cars have been getting 50+ MPG for years and years.

Yes. 800kg 1.3L 3-cyl diesel cars get 50+ MPG. A family-sized sedan hybrid Prius with a PETROL engine gets 60+ MPG. This guy gets 80+ MPG with his Prius.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[homer_ca]

Don't think of diesel as just petroleum diesel. Diesel engines will run on a wide variety of fuels. Their combustion is insensitive to fuel properties unlike gasoline engines. City buses here have been converted to run on natural gas. No black clouds or diesel stink at all. The combination of particulate traps, urea injection and low sulphur fuel will pretty much meet all pollution standards for the forseeable future. Biodiesel is naturally low sulphur, and it's attractive in the long term because it's renewable, doesn't put more CO2 in the air, and has minimal switching costs beyond growing and refining. Production and cost is a challenge for now, but oil isn't getting any cheaper. Once the cost curves cross, there's no going back to crude oil. We may have to cut back on our hamburger habit though. Something like 70% of U.S. farmland is used to grow animal feed (not counting grazing land). That's a helluva lot of vegetable oil. And there's species of algae rich in oil that could be grown in salt water too.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

I've spent most of a year working for a battery wholesaler, and I can tell you that recycled batteries are garbage. Not a single good one.
For reference: we deal in long life lead acid batteries which MUST have a shelf life of 2 years MINIMUM in fire/safety equipment. You might not care so much about reliability if it's just a car battery, after all.
The big problem is that is's actually much cheaper to import crappy batteries from China than it is to recycle lead and make new ones here in North America. The "closed loop" you would like to see does not exist in our economy, and I can tell you that there are not a whole lot of vendors like us to choose from. Few sources, my friend. Good luck with your recycling dream.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Afrosheen]

Crash test standards are so much higher because we're forced to share the road with H2 Hummers and SUV's all over the place. Back in the 80's when everyone built light cars, which was a result of the oil crisis in the 70's, I imagine most accidents were a little less deadly.

If we could just convince these soccer moms to hangup and drive a volvo station wagon like they used to, we'd be safer.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Firethorn]

Don't forget that we have plenty of experience here. This is how modern trains operate

Heck, I could see us going this way with tractor trailers first, then SUV's. Why? Well, they have alot of size reduction to do...

Point 1, well, yes, you'd loose alot of existing greese-monkey knowledge, but you're losing much of that anyways with hybrids. Answer is training and talking with the railroad guys.

Point 2, systems vary. Under constant load, direct mechanical connection is the most efficient, while the electric provides the quick start required by people.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Why bother with a steam turbine when you could have a plain old gas turbine, aka a "jet engine"?

This has been tried before, but not with hybrid technology. Major complaint of jet turbines was slow response time for initial acceleration: not a problem when all the turbine is doing is charging up the batteries.

Plus, with jet turbines, you can use just about any kind of combustible fuel: gas, diesel, kerosene (jet fuel), even alcohol, without any modifications to the engine.

That right there greatly simplifies your fuel infrastructure problems if in future you decide to migrate away from gasoline towards some other kind of fuel.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Gas turbines are light and efficient; if they are simply powering the batteries, you can do away entirely with the drive train, thus saving even more weight.

You can even make the wheels themselves the electric engines - ie, each wheel is its own electric engine - saving even more weight and making for a very nimble all-wheel drive, all-wheel steering vehicle.

As to servicing turbine engines - this would actually be to the benefit to the dealerships initially, since they would have the money to invest in infrastructure first and would have an intial advantage over non-dealership auto mechanics. But it isn't really that hard to make such a transition. Especially if you make the design modular, so you could simply lift out an old turbine engine and drop in a new one, in a few minutes, and send the old turbine engines back for periodic maintenance. Turbines are very efficient and in fact need a lot less maintenance than piston engines.

Finally, gas turbines can burn almost any fuel - gasoline, diesel, kerosene, alcohol. This would greatly simplify fuel distribution networks and make it easier to migrate away from gasoline if that were to be the most economical solution in future.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[timpaton]

The gas mileage you can get with a hybrid is far less than what you can get with a good diesel engine

...which begs the question:
Why is nobody building diesel-electric hybrid cars?

Why not gain the benefits of both worlds? A modest sized turbodiesel engine, assisted by an electric motor when required, charging batteries when able by running the engine at an efficient loadpoint, regenerative braking...

Modern European turbodiesels are very efficient, and very clean. Very few Americans have the experience to claim otherwise, given that there are very few, if any, modern European turbodiesels in America (NB - I'm not European, so don't play the "euro elitist wanker" card on me).

If diesel engine could be designed and tuned for absolute optimum efficiency, even if only over a limited speed range...the potential is quite exciting.

For that matter, why not try turbine-electric cars?

A major limitation of both gas and steam turbines (as mentioned in TFA) is that they only run efficiently at a very narrow band of speeds, and cars need to run at a wide range of engine speeds (due to the finite number of gears available, or the limitations of CVTs).

So why not use an efficient fixed-speed turbine to run a fixed-speed generator to charge batteries or capacitor banks, which then power electric wheel-motors to drive at whatever speed is required? No need for an inflexible mechanical drivetrain.

Incidentally, that's how diesel-electric railway locomotives have worked for years. Diesel engines run at whatever speed is required to generate the power needed; driving generators; which power electric motors to drive the tractive wheels at whatever speed is required. Many ships operate the same way, particularly large cruise liners; a roomfull of medium-speed diesel engines driving generators, started and stopped individually as required to meet the needs of the propeller motors (and other power needs onboard). It's not new technolgy. There aren't a whole lot of spark-ignition railway locomotives or cruise ships out there...

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually have a Prius and the room inside the car is far more than normal cars of a similar size. You should know what you are talking about before you post such a comment!! They're fantastic to drive too - one Prius managed to reach over 200kmh recently. Regards, Jon Dee

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[shplorb]

People don't like taking a minute to get to highway speeds, which is one of the big reasons Diesals had such a bad rap early on (have you ever driven one of those Diesal Rabbits? It's no fun.).

Early on, yes. Modern diesel's have very good performance. Earlier this year my father purchased a 4WD with a 3L turbo diesel engine. The damn thing weighs something like 2.5T, but it accellerates rather impressively considering the size of the motor!

You should check out a new Volkswagen Golf - they're very zippy and speedy. Turbo diesel is the way of the future.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Trimpy]

Driving in general is bad for the environment. Any manufactured product somehow produces some form of pollution directly or indirectly (using electricity from a coal power plant for example, or using other fabricated materials that when manufactured cause pollution.) The question is how they stack up relative to each other.

Diesel is less refined than gasoline and is cheaper to make. Diesel produces more energy per gallon than gasoline, which makes the work that you can derive from a gallon is about 20% more. Diesel engines have to be much tougher to withstand higher combustion temperature and pressure; as a result they last much longer. 250,000 miles before any major repairs is not anywhere near uncommon for diesels.

A gasoline hybrid uses a fuel that needs more energy to make it, and this fuel does less work per unit, and relies on a weaker engine in terms of durability.

A VW TDI engine is extremely simple. A 1.9L 4 cyl engine that produces a whopping 90hp is plenty for a comfortable level of acceleration and top speed. With the simplicity means less parts, less complicated parts, and less cost.

The hybrid is much more complicated of an engine. It is much more likely to be in need of major repair. They also weigh more meaning more energy to get the thing moving.

Diesel vs Gasoline Hybrid? I dont think there is much of a competiton. Even with the pollution differences you would think counties with stricter regulations that the US would tend to use gasoline more? Wrong, most countries in Europe are 50% diesel or more. Plus if you supplied a diesel and a gasoline hybrid with a single gallon of fuel and set them off all the while collecting every last bit of exhaust both engines produce, and generate a cofficient. Yes that coefficient is larger just in terms of say pollution units for the diesel. Now take Polluntion Units / Miles traveled = Pollution per Mile. Ok diesel is still higher even though it went further on the same amount fo fuel. Next factor in average cost to operate. Pollution per Mile * CTO = Cost of Pollution per mile. Now we are getting somewhere. The complexity of manufaturing, insuring, financing, repairing, and replacing consumables (fuel, tires, batteries) and disposal of all the byproducts of these actions makes the overall aggregate pollution per unit of work done for a diesel considerably less than a hybrid.

Plus since the US is crazy with the trucking industry there is a corporate motivation to make advancements in diesel technology considerably faster than hybrid research.

Lastly consider Biodiesel which is completely interchangable with regular diesel fuel with negligible consequences and considerable gains in terms of pollution having a significant reduction in the amount of unburned hydrocarbons, CO production, particulate emissions, and the essential elimination of sulfur dioxide and sulfates from exhaust. Biodiesel can be manufactured from almost any fat or plant oil so the potential for total aggregate pollution from a standard diesel engine is lowered even more.

Diesel engines are just a better choice when compared to a gasoline hybrid.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[sacredchao]

So what if you set up a hybrid vehicle using a good diesel engine instead of a petrol engine?

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[adpowers]

Don't forget the Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel is coming to the general population in 2006. Add the fact that you can blend with biodiesel (or use 100% biodiesel) and you get pretty clean fuel. The buses where I live use ULSD, all the new ones are hybrids (so you can get energy back from breaking), and some are being tested with biodiesel.

I still think a diesel is a good investment (if you must get a car) because they can be run on biodiesel, which is way better than gas or diesel.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[adpowers]

Forgot to add: The buses also have particulate filters and catalytic convertors. I haven't seen smoke coming out of our buses in years.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

If reduction of emissions is the goal, then you can convert your petrol car to work on LPG (Liquified Petrol Gas, a liquid mixture between propane and butane). It's better for the engine too. So there is no need for hybrid cars.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Anonymous Coward]

Diesels are good for the environment, if you forget about the emission of small particles consisting of poly-aromatic carbonhydrates for a moment. And while you are it, forget about the premature deaths caused by these carcenogenic substances as well.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[Kirth Gersen]

I remember a cartoon published in "Punch" magazine in England during WW2.

A suspicious bobby has stopped a spiv driving an enormous car (it was very difficult to get petrol because of rationing).

The spiv explains: "Nah! Nah! It runs on 10,000 torch batteries!"

I should explain that while gasoline was hard to get, flashlight batteries were *impossible* to get.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[mink]

A problem with diesel is it's 25-50% more in cost then the gas needed for that same rough milelage in a Prius. There are also pollution issues if you care about that.

Get whatever one you want, but before you say a diesel is better then a hybrid you need to take off the blindfold of ignorance.

There is no stigma in the US over diesel I can at any time from several manufacturers get my choice of diesel powered cars, trucks and other vehicles here in the US. I have been able to get them for the last 20 years (as long as I have cared to drive) and see no indication of production stopping.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[mink]

Yah, the US is sooooo fucking advanced in the whole diesel tech field that the US army still has to use 5 ton dumptrucks from the 1950's . I'm serious, whatever group we have over in Iraq right now, I heard them on the radio saying the oldest truck they have is from the mid 50's and the most recent one was made in the early 70's.

Trucking companies dont give a shit about advancing technologies, they just care about how little repairs they can get away with and still not have too many horrific accidents.

You got some mighty fine rose colored glasses on about this whole magical diesel tech research that we supposedly are leading the world on.

Add to your list that the crap diesel we see for sale today is 25% to 50% more expensive then the fuel used by say a Prius. If it has to be more cleaned and refined I suspect they will decide to charge more for it. Unless some kind of government subsidy comes into play, and even then they will certainaly chage as much as they can for it.

IMO from experiance with both technologies (about 4 times as long with diesels) they both have a place and a use. But to say (this early) that one technologu is clearly superior to another in every use is bunk. We dont yet have decent long term environmental impact info on hybrids in the US, if we maybe talked to Japan about it that might get us some.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[mink]

If you have a VWabbit and it's diesel make sure you put a 5 speed tranny in it, those 4 speed ones just dont work for shit with the diesel motors used by VW.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[mink]

I think your problem is that you are cracking them up to be more then I have ever heard any auto maker claim.

It almost smells like a strawman, set up hybrids as horrible.

Re:The Prius/hybrids actually isn't good at all

[mink]

Yah, looks like us sane people (who are not on some strange crusade/jihad) need to stick together.

The Air Car...

[Kjuib]

http://www.theaircar.com/

does not run on steam. But runs on air... And you can expect to see these at a local dealer soon. (at least Europe)

Re:The Air Car...

[sreid]

and who is compressing the air, with what power source? this is like hydrogen, someone needs to make it to use it, it does not come out of thin air..

Re:The Air Car...

[chill]

The Series 34 CATs engines can be equipped with and run on dual energies - fossil fuels and compressed air - and incorporate a reheating mechanism (a continuous combustion system, easily controlled to minimize pollution) between the storage tank and the engine.

This mechanism allows the engine to run exclusively on fossil fuel which permits compatible autonomy on the road.

While the car is running on fossil fuel, the compressor refills the compressed air tanks. The control system maintains a zero-pollution emission in the city at speeds up to 60 km/h.

Re:The Air Car...

[stratjakt]

You can refill at a modified gas station in 3 or 4 minutes, for a couple of bucks, and the vehicle is equipped with a compressor that you plug in and can refill itself in 3 or 4 hours.

It's also capable of running on gas, like a hybrid, so you can use it normally while you wait for the filling stations to propogate.

The air compression uses electricity. Whether that electricity was generated *cleanly* or not is irrelevant to the car itself.

The whole point is that 80% of vehicle emissions are released in densely populated city centers, and the quality of air in big cities is declining. When the local news is issuing "smog warnings" during the summer, somethings wrong.

This is about fighting the pollution problems in cities, it doesnt pretend to be a magical source of free energy.

This is an interesting idea, and I wish it success, but after reading that website (and the ridiculous amount of typos in their FAQ), it sounds like a lot of PR hype, they really seem to be running on hot air. Time will tell.

Re:The Air Car...

[adeydas]

now that's something cool...

Re:The Air Car...

[Cow Jones]

And you can expect to see these at a local dealer soon. (at least Europe)

What, you mean it's not vaporware?

Re:The Air Car...

[khrtt]

they really seem to be running on hot air

Actually, they seems to be running on rather cold air:-). They even propose using the exhaust for air conditioning.

So hard to spell check?

[mOoZik]

WTF is tho? I don't expect Slashdot, of all places, to voluntarily uphold basic English "practices," but come on! Mod me down if you must, but you may be content with 133t "speek" more than more educated members.

Re: So hard to spell check?

[Black Parrot]

> WTF is tho?

It's a quaint way of spelling "740", you 6006.

Re: So hard to spell check?

[koreaman]

Go here, please.

Re:So hard to spell check?

[Shadow Wrought]

Your UID is mOoZik and you complain about not holding up "basic English 'practices'?" Hello Mr. Pot, please meet Mr. Kettle.

Re:So hard to spell check?

[jmcmunn]

Amen to that one. I was thinking the same thing when I read it. That and the annoying "emoticons" and smileys are annoying as well. Come on, can't the posters at least act like this is a respectable place to come for news?

If I were a first time visitor to this site, and that was the first thing I read, I would leave and never come back because I wouldn't take this place seriously. Keep that crap in the chat rooms or whatever.

Re:So hard to spell check?

[pete-classic]

I had the same reaction. Then I looked it up in what I consider the canon of the American dialect of the English language.

There goes the neighborhood.

-Peter

Re:So hard to spell check?

[Anonymous Coward]

"tho" is an abbreviation of the word "though" that has come to be commonly accepted by the masses.

Much like "WTF" and "Mod"

Re:So hard to spell check?

[mOoZik]

At least it's funny! Picture a singing cow and tell me you don't giggle. Tell me! ;)

Re:So hard to spell check?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't find anthopomorphic animals funny at all, actually, but rather a sad statement about our attempt to humanize all things except the enemy. Case in point: Animals dressed in human clothes (such as primates) is "funny"; but depicting humans as animals (ie: WWII) is demeaning.

Re:So hard to spell check?

[Shadow Wrought]

You're right, I can't argue with that;-)

Re:So hard to spell check?

[upsidedown_duck]

You are an animal, too. And, yes, your clothes are quite funny.

Re:So hard to spell check?

[Methuseus]

I didn't know *anyone* saw this as a respectable place to come for news. It's more a forum than news site, and the mods here just barely take themselves seriously.

tho?

[Anonymous Coward]

you would think that a person having the time to submit an article to slashdot could spell "though" correctly.

Re:tho?

[A.Chwunbee]

You are bieng new here, right?

Not To Sound Silly...

[LegendOfLink]

But doesn't it strike anybody just a bit odd that we're reverting to very "old" technology?

Maybe it's just me, but lately, going retro seems to be the new trend. Hello 1880's!

Re:Not To Sound Silly...

[SnapShot]

I know there's a lot of people scared of dangerous hydrogen (ohh, the Hindenburg) but I'd rather have a hydrogen powered car than one where I'm sitting next to "superheated steam at 400C and at 40-bar pressure (4 million Pa)". Give me the new (not steam) technology any day.

P.S. Have you noticed that there's a lot of losers tossing around Troll points?

Re:Not To Sound Silly...

[I8TheWorm]

Haven't you ever heard the phrase "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"?

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go hook my horse to the cart so I can head to the general store for some flour, I have clothes to hand wash and hang to dry, and there's something wrong with my hand-crank well pump.

Re:Not To Sound Silly...

[iminplaya]

Hello 1880's!

Not quite. I don't think that these things will have us wading in horse crap all day. I bet they smell better also.

Re:Not To Sound Silly...

[Anonymous Coward]

The evolution towards a compact turbine does not strike me as odd at all. I am constantly amazed that we still use reciprocating pistons for anything but hand pumps. I mean seriously, of all the possible engine designs, someone decided that slamming hunks of metal back and forth was the best way to go? Talk about chasing a dead end.

IIRC, turbines are much more efficient and, since they use external combustion, they are fundamentally a lot less finicky about what you feed them: sun, e-, gasoline, uranium, old tires...if it produces heat, it'll work. It is only in the last 80 years however that we have had the ability to machine turbines to the required tolerances for anything smaller than a windmill.

Don't be surprised if the next generation of hybrid vehicles start using turbines for the power generation stage. If it doesn't have to directly power the road wheels (unlike this design), most of the disadvantages go away without losing any advantages.

I think this is quite exciting: I would love to see someone try this with a solar car.

Re:Not To Sound Silly...

[roadrunnerro]

Yes, and you'd also not like to feed it coal to get the "superheated steam at 400C and at 40-bar pressure (4 million Pa)", no? Prety please w/sugar on top - read the article - there is no "boiler"...

Re:Not To Sound Silly...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because a technology has been around for a long while does not mean the application need be primative. The fundamental principles of design that let your computer work were invented in 1940 yet dispite the speed at which the insdustry has evolved the method is the same.

Sure steam was one of our first portable power methods after live stock. This however is a stram TURBINE not a piston engine. Consider though that steam piston engine has many great advantages over internal combustion. Namely its very very hard to stall a steam engine they have a lot* of torque per cylinder sq. in. of displacement if the actual engine excluding the bolier displaced as much as your car does we'd be talking in the 700ft/lb range. So realy good exceleration would be possible if you could keep the weight down.

The steam engine evolved, it began using atomspheric pressure then moved to feeding pressure form a tank into the cylinder. Then moved to feeding both sides of the cylinder. Something still not done in internal combustion. So you can get two cylinders for the price of one in many respects. There is another key to that, its easy to build an engine where you can reverse the direction of the engine itself on the fly so to speak. This was done on locomotives. This means you can have a lot simpler transmission becase forward and reverse could be the same gear set. There is simply no reason why modern alloy materails and insulative technologies could not allow us to build a compact steam engine that would be safe and reliable. The warm up time would remain a problem, heating water just takes time pure an simple no matter how you do it. This could lead to a platform that is very fule flexible, ie runs on anything that burns provided its in a specific state such as liquid gas or solid depending on the design. You would be spared having to worry about coplex fule requirements of internal combustion. EFI systems would not really even need to know what you put in the tank, the logic, is the water hot if not add more fule unless the O2 sensor says not too.

The point of all this is just becuse a tech has been in service a long time does not mean its useless. Radio is mighty old too but I bet you think that WLAN is pretty neat. Old tech finds new applications and other advances can imporve it an make something like the steam engine that we got away from, due to technical limitations highly useful again if we desire. But you can be fool if you want an go reinvent the wheel after all thats pretty old too so it must be bad.

Re:Not To Sound Silly...

[mink]

Hung clothes dry faster on a sunny afternoon and use less electricity/gas then a modern dryer. Problem is not every day is a sunny day. A smart person uses both methods to his/her advantage.

Still using fossil fuels?

[hexed_2050]

Anything that can begin to cut down on the amount of pollution that is generated in our atmosphere is a step in the right direction.

Sure, I'm not about to give up my VW GTI VR6 just yet, but sooner or later something's gotta give. Even Buzz Lightyear from Toy Story is mocking us:

'Do you people still use fossil fuels, or have you discovered crystallic fusion?'

Re:Still using fossil fuels?

[xcomputer_man]

All these lame technologies - fossil fuels, steam, air, blah blah. When will people learn that the future lies in Potty fuels?

Re:Still using fossil fuels?

[lowededwookie]

I've been interested in steam powered cars ever since I first heard about the Stanley Steamer. This car was capable of doing 200Km/h when there were no petrol powered cars that could come close to that speed. Obviously today this is not the case but in reality who needs a car that can do 200 when the roads stop those speeds from being reasonable? Anyhow, I've also had a theory about making this car run without any fossil fuels whatsoever but I'm not really clued in as to whether or not it would work effectively so maybe you lot can help out. My theory is to use magnetic induction to heat up the water instead of propane, gasoline/kerosene. The other benefit is that you don't have to wait long for the water to heat up. From then on it's basically just steam turning a shaft or a turbine. Power would be supplied by batteries of course and the batteries would be charged by a generator running off the shaft. But the issue really is would batteries be able to supply enough power to run the magnetic induction initially? Thoughts?

Re:Still using fossil fuels?

[hexed_2050]

I'm not worried about doing 200km/h; I'm worried about being able to have the available power to step on the gas to avoid the cell phone talking housewive driving the navigator that almost ran me over.

So it's a steam turbine

[Lisandro]

Turbines are interesting designs and have been tried in cars before IIRC (i remember seeing a documentary on History Channel about this), was it Ford? They had a car that basically ran on anything that burned; they even tried common isopropyl alcohol on it. Worked just fine.

I wonder how efficient this engine is. Also, how quiet - that was one of the main issues with the car i mentioned before, it sounded like a small jet plane.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[Martix]

But a y2k motorcycle could be fun

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[Alien Being]

"was it Ford?"

It was Chrysler, but the car looked quite a bit like a Ford Thunderbird. IIRC, Chrysler builds the M1 Abrams tanks which are also turbine powered.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[I8TheWorm]

Right, it was Chrysler, and it was hailed as the Car of the Future at the time.

Evidently, rather than price, the main roadblock was the pollutants the car emited.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, if you're British it was Rover and called the Jet 1 in the early fifties. They even raced at Le mans with a turbine powered car at some time in the sixties.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[b0s0z0ku]

The car was the Chrysler turbine car. Some pics of the car can be seen here. You can read the complete owner's manual for the Turbine Car here.

-b.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[upsidedown_duck]

I think some of the engineering problems with turbines are:

- how to efficiently gear down something spinning at tens of thousands of RPM
- how to muffle them, since turbines are very sensitive to intake and exhaust restriction
- do turbines consume their oil supply, too? I'm not sure.

I'd love a super-efficient turbine in my car (direct fuel to rotational energy conversion!) but I'm not sure if the engineering problems have been solved, yet.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[TheGavster]

The problem that people keep running into with turbine powered cars is that they try to hook the turbine up the rest of the drivetrain from a gasoline powered car. If you hook the turbine instead to a generator, you can run at a constant RPM (making the turbine happy), and then power electric motors at the wheels (or a single motor driving a differential). With all the electronics on a modern car, you've got the alternator in there already, just need to go all the way.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[Lisandro]

Wandering off here, but i recall the futuristic bikes in Akira were supposed to work exactly like that: a very powerful engine feeding a generator, which stored energy for individual electric motors on both wheels.

It's a very good idea, and with modern batteries/motors can be made awfully efficient.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[Duhavid]

True, but steam turbines in ships have been around since before 1900. The first problem was solved in multiple ways ( reduction gearing, double reduction gearing, turbo-electric drives ( several battleships and the Lexington and Saratoga ( CV-2 and CV-3 ) ).

The turbine airflow and oil issues would have been solved in aircraft engineering from the 1940's and on.

It is true that the specifics of the solutions would need some additional work to fit the particulars of the problems, but I would think the large problems would have been solved already.

Re:So it's a steam turbine

[Anonymous Coward]

An automotive application has the primary constraint of turbine size. A small turbine must operate at high rotational speed to produce the power necessary to effectively drive a car.

There is no benefit to running the generator end of a turbine/electric system at 50krpm; it merely creates mechanical wear and balancing issues. The internal combustion engine, on the other hand, operates at the perfect crankshaft speed for efficient generation of electricity, with no gearing required.

Besides, NOx emissions from turbines are too high to make for a practical road vehicle with today's regulations.

the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[TrippTDF]

Here's a question I've never had answered fully-

Say that fuelcells start powering everything, and their exhaust is going to be water.
BR> What is going to happen to all that water that we create? Isn't that going to have reaching enviromental implications as well?

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[neverutterwhen]

Was that a joke? We don't have huge untapped reservoirs of hydrogen. the hydrogen will be created from water. Hydrogen fuel will hopefully be used to store all the energy we get from clean sources(wave, wind etc). The hydrogen itself is just a clean, non polluting battery. We don't create extra water.

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[jandrese]

One of the tricky things people don't always understand is that you can't create something from nothing. We can't flood the world by running fuel cells because we have to create the H2 before we can burn it in a fuel cell. One way to create H2 is to electrolize water! Other methods (usually using Hydrocarbons) may increase the amount of water not locked-up in the Earth's crust over the short run (much the same way we are currently releasing enormous amount of Carbon that was previously locked up in Old/Coal/Natural Gas/etc... deposits.

That said the amount of water we are talking about is unlikely to have any significant impact on the environment, although the effects are hard to predict.

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[Anonymous Coward]

How much water would one of these cars produce? I'm picturing rush hour here in Minnesota on a nice "warm" day, say -10 degrees F. Would it turn the highway into a skating rink? :)

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[reverseengineer]

Indeed, and it should also be noted that fuel cells from electrolysed water would really be introducing far less "new" water into the environment than conventionally burned fossil fuels. The products of complete combustion of a hydrocarbon are carbon dioxide and water vapor. Not only does the combustion of fossil fuels release carbon into the atmosphere that had been sequestered for millions of years, but it also leads to the reintroduction of hydrogen as well. It's not a very serious effect- the earth is much better equipped to handle a bit more water than a bit more carbon dioxide- but it's worth pointing out that the production of water vapor is not a valid argument against hydrogen fuel cells.

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[Vellmont]

Ever heard of something called the Pacific Ocean? It's plum full of that substance we call water. I hear there's even more oceans than just the Pacific.

I really do hope you're joking. Any amount of water we can "create" (that wasn't water to begin with) would be completely insignificant to the amount of water we already redistribute throughout the environment by just being alive.

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[b-baggins]

Because we all know that when that C02 was not sequestered, but actually in the biosphere, the Earth was in climatic chaos. A barren, uninhabitable wasteland filled with jungles and dinosaurs.

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[La Gris]

Released water is very pure and makes an incredibly good solvant. This may be a problem.

Re:the downsides of Hydrogen fuel cells

[Anonymous Coward]

If our experience with fossil fuels has taught us anything, its that you can't expect to have a negligable impact on the environment when you're working with such huge numbers of excited molecules.

Just take a field trip to the nearest geyser (Yellowstone, Iceland, etc) for an idea of what a continuous output of steam can do to the local climate. Its nothing disasterous, but it can have an impact.

You might see a microclimate effect in urban environments, where hydrogen vehicle usage is likely to be concentrated to a large area. The humidity at ground level would be noticably different during the summer, and could compound the 'heat island' effect already present in the city. You'd get the same effect out in the 'burbs, only to a lesser extent.

But I digress... I'll leave the complete meterological aspects of this to more informed individuals.

Finally!

[PIPBoy3000]

Some place I can play my air guitar without feeling silly.

Re:Finally!

[sk8dork]

playing air guitar in a vehicle that looks like that...no, you wont look silly at all... in all seriousness, with some different exterior design, this will surely take off

Re:Finally!

[Anonymous Coward]

with some different exterior design, this will surely take off

You mean wings, right?

chooo chooo

[Anonymous Coward]

chug a lug a chug a lug...

Steam Powered?

[freelance cynic]

Will the engine refuse to start if it can't connect to the internet?

Re:Steam Powered?

[eseiat]

HA! Perhaps they will be able to terminate any car that is broken in to and de-activate the car's ignition key.

Re:Steam Powered?

[b0s0z0ku]

HA! Perhaps they will be able to terminate any car that is broken in to and de-activate the car's ignition key.

GM's OnStar can already track your car, shut it down remotely ("in case of theft"), and lock/unlock it remotely.

-b.

Operation

[pete-classic]

Does the manual will indicate which lever is the velocitator and which the deceleratrix?

-Peter

Re:Operation

[delcielo]

The velocitator is the one marked:

"I think I can.. I think I can.."

Cool...

[b374]

... steam whistles on every road!

what is next?

[whitelabrat]

This would compliment my telegraph powered internet connection and my horse drawn dishwasher. Heh.

Stanley Steamer

[hey!]

My father-in-law actually remembers some people who had Stanleys from back in the 30s. I imagine that they were the same kind of people I remember from my youth who kept their 2-stroke Saabs on the road: engineering afficiandos.

According to pops, the Stanley was a terrific car in most respects, and fast as all get-out, but it had one fatal flaw. You had to heat the boiler up for a long time before you could get going. No running out the convenience store for a gallon of milk in that car.

Re:Stanley Steamer

[gwn]

I remember one late spring in the 70's, sitting in the back seat cruising down the highway and passing a convoy of steamers. Later they caught up with us at a fuel stop and we had a good look. The driver of one steamer replied to a speed question along these lines "she can go really fast, but we drive at a reasonable speed because of the bugs...". Several of the cars, all open, had dinky windshields and the black flies and mosquitoes must have hurt. They were certainly beautiful works of engineering and style, much nicer than the Ford we were in.

Re:Stanley Steamer

[b0s0z0ku]

According to pops, the Stanley was a terrific car in most respects, and fast as all get-out, but it had one fatal flaw. You had to heat the boiler up for a long time before you could get going. No running out the convenience store for a gallon of milk in that car.
This shouldn't be a problem with a steam car that uses a flash boiler which boils a small amount of water at a time rather than trying to bring its entire water supply to a boil at once. The real problem with commercially viable steam cars might be their water supplies freezing in cold weather. Then again, mixing in some type of antifreeze might solve that problem. Either that, or only using a small amount of water, held in an insulated tank.

-b.

Re:Stanley Steamer

[UrgleHoth]

I heard the same things about the Stanleys Steamers from my grandfather. Looks like what was old is new again.

Re:Stanley Steamer

[Cecil]

No running out the convenience store for a gallon of milk in that car.

Sounds like that'd probably be a good thing in the long run.

Re:Stanley Steamer

[iminplaya]

You had to heat the boiler up for a long time before you could get going.

Kinda like waiting for my computer to boot up. I'm sure nobody's going to use these as a getaway car. It would give new urgency to "keep the motor running".

Re:Stanley Steamer

[garysears]

Hmm. Stanley Steamers. Boilers wound with piano wire to eliminate burst boilers killing people when the regulators failed.

either the answer of a flash boiler or a pre-heater would probably suffice. If you ran out of water on the interstate, you wouldn't destroy your engine, just quietly coast to the edge of the road amidst profuse profanity aimed at whosever job it was to fill the resevoir before the trip....

Check out a steam plowing show sometime...two giant traction engines at either side of a field THROWING a plow across the field with the aid of woven steel hawsers. Kind of like air hockey with a half-ton puck. Awesome.

Re:Stanley Steamer

[westlake]

Stanley Motor Carriage offers a good look at a restored Stanley, plus scans of original technical manuals, promotional brochures, etc.

The Stanley twins were stubborn, high-handed, New Englanders who built for a very select market.
But Ford and GM were free to invest millions in R&D and by 1914 the Stanleys had fallen hopelessly behind. Until 1914, Stanleys were built without condensers, meaning you had to worry about running out of both fuel and water every time you drove out into the country.

Re:Stanley Steamer

[MasterRa]

I was never sure if this was correct info, and maybe i should look it up.. but i have read in a history book (in highschool) that the Stanley Steamer (at least one model) was steared with a stick, had no windsheild, woden wheels, and a top speed of over 200 miles per hour. I remember some good laughs at the thought of somebody riding in one of those..

Re:Stanley Steamer

[pipingguy]

I provided free webspace and web "design" to a bunch of students that were rebuilding one. Haven't heard from them in over a year and a half, so I don't know whatever became of the project. It might be worth a look for Steamer enthusiasts though.

http://stanleysteamer.pipingdesign.com/

This car runs on gas

[stratjakt]

So it's not any more eco-friendly than anything else that runs on gas. The article is full of a bunch of speculation about hydrogen or hithane or whatever, but it's the type of "in the future...." bullshit /. posts every day.

To further burst your steam-turbine bubbles, quoth the TFA:

"But the problem of turbines is that to be efficient, they have to run at a predetermined speed.

"The very nature of road cars is that their speed changes all the time, so this design would be no good for road vehicles."

They just built a fast car to break a record. This wont wind up in your garage.

Re:This car runs on gas

[Hognoxious]

But the problem of turbines is that to be efficient, they have to run at a predetermined speed. The very nature of road cars is that their speed changes all the time, so this design would be no good for road vehicles.

Some cars have a thingummyjig that allows you to change[1] the ratio between the engine speed and the roadwheel speed thus allowing the engine to be run at optimum revolutions. I forget the name of it.

[1] One day some clever chap might invent one that does it by itself, automatically even, thus leaving one hand free for other tasks such as eating.

Re:This car runs on gas

[wwest4]

> "The very nature of road cars is that their speed changes all the time, so this > design would be no good for road vehicles."

TF author is retarded, then. ICEs have the same problem. It's solved with a little doohickey called a transmission (as has already been hinted at... just thought I'd make it crystal clear).

Don't believe everything you read ;)

Re:This car runs on gas

[stratjakt]

ICEs still vary from 0-3000 rpm, while turbines are only efficient at one predetermined RPM.

So you'd need one hell of a transmission with like 100 different gear settings to get you a range of speeds from, say, 0 to 100. Transmissions in ICE cars only have 5 or 6.

God have mercy on you if it's manual transmission, though I'm sure you'd develop herculean calf muscles on your left leg from working the clutch.

Re:This car runs on gas

[wwest4]

> So you'd need one hell of a transmission with like 100 different gear
> settings to get you a range of speeds from, say, 0 to 100. Transmissions
> in ICE cars only have 5 or 6.

Not all cars. CVT == continuously variable transmission... already in today's production cars... Honda's Civic HX, and their hybrid too.

Re:This car runs on gas

[iminplaya]

This wont wind up in your garage.

Well, if it's made by Ford, that's the only place it will end up.

Re:This car runs on gas

[Duhavid]

To the sibling posts, your parent has a point, a turbine is more sensitive to the speed at which it runs, which is why a turbine is a poor choice to directly replace an ICE.

But... If you use the turbine at a constant speed to drive an electrical generator, then you can have the efficiency and the usablity, provided the electrical stuff doesnt weigh too much or is too inefficient. With hybrids on the road, I would have to think those issues are not big ones.

Re:This car runs on gas

[Anonymous Coward]

If you do away with the transmission entirely, and use the turbine to power four engines, one in each wheel (ie, the wheel itself is the electric engine), you save far more weight than you would ever use in extra battery and electrical weight.

Plus, jet turbines can burn any fuel you could want to use - gasoline, diesel, kerosene, alcohol. Very handy and useful if you eventually want to move to cheaper and/or more eco friendly fuels.

Re:This car runs on gas

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to burst your anti-steam bubble but the Australian inventor Ted Pritchard retrofitted a normal car in the early 1970's with his own steam engine that fitted into where a normal engine used to go.

It was virtually silent and was very fast. You can check out the pictures and the technical side of things at www.pritchardpower.com/

He has recently been developing a new version of the engine.

Regards,

Jon Dee
www.planetark.com

Re:This car runs on gas

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, it was invented by Van Doornen, the founder of DAF, a Dutch car brand. Back then, the CVT was not good enough to handle high amounts of power. Nowadays there are CVT's which can handle 400hp. The CVT is a briliant invention.

internal/external combo?

[SoupGuru]

I know very little about engines beyond some basic theory... but it seems to me that you need to burn fuel to drive pistons in an internal combustion engine and you need heat for steam turbines - would there be any practical way to combine the two?

Re:internal/external combo?

[Junior J. Junior III]

If it was worthwhile it would have been implemented. You *can* boil off your coolant and run a turbine with that, I suppose, but the added weight and complexity probably would not be worthwhile. The steam engine only works when the water has been heated up to boiling, which is pretty slow for a significant amount of water. As well, boiling off engine coolant may mean that you run a greater risk of having inadequate cooling, meaning your pistons will be apt to seize.

Re:internal/external combo?

[b0s0z0ku]

but it seems to me that you need to burn fuel to drive pistons in an internal combustion engine and you need heat for steam turbines - would there be any practical way to combine the two?
One way is to use the hot exhaust gasses to drive a gas turbine. Use the compressor of the gas turbine to pump more air into the engine's intake. It's called turbocharging and it's done frequently.

Another way is to couple the turbine to the engine's output shaft and use the turbine to generate more power directly. I believe this is called a turbo-compound engine - such engines were used in the last generation of large piston-powered aircraft (B-29 and B-36 bombers, Douglas DC-6 and DC-7, etc)

-b.

Re:internal/external combo?

[LurkerXXX]

Could they combine the two? Sure. And you could add on a peltier device to also take away that heat.

Why isn't it practical? You have to add a lot of weight for each different component. Plus there are now lots more parts to potentially break. That last bit is the part that is soon going to bit the new hybrid car owners in the ass. The stats are just now starting to roll in about how much less reliable hybrids are...

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2004-07-25-hyb rid_x.htm

They have all the same parts of a regular gasoline car. Plus they have all the electric motors and gear for braking-energy-recovery, etc. It should be no shock to anyone that they are going to have more broken parts than a regular car.

Re:internal/external combo?

[bojanb]

In theory, it can be done. That's how combined-cycle gas turbine power plants work. Gas is burned in a gas turbine (essentially a jet engine), and the exhaust heat is used to boil water for a classic steam turbine. Both turbines generate electricity leading to a higher efficiency.

In practice, probably would be too heavy/complicated to be worthwile in a car. Now, thermoelectric generators that recuperate car exhaust heat converting it to electricity, that is cool!

Re:internal/external combo?

[Anonymous Coward]

4 words
two stroke diesel turbo

Re:internal/external combo?

[Duhavid]

The boiling off would still be a closed cycle system. Marine steam plants have been doing this for more than a hundred years now. The size differences may introduce some issues... And I dont know that that would be effiecient. There would be added weight and complexity as you note.

Goofy Looking? No way!

[SpaFF]

The car is kind of goofy looking...

Whatever man, I think it looks awesome. Fark hit the nail right on the head when they described it as the batmobile in their headline.

Alternative power

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, check out this wood powered Yugo. It gets 145km per 35kg of wood.
English text not available. :(

Nothing new but....

[MajorDick]

Steam and Electric are obviously nothing new, the first Car to break 100 mph was I belive electric.

Steam , like electric has several DISADVANTAGES as well, The was a time, when steam engines didnt reclain their steam that steam polution caused great enviromental issues with their condensate.

In addition high pressuer steam is DANGEROUS, and any vehicle designed would need to take that into account, think of the danger to the occupants of a vehicle whose boiler explodes.

For a take on this take a Hot Water heater, it is actually (gas or electric) the MOST Dangerous item in you hous a blocked T&P (Temperature and Pressure relief valve) with a tank in ovverun condition can catapult a Hot water tank through a 3 story house to a height of 100 ft, yup thats right, just like those little red plastic water rockets you had as a kid.

I was a union plumber and pipefitter, my specialty was in steam, I can tell you while the average goober might see great potential they seldom see the very real dangers of steam, steam to most seem innocent enough, just look at some of the deaths associate with steam engines recently, This even happened about 10 miles from my home an hourt after I left. Here and Here , and the fellow who owned and operated this was FAMILIAR with these risks, from burns to boiler failures, its not something to screw with unless you know what youre doing, and even then it will leave you suspicious

Re:Nothing new but....

[calidoscope]

Low water over the crown sheet will do it every time - epitaph for many locomotive firemen. IIRC, Strasbourg RR had an accident a few years ago just from that cause - contributing factor was problems with the sight gauge.

It was common back in days of steam to see major parts of the locomotive a quarter-mile away from the site of the explosion.

OTOH, most modern steam cars have been using flash boilers with a much smaller water inventory than the old style firetube boilers. Properly designed, a failure in a tube will result in venting of steam through the exhaust. As you mentioned, the plumbing outside the boiler has to be treated with care.

As for high pressures in the hands of goobers - centerfire rifles typically generate 60,000 PSI peak pressure.

Re:Nothing new but....

[Anonymous Coward]

How would a boiler in a steam-powered vehicle exploding differ from a gas tank in a gas-powered vechicle exploding?

Re:Nothing new but....

[MajorDick]

Significantly , hydraulic pressure for one. Fuel dosnet burn unless exposed to air, fuel fire are usually just that, although gasoline does have a habbit of exploding, only the gas vapor that is mixed with air will, the rest does what ? burns...

Also a Gas Tank isnt that tough and it will rupture easily, that actually a good thin if a spark inside it ignites it readily blows apart and burns, OTOH a couple of hundred psi and trapped then released at once in a thick vessel causes one heck of a dangerous explosion.

Re:Nothing new but....

[temojen]

For a take on this take a Hot Water heater, it is actually (gas or electric) the MOST Dangerous item in you hous a blocked T&P (Temperature and Pressure relief valve) with a tank in ovverun condition can catapult a Hot water tank through a 3 story house to a height of 100 ft, yup thats right, just like those little red plastic water rockets you had as a kid.

I'm not sure if the hot water heaters where you worked are the same as the ones here, but this scenario is very doubtful here, for several reasons. Our residential hot water heaters are not designed to hold any more pressure than the pipe pressure. They are thermostatically controlled to stay at about 86C, which is too cool for steam to form. They have no valves between the intake and the outlet, but they do have a pressure relief valve on the overflow.

So for a residential waterheater to "catapult a Hot water tank through a 3 story house to a height of 100 ft" you'd need several unlikely events to happen simultaneously:

1. Jammed Thermostat
2. Blocked (water tight!) inlet pipe
3. Jammed overflow valve
4. Unusually strong drain valve
5. Unusually strong household pipes (PVC is not designed for pressurized steam)
6. Unusually strong water tank, so it doesn't rupture prematurely

A much more likely scenario is for the water tank to leak, causing a short circuit which will either trip the breaker or start a fire.

Non-ancient residential hot water heaters are nothing like the boilers of the early 1900's.

Much more likely domestic disasters are a fire from an electric malfunction or gas leak, or carbon-monoxide poisoning from a gas appliance.

Re:Nothing new but....

[Jester99]

Maybe it's a freak accident, but it certainly seems to happen

Re:Nothing new but....

[StormyMonday]

OK, so rusty 150 year old steam farm tractors are dangerous. How does this apply to anything remotely modern? With the car in the source article, I got the impression that it didn't even have a boiler -- it was more of a combined steam/gas turbine.

My understanding is that modern steam engines have a relatively tiny amount of water -- in case of an explosion (which I've never heard of happening) the steam simply wouldn't be a problem, and the fragments could be contained by a Kevlar shroud. Main problem is the same as an internal combustion engine -- the fuel.

BTW, do you have a reference for a water heater taking off like a water rocket? (I'm having this argument^Wdiscussion with the friendly neighborhood plumber).

BTW, I thought plumbers and steamfitters were different unions that didn't like each other very much?

Re:Nothing new but....

[MajorDick]

Well, when I was an apprentice in the Union , Some 14 years back, there was a great film of it we all watched

Ive seen boilers blow inder the same conditons a blocked or plugged T&P, no expansion tank and BOOM, off the go, in the case of a HWT , the bottoms are the first to weaken due to corrosive sediments, hence the bottoms will blow out sending it upward like a friggin rocke (In the films, they plugged the T&P and fixed the thermostat so it would do exactly this), if he dosent agree, maybe he ought to find a new profession, as it was usually after following those fellows I would see a T&P blocked with a plug, or no spray pipe attached.

Not here in Akron , Local 219 is BOTH , thank you very much..... The nice thing is I can go anywhere on either card if I want :)

Re:Nothing new but....

[MajorDick]

I suggest you look at the link the other fellow posted about this exact smae thing happeneing

What you didnt take into account is something VERY Important, HWT Usually leak at the bottom , why ? because of the caustic buildup of minerals, sulfur, calcium , etc, that weakens the BOTTOM of the tank, in an overrun situation there can easily be a buildup of pressure that exceeds the flow of both the T&P and the Drain Valve (Even plastic will hold up to around 500-100 PSI (even thought typically rated at 250) Brass, hell Ive seen 1000 psi several times, (makes you want to duck just being near it but it happens) and yes I am talking about the household 3/4 or 1 inch variety.

"A much more likely scenario is for the water tank to leak, causing a short circuit which will either trip the breaker or start a fire" They are common as well (in the sense of HWT failures, Adding all these items together make a HWT, THE SINGLE MOST DANGEROUS Item in a house, HWT Are typically drafted and not power vented, (some newere ones are) But also take into account the age of the average HWT is 20 years old, thats alot of weak bottoms and frozen t&p valves. I never said it was common, I said it happens, it was meant to be a simple illustration of exactly the amount of force that can be unleased by steam , STEAM the thing everyone thinks is so Quaint and Harmless...my ass....

Re:Nothing new but....

[pipingguy]

Significantly , hydraulic pressure for one.

Hydrostatic testing of equipment can cause bad things to happen:

http://www.pipingdesign.com/pressure_testing_safet y.pdf

CodeWanker?

[Viol8]

Now theres a name just begging for some tasteless puns.

Steam is not a source of energy

[frovingslosh]

OK, I've RTFA. Hype! The bottom line is that steam is not a source of energy. Something has got to make that steam. And that gets us right back to the problem of supplying the energy in a form that burns clean and is clean to produce in the first place (Hydrogen for hydrogen based cars, by the way, burns clean, but is made from natural gas in a very polluting and wasteful process; overall a "clean burning" hydrogen car is a much more wasteful car and a source of more total polution tyhan one that would just use natural gas directly. Of course, if we were to produce hydrogen cleanly that would change, but there seems to be no move to do so.)

Re:Steam is not a source of energy

[noidentity]

OK, I've RTFA. Hype! The bottom line is that steam is not a source of energy. Something has got to make that steam. And that gets us right back to the problem of supplying the energy in a form that burns clean and is clean to produce in the first place [...]

It's as much a steam-powered car as current "hybrid" cars are electric "powered" (hint: they aren't hybrid, any more than my computer is magnetic powered due to having a transformer between it and the wall socket).

Does this mean....

[amemily]

...we'll be seeing this all over the roads?

boiler explosion

Uhm, hello........

[pair-a-noyd]

Anyone remember Stirling powered cars?
They've been around for years, the Air Force used them, the USPS used them, etc...
Not to mention, the Stanley Steamer....

Nothing new to see here, move along...

Re:Uhm, hello........

[iminplaya]

If I remember right, If you want the quick response an internal combustion engine provides, you will lose a lot of the efficiency inherent with the Stirling. The same may apply to steam, unless you keep the boiler really hot. I would still prefer steam or Stirling due to the wide varieties of fuels you could use to power them. These types of engines would be ideal in a hybrid. They can run under a near constant load, with the battery supplying the burst power needed for a quick start. There's lots "new" here as far as applications go.

Re:Uhm, hello........

[uisqebaugh]

Yes, I do remember them. As a matter of fact, I experiment with Stirling engines.

Not only are Stirling engines efficient, but they were invented by the Reverend Stirling as an alternative to the dangers inherent in the biolers of steam engines.

Historically, they also have been known as hot air engines.

Well

[GasKewled]

If we could make one run off flies, that would be something

Re:Well

[vurg]

In Korea, only I, for one, welcome our fly-fueled beowulf cluster are belong to Natalie Portman.

mmmmmmm steam..

[the_mpls_guy]

I dont understand why steam has such an archaic stigma attached to it...
Diesel dates to the late 1800's and Electric powered cars date back further than that. Steam power was not developed with the view toward automobile production as much as other technologies.

Stanley Steamer broke the standing land speed record in 1906 with a steam powered car..

If we can get the same or more power out of a steam powered car, with better gas mileage.. then i'm up for it. Even if it is "old" technology.
(I'll even wear my bowler hat to the box social)

Cheera

Re:mmmmmmm steam..

[bluGill]

Its about danger. Back in the last 1800s boilers exploded all the time. Every state with an industry at all could count on a few deaths from boiler explosions every year. Many were innocents who didn't even know there was a boiler operating in some other shop on the same block! (A big explosion could easily level a city block, though most weren't quite that bad).

Steam needs to be treated with care. Actually and gas under pressure needs to be treated with care, steam is worse because it is also hot, which adds a second set of problems.

Where's the spider?

[AtariAmarok]

Now that we've reached this milestone, how long before we have high-speed giant robot steam spiders? We've had the slow ones since the days of the Wild Wild West.

Re:Where's the spider?

[the_mpls_guy]

i'm sure the Transportation department would have a field day with this one.. Imagine all the safty features that they would want. i'm sure the flame shooting cannons would have to go.

Re:Where's the spider?

[geekoid]

They'll get my flame shooting cannons when they send a secret agent to pry it out of my cold dead hands

CodeWanker

[Anonymous Coward]

CodeWanker is an ultra-right wing, red-state MORON. Look at his posting history.

The fact that a shameless pro-Bush Nazi like CodeWanker can submit a story to slashdot is a fucking disgrace.

Re:CodeWanker

[CodeWanker]

Awww... Snuggle Bear! Sounds like somebody needs a group hug!

Re:CodeWanker

[Bill Walker]

I would say it's a very good thing that Slashdot's editors do not consider a submitter's politics when considering an article about steam engines.

External combustion engines

[AtariAmarok]

"Internal combustion engines are a century old too"

We did experiment some with external combustion vehicles about 30 years ago.

Re:External combustion engines

[Archangel Michael]

I don't think this was meant to be INTERESTING, but rather FUNNY.

Tho?

[Anonymous Coward]

A new low. That's not even trying tortia-boy.

How short sighted

[2nd Post!]

Imagine everything good about your diesel cars.

Then make them hybrid!

If a Hybrid gas electric can make 40% better mileage then the same technologies on a 50MPG diesel should push it into the 70MPG range easy.

Diesel is great and I would love to see Diesel hybrids. Even better would be diesel-steam-eletric hybrids!

Diesel as a compact, efficient, renewable energy source.
Steam turbine as the efficient electric generator.
Electric as the efficient drivetrain and braking system.

Re:How short sighted

[UCFFool]

There already is a car that pushes 60-70MPG... and it's been out and unchanged for 5 years. The Honda Insight. After 3 years, Toyota revised the Prius Synergy Drive and gained a 20% (rough) imrpovement in gas mileage...

The problem with Diesel is simply US Diesel is much lower grade that European, and once that infrastructure is cleaned up, current Diesel designs greatly improve the ECO aspects of Diesel, and thus a Diesel/Electric Hybrid could indeed be fantastic. Unfortunately, that would take a lifetime stateside, but can happen now in Europe.

Re:How short sighted

[2nd Post!]

If you made the Insight a diesel vehicle then you'd immediately get two benefits:

30% higher energy density, or an additional 30% boost in mileage (so 80mpg!)
Diesel is renewable

Diesel Hybrid

[EXrider]

VW is supposed to do this:

http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/news,view.spy? artid=30458&pg=1

Looks Like...

[Deinhard]

...the Porsche cars that came with my ca. 1975 slot car set.

Re:FP

[Anonymous Coward]

Make Love, Not First Posts!

It gives a new meaning...

[mealtime_warrior]

...to vapor-ware!

Re:What is this?? Anyone understand any of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because like all warez pirates slashdot editors want to keep a fresh list of open proxies.

Diesels are loud and smelly

[wheelbarrow]

I don't like diesels for simple reasons. It's not because of some sort of unfair stigma. Diesel cars and trucks are louder than gasoline cars and trucks. The exhaust from diesels is visible and it smells bad. I'll take a quiet car that at least pollutes with an oderless and colorless gas.

Re:Diesels are loud and smelly

[OhPlz]

The loudness is no more. I own a fullsize pickup with one of the last "loud" engines, sounds exactly like a UPS truck.

This type of engine has been replaced with an engine that delivers the fuel at much higher pressures which somehow reduces that rattle. I'm not much of an engine person so I may be stating that a bit wrong. To me, the newer diesels in fullsize pickups sound exactly like their gas powered equivalents.

As for stinky, I have no idea. The stench from my truck has destroyed my sense of smell.

Visible exhaust? Not a good a thing to compare. Diesels should only emit visible exhaust when they're under very heavy load, a load which the equivalent gas engine would be unlikely to handle.

An advantage that comes to mind besides mileage and torque, diesel isn't as flammable as gas. Theoretically you can toss a lit match into a tank full of diesel and not meet your maker.

Re:Diesels are loud and smelly

[Doctor Memory]

Theoretically you can toss a lit match into a tank full of diesel and not meet your maker.

Actually, you can do this with gas, too -- in fact, one of the race shops I use routinely fills the gas tanks on cars if they're going to do any welding on them. A full tank has less oxygen to fuel any burning, so even if a spark were to get in, you'd get a minor burp before all the available oxygen was exhausted and the fire went out. Just make sure the gas cap is on...

Re:Diesels are loud and smelly

[Firethorn]

But if you have an open pail of gasoline and you chuck a match towards it you're likely to ignite the gasoline vapors around it. You don't have this problem with diesel.

Note: Don't try this trick with a flare, it burns hotter.

Re:Diesels are loud and smelly

[mink]

The flipside of this is take a normal burnable object, soak it in diesel, it burns much more happily and is harder to put out.

pleae Mod Parent Up.

[CodeWanker]

That was funny.

World's first 200MPH car...

[coats]

For what it's worth, the first automobile to exceed 200 MPH was a Stanley Steamer, outfitted with an aerodynamic body (IIRC, the year was 1919, the location Daytona Beach).

Unfortunately, they didn't understand aerodynamics as well then as we do now, and on the next run the car hit a bump and became the first automobile to fly more than 500 feet -- totalling the car and killing the driver.

I'm holding out...

[vdthemyk]

Keeping my eye out for a car powered by dilithium crystals... On a serious side, I personally could care less how my car is powered. I would like it to be the most efficent use of the energy put in, but if that energy is provided by steam or by carbon based fuels, then so be it. If someone can provide a machine that pumps out close to the amount of energy as is put in to it, then great. If that is the most efficent way of getting the work done, lets do it that way. Just my 2 cents.

Hello, steam POWERED, steam is NOT a fuel.

[GuyFawkes]

Steam is just an energy transport mechanism, like roller chain, belt drives, gears, hydraulics or electricity.

Can we make whiskey while we drive?

[Blimey85]

What if instead of water we put in our ingredients for whiskey and use the car as a still? Maybe have a closed system that you get paid for that you can swap at gas stations... so you pull in to fuel up and you swap tanks... you give them your tank of whiskey and an empty ingredients tank. They give you an empty whiskey tank and a full ingredients tank.

Then you run a hose from the whiskey tank to the drivers area... and you run a hose from you windshield wiper... hook both of those into a t connector... then fill the windshield wiper resevoir with oj... and you've got instant screwdrivers while you drive!

Re:Can we make whiskey while we drive?

[bje2]

i only see one problem with your plan...

a screwdriver has vodka, not whiskey...everything else sounds great though...

Re:Can we make whiskey while we drive?

[Blimey85]

Damn... I knew it sounded too good to be true. And I can't believe I made such a stupid mistake... I think it's time I went back to bed and finally caught up on my lost sleep.

Remember the BatMobile?

[crovira]

And the turbine powered race cars that were the bane of Nascar in the seventies?

That showed that you could build a FAST car that basically ran on anything.

Nothing new here.

Been done already...

[Anonymous Coward]

...you burn the fuel to create steam, then (get ready for this) use the steam to move pistons.

Legacy technology, as in a couple of centuries ago.

Pure B.S.

[Anonymous Coward]

"The[re] was a time, when steam engines didnt reclain their steam that steam polution caused great enviromental issues with their condensate."

Yah, the condensate was that killer, dihydrogen monoxide (water). Real eco-unfriendly stuff, huh?

Re:Pure B.S.

[MajorDick]

Uhhh, you have no idea what you are talking about then, the amount of ice that was a result of that steam in winter months in urban areas, London, etc, was a serious hazard.

Think of living in a steam bath, summer too, the water vapor created its own thermal blanket layer, and in some areas was responsible for a reduction in wildlife (See moths and other insect), uhhhh its called thermal polution and YES its a problem zippy.

The steam pollution also acts as a medium for bacterial and fungal propgation.

Are you REALLY That shor sighted that you dont see that ? Or are you so short sighted as to ignore past events ?

Well,

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd rather drive that than a Toyota Prius.

Do the Math...

[Anonymous Coward]

30% less emissions, half the efficiency.

Ever read about the good old days of good, clean, horse power? On big work projects, half of the horses were hauling water and food for the other half. Not to mention the tons of emissions - horse urine, road apples, and Al Gore's greenhouse gasses.

thermodynamics 101

[max born]

Although steam engines still need to burn hydrocarbon-based fuels like petrol and diesel, which in turn release carbon dioxide, external combustion engines can control the release and the production of CO2 more efficiently.

How so? Isn't the amount of CO2 proportional the amount of fuel you burn, no matter how you burn it?

Better to transfer the heat directly to the axles, the extra step of the steam turbine wastes enegry due to friction, not to mention the added weight of the extra crap you have to carry. This is not efficient.

Re:thermodynamics 101

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not efficient, but a steam powered car could presumably use non-fossil fuels, making it ecologically friendly. This is true for Diesel engines too.

You will still have CO2 emissions, but the point is that you wouldn't be using fossil fuels. The reason this is important, is because the recycle rate of plants absorbing CO2, dying, turning into fuel, and re-releasing that CO2 is much faster than the thousands and millions of years it takes to create fossil fuels.

I'm not really good at explaining the concept, but basically the CO2 released is the same CO2 that was absorbed by plants in the first place, so you have a ballanced input/output. With fossil fuels, you'd be releasing CO2 that was absorbed several million years ago.

In that sense, I believe gasoline engines are the ONLY truly ecologically nasty engines. (Which is debatable, since alcohol can and is being used.) Diesel can use plant based oils (bio-diesel) and so on. As a matter of fact, Prof. Rudolf Diesel had never intended to use fossil fuels in his engine design. (Look it up.)

Personally speaking, diversity is really the key. Right now the majority of engines run on gasoline. Not a very nice fuel. Bio-diesel is nice, but it still has emissions, and that is the problem in urban areas. (High concentration of emssions.) This would probably be the same problem for modern steam engines. Electric cars would probably be better for inner city use, while bio-diesel and steam engines may be fine for other less populated areas. It also makes sense that farmers would be able to make their own fuel!

If even that.

[AtariAmarok]

If even that. I expected to be modded "flamebait", just as I was in real life whenever I drove my '78 Pinto Wagon.

A little disappointed

[jjwahl]

I fully expected the site to be slashdotted and looked forward to reading (and posting) witty comments about the underpowered web server being run by steam ...

Curses to you, BBC news. Curses to you.

You win

[Anonymous Coward]

You win.

I was only saying that water is inherently non-polluting (meaning: non-toxic).

By the way, can you supply a reference to a specific area that was affected by humidity from steam?

Fascinating, honestly.

Bennet

[PoopJuggler]

Let off some steam!

Diesel is still better for the environment.

[Shivetya]

First it takes less energy and material to produce a gallon of diesel. I belive the cost to make gasoline is 55 gallons of diesel.

Second the restrictions in the US are mostly because of California. The idea of what is pollution in California is nearly the opposite of what is considered in Europe. So Europe gets more diesels and there is much more money spent to make them efficient and clean.

There is more real air pollution in the NorthEast during winter months than in California regardless of time of year there. Why? More engines are running enriched mixtures to get up to operating temperatures.

Diesels do weigh more but only in the engine area. They make up for this "weight" issue by being more efficient in fuel usuage.

So I have to ask, why not diesel? It really is a magnitude cheaper to produce, the cars perform better as for mileage, and the engines are built strong enough to survive many more miles than any gasoline engine.

Also a nice side effect is that they DO NOT EXPLODE.

The Prius will never return on its investment cost to regular drivers. The surcharge for the tricks needed to make a gasoline engine viable versus diesel are too high still. Better yet, a diesel electric combo would be more efficient.

Re:Diesel is still better for the environment.

[theguyfromsaturn]

Still the best cars for the environment are those they used in the Flintstones. Put a gallon of gasoline in those, and it'll stay there forever if it's in a well sealed jar :)

That plus the weight in stone you have to personally carry around will ensure that you will not abuse this mode of transportation, thus reduding the global energy comsumption (in the form of food) attributed to transportation. All in all, the perfect environmental solution.

huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to be directing sarcasm toward your post's parent but your point has eluded me. Could you please explain what you meant?

Why LPG? Try new coal!

[Anti-Christ (P.S.)]

Having examined the specs on this new vehicle, an obvious question occurs to me:
Could the steam car work with new coal technologies?

I believe they could. Coal is still by far the cheapest and most plentiful fossil fuel. Thirty years of mostly mediocre research has yielded a few new concepts for clean, effective combustion of coal; application of these technologies to unanticipated fields (e.g. steam-powered external combustion automobiles, home heating, kilns and crucibles, etc.) would shift the economics of developing these technologies.

Currently, advanced coal technologies are mostly in development as an alternative to costly regulations on the construction and expansion of coal-burning power plants. By that measure, most of these technologies would be deemed to expensive. Measured as a power source to replace our internal combustion engines, coal external combustion could be to gasoline internal combustion what the latter was to the former a hundred years ago.

Just a thought.

Drat...

[dep01]

Heh, I was considering posting this story... *snaps fingers in disappointment*

Not an answer, but something else to think about..

[Gadgetfreak]

One of the byproducts of burning fossil fuels *is* water. Combining a hydrocarbon with oxygen creates H2O. When you see a car that's recently been started, the water vapor from combustion will condense on the cold exhaust pipe, and drip out the tail.
While I don't know what the environmental impact of fuel cell cars will be, consider that hydrocarbon vehicles (and all other things that burn fossil fuels) have been creating water all along. After the hundred years or so that we've been burning them, I've yet to see anything overflow.

Potty fuels

[DaChesserCat]

Unfortunately, that only works if you've been to Taco Bell in the last hour or two.

typical idiots

[pbjones]

the 100MPH barrier was first broken by a steam car. Why show early steam cars as 'clunkers' they were fast and powerfull, but not 'fashionable'

Small steam turbines are not easy

[panurge]

Apart from the fact that the article referenced seems to refer to a flash boiler - which is not novel - steam turbines have problems all their own. They do not scale downwards well. It's possible to build very big, efficient steam turbines - that is how nuclear power stations actually drive generators, after all - but the components are smaller than those of reciprocating engines. The result is that as turbines scale downwards, the problems of heat losses, leakage past seals, bearing sizes and reliable construction become more acute than they do with reciprocating engines. People constantly complain that the reciprocating IC engine is inherently a bad idea, but we use reciprocating locomotion rather than rotary and it works well for us. If mother Evolution likes it, who are we to argue?

I realise that people have to try to make these things work, but the problems shouldn't be underestimated. One major practical problem is that steam turbines require a supply of distilled water, and that even small amounts of leakage of steam cause replenishment headaches. (There are stories, with the old steam turbine ships, of ships running out of water because the steam leakage in the engine room prevented staff from entering it to fix problems with the still. )

I'm sure someone will suggest that a hydrogen fueled turbine could use its waste water, but that water will be contaminated and require treatment.

I believe myself that in the end we will have to rethink the whole concept of individual transport, because most of the alternative supplies of energy to oil, like nuclear or solar power, are best suited to electrical distribution system and these favor railways or monorails. Nuclear power also better suits marine transport than aircraft, because it is perfectly possible to design safe nuclear powered ships. All of these attempts to keep the motor car going may just ultimately be dead ends.

Why was this modded down?

[Duhavid]

I could understand not modding it up, but down?

Milage?

[riflemann]

So how many rods to the hogshead does this steam contraption do?

Gravity powered car

[Anonymous Coward]

I've invented a car that needs no fuel since it is always running downhill. I simply made the back wheels bigger than the front ones. Only problem is I can't figure out how to make it go in reverse...

For Gentlemen of Steam

[thephydes]

http://gsc_oz.tripod.com/gentlemenssteamingclub/in dex.html

shame it's but ugly

[Anonymous Coward]

i realy like the consept
but it looks like a combination of every ugly car made ever but more ugly.

you woundt get the biggest tree huging hipie to drive it even if you drew a rainbow on it

Wobblebug

[payndz]

Hooray! Time to throw some coal into my old Wobblebug and head out onto the open road, secure in the knowledge that I'm fashionable again!

propane

[deadweight]

Guess what? Diesel engines can and do run off of propane/methane too. They need just a little diesel mixed in as well. I have seen city buses with natural gas tanks on them for this reason.

Re:propane

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that propane/methane gas engines were modified GASOLINE engines, not diesel engines. Diesel engines can use bio-diesel (treated plant oils like grapeseed, olive, and hemp seed oils) while converted gasoline engines can use (m)ethanol, propane and methane. (Diesel engines don't need any conversions to use bio-diesel, unless you're considering straight vegetable oil, which is a bad idea.)

Taxi cabs in Japan use propane. But they're normal gasoline engines. Not sure what the propane (LPG) gas busses use for an engine in Japan...

Re:propane

[deadweight]

Gasoline engines can be converted to run 100% on propane, methane, hydrogen, and likely a few more gases. Propane is high-octane and low pollution, so it is a pretty good auto fuel. Diesel engines ALWAYS need some diesel to trigger the combustion event the normal way, but they can also use propane/methane for the bulk of their fuel. Many stationary diesel generators run this way. >>>> The Wärtsilä dual-fuel engines are unique because they have two different injection systems. A micro pilot injection system injects a very small amount of liquid fuel when the engine is operating in gas mode. The micro pilot system is of the common rail type, which allows for very small injection amounts. This makes it possible to meet very stringent emission regulations, which would be impossible if a normal injection system were used. A conventional injection system is used when the engine is run on liquid fuel such as heavy fuel oil or of course diesel oil if that is the fuel choice. Fuel flexibility and high efficiency are the main advantages of the dual-fuel technology. Two engine models are offered at the moment, the Wärtsilä 32DF and Wärtsilä 50DF. The latter has shown an efficiency of over 48%, which is probably a record at this time. Wärtsilä gas diesels were the first gas engines to be offered by the company. The first engines have now been in operation for almost 70,000 h. The concept was initially developed for the offshore market, where it has been successfully applied in a large number of floating production units. However, these engines have also been used in numerous power plants because of their fuel flexibility. In the gas diesel the gas is injected according to a diesel process at high pressure. A small amount of liquid fuel is pilot injected when the engine is operating in gas mode. A gas diesel can operate on gas with pilot injection and also on liquid fuels such as diesel oil, heavy fuel oil or even crude oil. In gas mode the gas diesel is more tolerant in terms of methane number than other gas engine concepts. Wärtsilä's gas-diesel engines are the Wärtsilä 32GD and Wärtsilä 46GD. >>>>>

Check out the IAV Ezee steam engine first

[MZdoctor]

As usual, the collective Slashdot memory is short. The German company IAV pushed the envelope of steam power for wheeled vehicles way beyond Bowshers design and published their results in 2001. Check it out at http://www.iavinc.com/alternativedrives.html

Some minor corrections.

[twitter]

OK, I've RTFA. Hype! ... the problem [is] supplying the energy in a form that burns clean and is clean to produce in the first place.

TFA redundantly refutes the idea that this is not an improvement over existing internal combustion:

External combustion engines - like steam ones - hold several advantages over internal ones. They have the potential to produce fewer harmful nitrogen oxides (NOx) than conventional cars which use internal combustion engines. Although steam engines still need to burn hydrocarbon-based fuels like petrol and diesel, which in turn release carbon dioxide, external combustion engines can control the release and the production of CO2 more efficiently.

The real problems with this vehicle are size and practicality. The link to the designer's site is informative and should be followed if you are interested in steam powered vehicles. The heat exchangers are each bigger than large internal combustion engines and the care requires two of them. Also, the system has no condenser so you have to fill up water as well as fuel. Most of us won't have to go 200 MPH, so the size consideration can be reduced, but that improvement will be offset for by the inclusion of a condenser. If we could linearly reduce the 2MW thermal (from which we might get 1,000 HP!) to a far more reasonable 100 HP model, we would get a steam engine 1/10th the size of this one. I imagine that material restraints will not allow this. A hybrid vehicle would be nice, but it would have to be huge with current steam technology. This effort goes a long way to show why steam is an abandoned locomotion technology and why it would be better to separate power generation from consumption.

Nuclear power plants and electric cars are a current, viable alternative to internal combustion. Nuclear, despite disastrous exclusive franchises and government regulation, is still the cheapest and cleanest electricity available. Recent improvements to batteries makes high performance electric cars possible. Self contained nuclear plants have been designed that could be distributed like gas stations and will put an end to both much regulatory monkey business, if we demand reasonable laws.

Re:Some minor corrections.

[frovingslosh]

Nuclear, despite disastrous exclusive franchises and government regulation, is still the cheapest and cleanest electricity available.

Nuclear is only cheap if you don't factor in the problem of disposing of the waste and the entire plant after it's rather limited life, and if you get the government to let you force the consumer to make the innitial investment in the plant but don't make them stock holders in return.

More minor corrections.

[twitter]

Nuclear is only cheap if you don't factor in the problem of disposing of the waste ...

Reprocessing is a little more expensive than the one shot fuel cycle being used, but it makes the fuel we have on hand essentially limitless. In any case, fuel disposal costs are most part of the cost of nuclear power and no one is hiding anything. The only hidden part of costs are those imposed by infinite research, such as goes on at Yucca mountian, and continuously changing requirements for storage of "waste".

...and the entire plant after it's rather limited life

Every plant has a decommission fund that you have paid for. Beware those who would spend it on anything else, especially those who pretend such funds do not exist and call for government programs like superfund. The problem there is that you will get to pay for it again and again.

The "waste" problem is not technical, it's political.

Very few folks really understand the Prius system

[MZdoctor]

The parent makes a few good points. However the design of the Prius powertrain is so unorthodox that almost everyone misses the really cunning part, which is that it actually has two transmissions working in parallel. The power from the IC engine (when it's running) is partitioned among them by a differential drive. One part goes to the infinitely variable electrical CVT (= generator + motor) and the other part goes straight to the wheels.The transmission ratio of this part is essentially that of top gear.

When cruising all the power is transmitted by the direct drive and none by the electric motor. That only provides the additional torque when more torque is required than top gear can provide, therefore the additional electrical losses are only incurred when you put your foot down.

The second point that is usually missed is the fact that the Prius sports an Atkinson cycle engine, which is more efficient at part load than the usual Otto cycle engine. The Atkinson cycle goes a long way towards making up the difference in efficiency between the Otto and the Diesel cycle at part load.

Did you miss the joke?

[eseiat]

Valve recently has been shutting down Steam accounts that are in violation of their policies, hence my extension of the parent's joke.

Holy hell I just had to slaughter the joke. Thanks.

Hmm Trains Diesel have been hybrid for a long time

[Anonymous Coward]

It all in the breaking. Trains that a Diesel get a lot more than 50+MPG. Reason regen breaking and electric motor to help with the move off. So the Diesel is not just used to get the train from a standing start Electic is use when ever speed is need to be lost or gained to reduce fuel use when able.

Most cars hybrids have the electic motor setup wrong ie Apply breaks Should be applying the electic genorator before brake pads. At high speed Break pads overheat and lose effect. Generators work better than break pads at high speeds due to not over heating in most cases yep it is hard to over heat a Generator. Note a Generator will not pull you to a complet stop so break pads or oil breaks are still required.

The Point Straigh line test Diesel engined vers Hybrid, Diesel wins. Place stop lights and sections of road requiring breaking the Hybrid sould win out right if it is setup right. Ie Most citys. Due to the breaks recharing the batterys and them the batterys being used to recover the lost speed. ie reducing fuel use.

Sulfer isn't added to diesel

[Firethorn]

Actually, no. The sulfur is naturally occuring. It's just that it costs money to remove it, and as the main usage of diesel is with large vehicles that can handle the sulfur, they don't want to spend the money to remove it.

And the lowering is occuring

The lubrication myth comes because the process that removes the sulfer also removes other compounds that do act as a lubricant. You just have to add something in to replace the natural lubricants.

Steam is alive and getting better

[FrankHaynes]

If you would like to see some images of the inside of a "classic" steam boiler, my group's web site documents our restoration of a steam locomotive.

Some that have not been given a home yet:
Side sheet and mud ring
Nicholson thermic siphons
Backsheet and crownsheet under repair

Since this is a restoration effort we are not at liberty to improve the design of the boiler or transmission system, but there is research being done on steam technology that is promising. Much of it is being done in India I understand. Just because Polar Express is in vogue right now and when we hear "steam" we think of quaint old steam trains, this is not your father's steam engine (in TFA).

Also, it is a fact that steam engines operate more efficiently at high altitudes than internal combustion engines, where that might be applicable. We should not be so quick to dismiss the possibilities.

I told them so...

[silas_pc]

I told those whippersnappers that the internal combustion engine was a bad idea...

Steam is great! Just don't get in over your HEAD!

[sncomputer]

The early stanly's were pretty fast but not so areodynamic and racers have been known to loose their head!

Recycling and The Beer Store

[IncohereD]

ith an approximate 94% recycling rate, the lead-acid battery industry is just about as good as it gets.

Further, the cycle of lead from smelter -> battery manufacturer -> consumer -> old battery to smelter is as tight a closed loop as you'll find (short of a cow in a pasture).

Ahh, The Beer Store.

98% recovery rate of _all_ packaging. All by offering a mere 10 cents per bottle.

And yet every few years some Conservative will spout off about privatising the damn thing. Despite truly ridiculous selection, rural community reach, and said environmental success.