Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Daryl Hunt <dhunt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 02:55:55 -0700
On 1/20/2011 1:44 AM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
"Tankfixer"<paul.carrier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.27a1852d2643914ea80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article<ih7t2f$4im$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
smharding@xxxxxxxxxxx says...
Keith Willshaw wrote:"Schiffner"<stevenkeith2@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:5fd425e0-9136-44cf-bf7c-b60055f38b9f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jan 18, 9:07 pm, "David E. Powell"<David_Powell3...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Jan 18, 7:09 pm, Schiffner<stevenkei...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 18, 2:26 pm, "David E. Powell"<David_Powell3...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
FIne now make that electricity without pollution and toxic waste...
I'll be sitting over there with war&peace, koran, king james and a
torah(might even drag out some copies of the kabbalah and necromicon)
to while away the time while you go on your snipe hunt.
I never said I'd do that. I said I'd reduce US dependence on foreign
sources.
= Sorry David, wasn't picking on you as such. BUT on the fools out
their
= that are screaming for electric vehicls NOW! I've enough experience
= with all but the latest batteries to call bullshit. Lipo? Watched
= brand new ones catch fire on the 10th charge, Nicad exploding while
= charging...Nimh battery pack start venting the second time it was
= used, LiFe just quit... All are toxic and have to be carefully
= recycled and even then they have toxic waste. I love the concept of
= nuclear power generation...even if it's one of the more toxic ways to
= generate electricity.
= The problem is the batteries. Period.
In the UK someone took on of the new electric minis from London
to Edinburgh , a distance of around 400 miles. This required 9
recharging stops and with a full recharge taking up to 10 hours
extended over 4 days.
In the 1830's you could do it by stage coach faster.
The Chevy Volt seems to be a good way to do electric.
It's electric drive which is good for about 35 miles (which covers
most average daily commutes in the US) and then has a little IC
engine (80 hp I think) that charges the battery to keep you going
for a total of about 375 miles total range.
Use a charger every day and you don't pay for gas for very long
periods of time (I think the car will start itself every now and
then to keep engine in good health).
So far none of the Hybrid manufactures have taken the next step and gone
to all electric drive.
Some prototypes are out there but no production vehicles.
The layout I'd pick is as follows.
electric motor/regeneration module at each wheel.
The central power controller senses any slip either in braking or
acceleration and provides anti-lock and anti-spin by modulating the
module.
The drive units act as regeneration units on braking.
Small IC motor running on your fuel of choice, Jaguar has demonstrated a
concept with two micro turbines to act as power generation modules. The
rational for two was at light draw on the charge one would light off and
if the draw became heavier then the second would come on-line to keep
the batteries at optimum charge.
Something to look at since the engine will run at fairly constant rpm
and then shut down as the batteries are topped up.
And a turbin is fairly fuel flexible.
Current Hybrids are definitely not the best route for fuel
economy in europe. The Times recently ran a test between
London and Geneva. The Prius returned just 48.1 mpg
while a standard BMW 520D got 53 mpg. On such a run
I would expect my Seat Altea Econetic (sister to VW Golf Plus)
with a 1.6 Crdi engine to give me better than 55mpg. Its official extra
urban mileage is 68 mpg but thats unachievable by mortal
drivers at real road speeds IMHO.
All figures refer to imperial gallons not US gallons.
Keith
1. It's hard to believe that we are back to 1979 for fuel mileage and the same type of vehicle. 53 by mortals wasn't unheard of in the Plymouth little Pickup and the same running gear car. And they had zip to them. Yes, we should keep dumping billions of dollars into these auto manufacturers so they can do the same job that was done over 30 years ago.
Now, on to Tinkerbells comments. While I do like the inhub design, it has a problem. It has a power band range. It's gutless at low rpms. It has the torque but hasn't developed the HP at low RPMs. And there is a definate rpm band. You are going to have to make your mind up in the onset is it a high speed or a low speed power. The RPMs only go so high. This is why the electric motor needs a transmission of at least 2 speeds. 3 is better and a CTV would be the best. This means that you will probably be driving at least 2 wheels from an electric motor in the more conventional way to maintain efficency.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Tankfixer
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Jim Wilkins
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: smharding
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- References:
- Steam powered aircraft
- From: Greasy Rider
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Jim Wilkins
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Bay Man
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: vaughn
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Jim Wilkins
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Keith Willshaw
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Jim Wilkins
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: smharding
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: vaughn
- Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Daryl Hunt
- The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: David E. Powell
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Schiffner
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: David E. Powell
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Schiffner
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Keith Willshaw
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: smharding
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Tankfixer
- Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- From: Keith Willshaw
- Steam powered aircraft
- Prev by Date: Re: 'Pushing hard' for new helicopters
- Next by Date: Re: South Korea should buy North Korea
- Previous by thread: Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- Next by thread: Re: The Future of Energy and Transport WAS Re: Steam powered aircraft
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|