Slashdot Mirror
First Algae Car Attempts To Cross the US On 25 Gallons of Fuel
Mike writes "San Francisco recently saw the unveiling of the world's first algae fuel-powered vehicle, dubbed the Algaeus. The plug-in hybrid car, which is a Prius tricked out with a nickel metal hydride battery and a plug, runs on green crude from Sapphire Energy — no modifications to the gasoline engine necessary. The set-up is so effective, according to FUEL producer Rebecca Harrell, that the Algaeus can cross the US on approximately 25 gallons of fuel — a figure which is currently being tested on a coast-to-coast road trip."
...if you rtfa..., guess a full algae-driven car isn't feasible yet.
Back to the MPG debate when dealing with electric/hybrid vehicles. Any time one take electricity from the grid, which this car does through the plug, that energy is not counted in the MPG. This makes MPG rating suspect at best. It also merely shifts the carbon load to the electricity plants rather then the vehicle causing the carbon footprint to be distorted.
green is a color or pigment; resembling the color of growing grass crude is unrefined: not refined or processed; "unrefined ore"; "crude oil" there you go.
Easy answer - it's just a marketing stunt. As mentioned above, they don't include the oil / coal / etc. used to produce the electricity that will provide, oh, say, 99.9% of the motive power. And since of the .1% (and that's probably an over-estimate) of energy used to move the car that's in the form of liquid fuel only 5% is algae... the real questions are: 1) so what? and 2) who cares? If this stuff is so great, why can't you use it exclusively to go across the country? Or at least provide 50% of the energy?
Even as marketing stunts go, this just completely sucks ass.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
The thing to get excited about here is not the efficiency of the fuel but that this is supposedly a "cradle to cradle" solution. By producing this fuel you are not taking away farmland to decrease possible food production but you are taking the CO2 out of the air to produce the fuel.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/us/02algae.html?_r=2&oref=slogin
An algae farm could be located almost anywhere. It would not require converting cropland from food production to energy production. It could use sea water and could consume pollutants from sewage and power plants.
One of their distortions depends on having the battery to store most of the energy they will be using to power the vehicle.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
You seem to think that a Prius runs either on the gas motor OR the electric motor (but not both).
If you watch the display on a Prius at highway speed (gas motor running), the electric motor / generator / battery are being used in one way or another almost all the time. If they were just useless weight, a Prius would get mileage similar to a typical gas car. In reality, it gets much better mileage and has rather good highway performance. I drive 100 miles roundtrip to work every day and average about 50 mpg at 65 mph, driving "normally" (no concessions for the sake of mileage). Passing acceleration (50 up to 75-80) is surprisingly good because both the gas and electric are combined.
Most folks would take a highway, where the electric motor and battery do not get used at all-- they're just useless weight.
Not how it works at all. The electric motor in my Prius works at all speeds. It contributes to the drive chain when it makes sense to do so regardless of the speed. If I take my foot off the gas at 65mph the car coasts and the motor runs in reverse as a generator and charges the batteries. If I lightly rest my foot on the gas the gasoline motor stays off and the electric has enough torque to maintain speed. Until I hit an incline or need to accelerate, then the gas will pop on. Under most conditions if you watch the Energy display screen, you can see both the gas motor and the electric drive contributing at the same time.
The whole system is pretty dynamic. It's not like there is a kill switch on the motors at 30mph.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Then they should focus on the "it's electric!" sales pitch, rather than spread lies about getting 100 MPG and ignoring the costs at the user's electric meter. This is the same crap Chevy does with its Volt, claiming you get 60 MPG and "save money" but they never bother to mention the $50/month increase for charging the Volt's battery. Such false advertising should be illegal.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
>>>Yes and no. If a Chevy Volt costs 60 mpg + $50/mo to travel 1200 mi/mo, that's $100 at $2.50/gal....
>>>
Yes and another hybrid like the Prius (approximately same size/shape) will only cost $66 each month. So even though the Prius appears to be a less-efficient 45MPG car versus the Chevy Volt's advertised 60MPG, in reality the Prius will be cheaper to operate for the customer.
Heck even a non-hybrid 38MPG Civic is cheaper to operate ($78). This is why I think this Chevy Volt false-advertising needs to be stopped. It's misleading to the consumer to say "it gets 60MPG" while never mentioning the additional impact on their electricity bills.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Chevy Volt does 40 miles per charge, so figure 2 charges a day (to work/from work) and 20 working days per month == 1600 miles which is 600 kilowatthours for a typical EV. Multiply by 15 cents per KWh == about $87 per month for electricity.
Most people don't drive 80 miles roundtrip to work and where are you getting 15 cents per kilowatt-hour from? According to the map on this site there's only one US State that comes close to that price.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
[which should be enough for anyone!
So nice try, but next time provide a better BOE for your numbers.
>>>greater than 90% efficiency
Wow. That's not even close to accurate. First off 90% is impossible according to what I studied in Thermodynamics class. Even if you built a perfect cycle with NO friction or heating losses, the best you can get is around 80% due to the limitations of our universe (i.e. "you cannae change the laws of physics!" as Mr. Scott would say).
Furthermore while some of the modern "clean coal" plants can get almost 60% efficiency, the overall national average is only 40% or less. "Subcritical fossil fuel power plants can achieve 36-40% efficiency" - wikipedia.com "Today's coal-fired power plants average 33% efficiency (energy conversion to electricity)" -http://www.healthgoods.com/education/energy_information/General_Energy_Information/fossil_fuel%20coal.htm As I said before that ~40% national average beats most cars, but doesn't beat the efficiency of a well-built engine like the Lupo 3L (50% according to Volkswagen Germany).
>>>pulled your estimate of electric power plan efficiency from some dark place.
No but I suspect you did. >90%??? Yeah that's definitely smelly. I provided citations. Can you? I doubt it.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall