From: Albm&ctd on
In article <i06ttf$e53$2(a)news.eternal-september.org>, atec7 7 <""atec77\"@
hotmail.com"> says...
> Albm&ctd wrote:
> > In article <8e954030-ad3e-462d-9b96-b896636b6013(a)j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> > Diesel_4WD(a)yahoo.com.au says...
> >> On Jun 23, 4:22 pm, Neil Gerace <gera...(a)iinet.net.au> wrote:
> >>> On Jun 23, 11:37 am, Diesel Damo <Diesel_...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Jun 22, 8:52 pm, Qansett <qan...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Why cant they build and electric car that can recharge its
> >>>>> own batteries while in motion.?
> >>>> Rumour has it the sun emits energy...
> >>> You certainly can't generate enough power that way to get a net
> >>> benefit while the car's running. The batteries will still need
> >>> charging after you shut down for the night.
> >> I know, but something is better than nothing.
> >>
> > A 4 x 600 foot trailer covered in solar panels should do it for daytime running.
> > How come box trailers are still pre-metric?
> >
> > Al
> kinda long and narrow at 4ft x 600 ft ?
> how does it corner ?
>
Better that it reverses and a prick to overtake.

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html
From: st3ph3nm on
On Jun 23, 6:01 pm, Bernd Felsche <ber...(a)innovative.iinet.net.au>
wrote:
> Toby <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
> >On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:51:15 GMT, Athol wrote:
> >> Qansett <qan...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Read about this in the motoring section of Sydney Saturday
> >>> Telegraph.  This car has only 160 kms range on a full battery
> >>> charge and costs $40K plus to buy. Unless youre a city driver
> >>> only, who would buy this car at that price.?
> >>> Heres the big question: Why cant they build and electric car
> >>> that can recharge its own batteries while in motion.?
> >> As far as I can find out, every current straight electric and
> >> hybrid electric vehicle uses regenerative braking to charge the
> >> batteries when slowing down or going down hill.  That's a major
> >> part of how they get the range that they do.  Without that, the
> >> above vehicle might have a range of say 60km.
> >> On average, only about half of the energy makes it back into the
> >> batteries, due to a combination of inefficiencies in the motor
> >> when operating as a generator, wiring, electronics, etc., plus
> >> the limit on how fast charge can be put into batteries.
> >Yes, well - we're still waiting for the Insurance Shysters to
> >calculate the risks of capacitor batteries  - and of course the
> >military applications of the things will have to be explored first.
> >All that and more before we see a real rechargeable battery in a
> >normal vehicle.
>
> The electric car nuts need to get a grip on reality and realize
> that electrolytic storage of energy is unsuitable for general
> automotive traction power. All the plausible (and some implausible)
> anode/cathode pairs in a myriad of electrolytes have been explored
> and still the energy storage density (by mass and/or volume), charge
> rate, durability, safety and recovery efficiency are nothing like
> competitive with liquid fuelled vehicles (including LPG).
>
> Time to bite the bullet. Fuel cells still have some way to being
> engineered for automotive traction use in hot climates, but that
> can possibly be achieved within a decade. Which gives time to
> develop synthetic, liquid fuels for such applications. Liquids that
> are as easy and convenient to store and handle as petrol or diesel.
> Energy to synthecise such fuels can be taken from "waste" heat of
> nuclear power stations; or conventional ones.
>
> Hydrogen is interesting but a dead-end.
>
> Even if the synthetic liquid fuel only has half the recoverable
> density of petrol/diesel, the ease of handling and refuelling will
> not be a severe constraint on personal mobility.
>
> Personal, independent mobility is what the car game is all about.
> --
> /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
> \ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | For every complex problem there is an
>  X   against HTML mail     | answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
> / \  and postings          |  --HL Mencken

Why do you think hydrogen fuel cells are a dead end? I would have
thought them ideal - you've got a similar infrastructure setup to
current usage of petro chemicals, and you don't need to rely on
battery technology to get much better than it is. I saw a review on a
Honda fuel cell vehicle and it seemed not that far away, with similar
performance to a modern petrol sedan. So long as the refuelling
infrastructure can be set up, I think it's the way we'll end up
going.

Cheers,
Steve
From: atec7 7 ""atec77" on
st3ph3nm wrote:
> On Jun 23, 6:01 pm, Bernd Felsche <ber...(a)innovative.iinet.net.au>
> wrote:
>> Toby <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:51:15 GMT, Athol wrote:
>>>> Qansett <qan...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Read about this in the motoring section of Sydney Saturday
>>>>> Telegraph. This car has only 160 kms range on a full battery
>>>>> charge and costs $40K plus to buy. Unless youre a city driver
>>>>> only, who would buy this car at that price.?
>>>>> Heres the big question: Why cant they build and electric car
>>>>> that can recharge its own batteries while in motion.?
>>>> As far as I can find out, every current straight electric and
>>>> hybrid electric vehicle uses regenerative braking to charge the
>>>> batteries when slowing down or going down hill. That's a major
>>>> part of how they get the range that they do. Without that, the
>>>> above vehicle might have a range of say 60km.
>>>> On average, only about half of the energy makes it back into the
>>>> batteries, due to a combination of inefficiencies in the motor
>>>> when operating as a generator, wiring, electronics, etc., plus
>>>> the limit on how fast charge can be put into batteries.
>>> Yes, well - we're still waiting for the Insurance Shysters to
>>> calculate the risks of capacitor batteries - and of course the
>>> military applications of the things will have to be explored first.
>>> All that and more before we see a real rechargeable battery in a
>>> normal vehicle.
>> The electric car nuts need to get a grip on reality and realize
>> that electrolytic storage of energy is unsuitable for general
>> automotive traction power. All the plausible (and some implausible)
>> anode/cathode pairs in a myriad of electrolytes have been explored
>> and still the energy storage density (by mass and/or volume), charge
>> rate, durability, safety and recovery efficiency are nothing like
>> competitive with liquid fuelled vehicles (including LPG).
>>
>> Time to bite the bullet. Fuel cells still have some way to being
>> engineered for automotive traction use in hot climates, but that
>> can possibly be achieved within a decade. Which gives time to
>> develop synthetic, liquid fuels for such applications. Liquids that
>> are as easy and convenient to store and handle as petrol or diesel.
>> Energy to synthecise such fuels can be taken from "waste" heat of
>> nuclear power stations; or conventional ones.
>>
>> Hydrogen is interesting but a dead-end.
>>
>> Even if the synthetic liquid fuel only has half the recoverable
>> density of petrol/diesel, the ease of handling and refuelling will
>> not be a severe constraint on personal mobility.
>>
>> Personal, independent mobility is what the car game is all about.
>> --
>> /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
>> \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | For every complex problem there is an
>> X against HTML mail | answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
>> / \ and postings | --HL Mencken
>
> Why do you think hydrogen fuel cells are a dead end? I would have
> thought them ideal - you've got a similar infrastructure setup to
> current usage of petro chemicals, and you don't need to rely on
> battery technology to get much better than it is. I saw a review on a
> Honda fuel cell vehicle and it seemed not that far away, with similar
> performance to a modern petrol sedan. So long as the refuelling
> infrastructure can be set up, I think it's the way we'll end up
> going.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve
they are not dead in California where apparently the H2 sales is going well
From: OzOne on



>> Hydrogen is interesting but a dead-end.

Nope..Far from it.
Developing steadily and gaining acceptance in California.




OzOne of the three twins

I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.
From: Brad on


<OzOne(a)Crackerbox-Palace.com> wrote in message
news:hcfq26960tqleg9qdlmnj5681tsasjsob7(a)4ax.com...
:
:
:
: >> Hydrogen is interesting but a dead-end.
:
: Nope..Far from it.
: Developing steadily and gaining acceptance in California.
:
:
:
:
: OzOne of the three twins
:
: I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.

It's the whole energy in energy out thing, the car makes no pollution while
driving yet the PowerStation that produces the power to separate and
pressurise the H2 does.

--
Brad Leyden
6� 43.5816' S 146� 59.3097' E WGS84
To mail spam is really hot but please reply to thread so all may benefit (or
laugh at my mistakes)
>
>