Slashdot Mirror


New X-Prize for Fuel Efficient Cars Announced

miowpurr writes "A new X-Prize for ultra fuel efficient cars has been announced. The winning car must 'carry four or more passengers and have climate control, an audio system and 10 cubic feet of cargo space. They also must have four or more wheels, hit 60 miles per hour in less than 12 seconds and have a minimum top speed of 100 miles per hour and a range of 200 miles. Those that qualify will race their vehicles in cross-country races in 2009 and 2010 that will combine speed, distance, urban driving and overall performance.'"

10 of 371 comments (clear)

  1. Car Must Be 100 MPG+ by Zabu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not mentioned in the summary.

    --
    It's all good.
    1. Re:Car Must Be 100 MPG+ by Tyndmyr · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also not mentioned...10Mil prize. Not bad at all, though I suspect that if a car that efficient could be designed for that price, it probably already would exist. Also, the prize is split between "mainstream" and "alternative" cars. The above restriction was for the mainstream category, which I imagine will be acheived later.

      --
      Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
  2. MPG? by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Informative

    carry four or more passengers and have climate control, an audio system and 10 cubic feet of cargo space. They also must have four or more wheels, hit 60 miles per hour in less than 12 seconds and have a minimum top speed of 100 miles per hour and a range of 200 miles.

    My car does that now. The summary left out the most important piece of information: the car must get 100 MPG or more.

  3. Draft Guidelines by ryanguill · · Score: 3, Informative

    Draft Guidelines can be found here: http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/auto/prize-details/draft-guidelines [PDF Warning]

  4. Re:No Batteries Allowed by MyNymWasTaken · · Score: 5, Informative
    http://www.progressiveautoxprize.org/auto/prize-details/draft-guidelines

    Fuel economy (energy efficiency): at least 100 Miles per gallon of gasoline energy equivalent (Mpge)

    Vehicles must use AXP-supplied fuel during performance tests and races. A limited number of representative fuels will be provided. This will neutralize fuel gaming, and allow us to focus on viable fuels that are available in the marketplace to a level of our satisfaction. At this point, we expect to provide gasoline, diesel, electricity, natural gas, bio-diesel, and E85
  5. Re:I'm looking for reasons against "Water4Gas" by MoonBuggy · · Score: 3, Informative

    The energy gained from the hydrogen combustion will be less than the energy expended in the electrolysis. It's as simple as that. No system is 100% efficient, so you must lose some energy in the process of extracting the hydrogen from the water. If the hydrogen generator were plugged into the wall you could argue that the gains coming from the electricity used were greater than spending the equivalent money on petrol rather than electricity, even factoring in the inherent losses from the process, but inside the car's system all the energy ultimately comes from the petrol anyway.

    I no very little about the chemistry involved in adding hydrogen to the combustion of petrol, so I can't say what (if any) impact it could have on emissions, but the physics of the situation mean that you must be expending more fuel overall than you would without the system.

  6. Rule summary by Thelasko · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here is a brief summary of the rules as taken from the draft on X-Prise website.
    Fuel economy >100MPGe
    4+ passengers
    Must meet US EPA Tier II bin 5
    Must meet US safety regulations
    Must have features considered standard in today's automobiles at a cost that is not prohibitively expensive, and must provide a business case proving so.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  7. water 4 gas by xj · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well conservation of energy for one. The energy required to split water in to hydrogen and oxygen is greater than the energy you get from burning it otherwise we'd all have perpetual motion machines running in our back yard.

    Flow rate.
    Say an engine has a displacement of 3 liters and is operating at 2000 rpm.
    3 liters * 2000 rpm /2 (as this is a 4 stroke engine) * .85 (assume this is not turbo charged so the cylinder is never completely full) = 2550 liters of air per min.

    the electric power required to electrolyze the hydrogen equivalent to 1 gallon of gasoline is equal to (500 moles) x (0.06587 kWh/mole) = 32.935 kWh, and the approximate cost of that power = (32.935 kWh)
    credit to this site http://www.stardrivedevice.com/electrolysis.html

    How much current can you alternator put out? Maybe 100 amps. How much hydrogen could your car generate per min? How much power can your alternator produce 100A *13.7V 1.37 KW

    How much hydrogen could your car produce per min?
    1.37 * (.06587 kWh/mole) / 60min/hr * 22.4 liters/mol = 0.033 liters of hydrogen per min
    Compare this to the number above for the volume of air entering the engine.

    How much hydrogen would one need to run a vehicle?

    If 500 mol of hydrogen = 1 gallon of gasoline
    If the vehicle gets 30 mpg at 60 mph = 2 gallons of gasoline per hr or 1000 mol of hydrogen per hr * 22.4 liters / mol / 60 min / hr = 373 lites per min of hydrogen

    Compare this to the number above.
    If anything all those hydrogen generator scams are going to do is create a vacuum leak that will turn on your check engine light.

  8. Re:100 MPH? by MobyDisk · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Government, well ours in the UK anyway, have been doing a great job trying to make people think that speed is somehow inherently dangerous. Heads up folks ... it isn't! I'm glad that is your opinion, but the statistics seem to disagree with that statement and show that severity and likelihood of accidents is directly proportional to speed.
  9. Re:More practical than other X prizes by diGitalRchitect · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't think there is much likelihood that this prize will have any major impact on an environmental level. Addressing fuel economy globally is not at all about creating the most efficient technology. It will be about creating the most mass producible solution. The best solution will be the one that relies on the most abundant resources.

    We see contention now in the number of hybrid electric vehicles that can be produced, because they all depend on a limited supply of some common parts. The more Prius vehicles produced means the fewer HEVs that can be produced by other manufacturers. Doesn't the Tesla run on something like 100 laptop batteries. That means that for each one, 100 fewer laptops can be produced. One factory produces seemless containment units for nuclear reactors. They produce 8 a year. That means that only 8 reactors based on that technology can be opened each year. Wind power is more viable solution for global impact because the materials for turbines are easily acquired, even if the power source is unreliable.

    I suspect that this will produce a nice pet project for enthusiasts, but not one that will have a large impact.