This engine is a heat engine, just like a petrol or a Diesel engine. The efficiency of a hydrogen, petrol or a Diesel engine is defined by the temperatures of the combusting gasses and the exhaust gasses.
The temperatures the engine can handle are defined by the materials it is made of. Diesel and petrol engines are limited to around 30% because they are made of aluminium and steel, a ceramic engine could be far more efficient because it could handle much higher temperatures but the same technology would apply to Diesel and petrol as well, there's no inherent reason a hydrogen combustion engine would be any more efficient than using conventional fuels.
A hydrogen *combustion* engine is *always* going to be less efficient than simply burning the fuel in the first place because energy has to be supplied to make the hydrogen with a corresponding loss. This is why fuel cells are so important.
This really just demonstrates the successful strategy of the prize. It's imperative that the momentum isn't completely lost when/if Scaled Composites take the prize.
That means a new, bigger, harder target next with a bigger prize.
You don't need one per person. It's really quite a good idea, the UK has a similar "Open University" (http://www.open.ac.uk/) where lectures are broadcast late at night on the BBC channels.
Internal combustion engines using conventional materials can only be around 30% efficient on a good day, that drops to around 10% after going through the gearbox, including air resistance, traffic jams etc.
The whole idea of fuel cell vehicles is to increase the efficiency by making use of natural efficiencies of electrical drive.. This particular Internal Combustion Engine vehicle is only 30% efficient, *AND* the energy required to make the hydrogen has to come from somewhere, a 55% efficient combined cycle turbine power plant drops the efficiency of this car to 17% before it leaves the engine which'll give you a vehicle which is approx 5% efficient rather than a 10% efficient one.
Closer to 1.8USD. But when product comes over from the US to the UK, it often does it on a 1:1 conversion ratio. Which obviously generates larger profits for the makers.
Thunder Sky LiON batteries cost approximately the same as Lead Acid batteries and have approximately 10x the storage capacity for a given size and weight. They can be recharged hundreds of times. (read that as hundreds of thousands of miles).
The technology has been around for a few years and the costs are now down to the point where it's economically feasable. It's odd that the major car manufacturers have switched their research yet again to technologies which are another decade into the future.
30 mile range vehicles usually use Lead Acid battery technology.
Good electric cars have had 200+ mile ranges for a few years now. The car called the Solectria Sunrise did 373 miles on a single charge using NiMH batteries in 1997, well batteries have improved substantially since then and existing LiON batteries should be able to approximately double that, and coming Li-S batteries promise to double that again.
Home builds and conversions often use obsolete lead acid batteries and heavy steel shelled vehicles.
There are good designs but they'll never happen. The question you have to ask is... In the future, how are the existing oil companies going to make you pay them thousands of dollars per year for fuel? They can't do that if your vehicle is purely battery powered, you can charge it at home or work. They can if it's hydrogen fuel cell powered.
This guy is fairly on the ball with the various solar and battery technologies around for cars:
In terms of impact protection, have a look at the various safety equipment suppliers. When I'm cycling or biking I wear actual safety glasses which conform to EU protective eyewear standards in terms of optical quality and ballistic protection. Cost £6 including VAT and delivery.
In order to meet the essential requirements of the PPE Directive sunglasses have to be tested to, and conform to, EN 1836:1997 (Personal eye protection-Sunglasses for general use and filters for direct observation of the sun). This standard defines requirements for transmittance properties, optical properties, minimum robustness and information and labelling. It also requires that sunglasses are safe to wear with no sharp protrusions or defects that could cause harm, are not combustible and are made from materials that are non-toxic when in contact with the skin."
Copied from the ESA website: http://www.eurosunglass.com/de/index.htm l
Oh, and Dollar prices often convert approximately 1:1 to GBP prices, the real live USD/GBP exchange rate rarely comes into it:
e.g. http://www.shadestation.co.uk/oakley/ htt p://www.changing-gear.com/acatalog/CG_Catalog_P ENNY_218.html
They were £9.99 marked down to £2.99 in SuperDrug since summer is now officially over. Of course, it's during winter that the sun is particularly low in the sky. In terms of optical quality they are fine.
The most I have ever paid for a set of sunglasses is £40 and I regret that because they got sat on.
All sunglasses sold in the EU must conform to certain safety standards. The word "Oakley" doesn't actually increase level of protection from UV. If you want to blow an extra £296 on that word in the belief that it does, it's completely up to you.
Well, I paid £2.99 for a pair of decent looking sunglasses with all the protection needed. I don't think that the word "Oakley" is worth multipying that figure by 100.
Thing is, with a car you can still go out and buy a 600cc 25hp SmartCar for running about the city. You can't really do that with a computer, your minimum config just keeps growing.
"Bush is not the head of our gevernment he is the head of the executive branch of our government."
Semantics. The point remains the same, the voting system ensures that the largest minority candidate (and party) are the ones in power. Under the existing system the only effect a third party can have on electoral success is to split the votes of one of the existing parties (or candidates) and therefore ensure the continued success of their opposition, leading to basically a single party state. The existing system has made America a two party state rather than a democracy, it's the inescapable result.
Your head of government representing what percentage of the populace? 38%, 40%, 42%?
I don't see how giving a minority candidate majority power could in any way be described as democratic. The Prime Minister of the UK, Tony Blair only received 42% of the popular vote. The majority of the population (58%) did not want him as the prime minister, or New Labour as the governing party. But because of the winner takes all style of the voting system his party took more than 65% of the seats in parliament.
The result of the 2000 US elections are similarly controversial, the minority candidate (Bush) assumed power despite Gore having received more than 50% of the popular vote.
Stability is a ridiculous excuse for preferring the existing undemocratic voting system over one which actually takes account of the preferences of the people. Especially when the overwhelming evidence from the many European parliaments is that proportional representation does generally provide stable government depending on the specific implementation.
The electoral college is largely the cause of a two party state in America. It's basically a first past the post winner take all system which punishes extremely heavily any votes for parties which are not the outright winners or potentially outright winners in elections. There is simply no point voting for any party which is not likely to receive 35%+ of the popular vote. A vote for the Greens really is effectively a vote for Bush.
Across Europe, proportional representation systems are in place which allow smaller parties representation in their respective parliaments. If 5% of the population vote for the greens, they get 5% of the seats. The result is that the amount of money required for campaign funding is substantially reduced and the influence those supplying the funding is also substantially reduced by a similar amount.
I used to download the pages
on
Ceefax Turns 30
·
· Score: 1
Especially the share price information, 15min delayed but also TV schedules, news, cinema timetables etc there was a lot of free information available on the various channels. I wrote some Unix/linux software for the OPT III external teletext decoder. It got fried during a storm and the company has gone out of business, these days it's easier to get the info from the Internet over DSL though there are still a number of teletext decoders out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Drag increases with the square of the speed. The faster you go the more fuel you have to use to travel the same distance, reducing the efficiency.
This engine is a heat engine, just like a petrol or a Diesel engine. The efficiency of a hydrogen, petrol or a Diesel engine is defined by the temperatures of the combusting gasses and the exhaust gasses.
The temperatures the engine can handle are defined by the materials it is made of. Diesel and petrol engines are limited to around 30% because they are made of aluminium and steel, a ceramic engine could be far more efficient because it could handle much higher temperatures but the same technology would apply to Diesel and petrol as well, there's no inherent reason a hydrogen combustion engine would be any more efficient than using conventional fuels.
A hydrogen *combustion* engine is *always* going to be less efficient than simply burning the fuel in the first place because energy has to be supplied to make the hydrogen with a corresponding loss. This is why fuel cells are so important.
This really just demonstrates the successful strategy of the prize. It's imperative that the momentum isn't completely lost when/if Scaled Composites take the prize.
That means a new, bigger, harder target next with a bigger prize.
You don't need one per person. It's really quite a good idea, the UK has a similar "Open University" (http://www.open.ac.uk/) where lectures are broadcast late at night on the BBC channels.
When using hydrogen. Fantastic.
Even battery electric vehicles are way better than that on current technology.
Marketing.
This particular hydrogen vehicle is less efficient than a conventional petrol or Diesel vehicle so we're not exactly taking acheivements here.
Or are we talking marketing exercise here?
Internal combustion engines using conventional materials can only be around 30% efficient on a good day, that drops to around 10% after going through the gearbox, including air resistance, traffic jams etc.
The whole idea of fuel cell vehicles is to increase the efficiency by making use of natural efficiencies of electrical drive.. This particular Internal Combustion Engine vehicle is only 30% efficient, *AND* the energy required to make the hydrogen has to come from somewhere, a 55% efficient combined cycle turbine power plant drops the efficiency of this car to 17% before it leaves the engine which'll give you a vehicle which is approx 5% efficient rather than a 10% efficient one.
It's a marketing exercise.
Closer to 1.8USD. But when product comes over from the US to the UK, it often does it on a 1:1 conversion ratio. Which obviously generates larger profits for the makers.
Languages evolve or die. Deal with it.
Unfortunately you have to buy the text of any European (or British) standards.
/ SitePage .asp?LS=&PgID=0080&LR=&LD=&Src=&Dest=&Last=&SessID =U4CK5HSU54638G26BW5TVT7G92NP8UQ9&MSCSID=&ErrID=&S essStat=&Parent=&Child=&PCount=0&LogStat=&URLData= &SEARCH_ID=U8DUJ28F0CJE8JDU3BE2AF3AV8W2BPB8&SEARCH _TYPE=SRCH_TYP_STD
e.g.
http://bsonline.techindex.co.uk/BSI2/Dir1
Thunder Sky LiON batteries cost approximately the same as Lead Acid batteries and have approximately 10x the storage capacity for a given size and weight. They can be recharged hundreds of times. (read that as hundreds of thousands of miles).
The technology has been around for a few years and the costs are now down to the point where it's economically feasable. It's odd that the major car manufacturers have switched their research yet again to technologies which are another decade into the future.
30 mile range vehicles usually use Lead Acid battery technology.
Good electric cars have had 200+ mile ranges for a few years now. The car called the Solectria Sunrise did 373 miles on a single charge using NiMH batteries in 1997, well batteries have improved substantially since then and existing LiON batteries should be able to approximately double that, and coming Li-S batteries promise to double that again.
Home builds and conversions often use obsolete lead acid batteries and heavy steel shelled vehicles.
There are good designs but they'll never happen. The question you have to ask is... In the future, how are the existing oil companies going to make you pay them thousands of dollars per year for fuel? They can't do that if your vehicle is purely battery powered, you can charge it at home or work. They can if it's hydrogen fuel cell powered.
This guy is fairly on the ball with the various solar and battery technologies around for cars:
http://www.benerridge.freeserve.co.uk/ecot.htm
In terms of impact protection, have a look at the various safety equipment suppliers. When I'm cycling or biking I wear actual safety glasses which conform to EU protective eyewear standards in terms of optical quality and ballistic protection. Cost £6 including VAT and delivery.
"The European Sunglasses Standard EN1836:1997
m l
t p://www.changing-gear.com/acatalog/CG_Catalog_P ENNY_218.html
In order to meet the essential requirements of the PPE Directive sunglasses have to be tested to, and conform to, EN 1836:1997 (Personal eye protection-Sunglasses for general use and filters for direct observation of the sun).
This standard defines requirements for transmittance properties, optical properties, minimum robustness and information and labelling. It also requires that sunglasses are safe to wear with no sharp protrusions or defects that could cause harm, are not combustible and are made from materials that are non-toxic when in contact with the skin."
Copied from the ESA website:
http://www.eurosunglass.com/de/index.ht
Oh, and Dollar prices often convert approximately 1:1 to GBP prices, the real live USD/GBP exchange rate rarely comes into it:
e.g.
http://www.shadestation.co.uk/oakley/
ht
HTH...
They were £9.99 marked down to £2.99 in SuperDrug since summer is now officially over. Of course, it's during winter that the sun is particularly low in the sky. In terms of optical quality they are fine.
The most I have ever paid for a set of sunglasses is £40 and I regret that because they got sat on.
All sunglasses sold in the EU must conform to certain safety standards. The word "Oakley" doesn't actually increase level of protection from UV. If you want to blow an extra £296 on that word in the belief that it does, it's completely up to you.
Well, I paid £2.99 for a pair of decent looking sunglasses with all the protection needed. I don't think that the word "Oakley" is worth multipying that figure by 100.
Thing is, with a car you can still go out and buy a 600cc 25hp SmartCar for running about the city. You can't really do that with a computer, your minimum config just keeps growing.
"Bush is not the head of our gevernment he is the head of the executive branch of our government."
Semantics. The point remains the same, the voting system ensures that the largest minority candidate (and party) are the ones in power. Under the existing system the only effect a third party can have on electoral success is to split the votes of one of the existing parties (or candidates) and therefore ensure the continued success of their opposition, leading to basically a single party state. The existing system has made America a two party state rather than a democracy, it's the inescapable result.
Give they've been hit what? Three times this year by hurricanes?
Your head of government representing what percentage of the populace? 38%, 40%, 42%?
I don't see how giving a minority candidate majority power could in any way be described as democratic. The Prime Minister of the UK, Tony Blair only received 42% of the popular vote. The majority of the population (58%) did not want him as the prime minister, or New Labour as the governing party. But because of the winner takes all style of the voting system his party took more than 65% of the seats in parliament.
The result of the 2000 US elections are similarly controversial, the minority candidate (Bush) assumed power despite Gore having received more than 50% of the popular vote.
Stability is a ridiculous excuse for preferring the existing undemocratic voting system over one which actually takes account of the preferences of the people. Especially when the overwhelming evidence from the many European parliaments is that proportional representation does generally provide stable government depending on the specific implementation.
You want political stability? Doesn't get much more stable than a single party state. Not very representative though.
The electoral college is largely the cause of a two party state in America. It's basically a first past the post winner take all system which punishes extremely heavily any votes for parties which are not the outright winners or potentially outright winners in elections. There is simply no point voting for any party which is not likely to receive 35%+ of the popular vote. A vote for the Greens really is effectively a vote for Bush.
Across Europe, proportional representation systems are in place which allow smaller parties representation in their respective parliaments. If 5% of the population vote for the greens, they get 5% of the seats. The result is that the amount of money required for campaign funding is substantially reduced and the influence those supplying the funding is also substantially reduced by a similar amount.
Especially the share price information, 15min delayed but also TV schedules, news, cinema timetables etc there was a lot of free information available on the various channels. I wrote some Unix/linux software for the OPT III external teletext decoder. It got fried during a storm and the company has gone out of business, these days it's easier to get the info from the Internet over DSL though there are still a number of teletext decoders out there.
Les Fleur by 4 hero.
That'll be me buying the CD and ripping it myself... Again...
Anyone else find that legal MP3 download services rarely have what you want?