Have you ever wondered?

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Well here you go -> http://www.whatcar.co.uk/news-article.aspx?NA=231188

67mph :o ...crazy fools

Edited February 13, 2008 by ChrisL

[wysiwyg]

Cool - but how do you compress the air? - surely can't be as efficient as electric cars.

[Bobby]

It require huge amounts of energy to compress air that much. The energy may come from solar or wind, very very expensive already. More likely it comes from energy from petrol/diesel powered compressors.

Taking into account efficiency loses, you are likely to be much more greener using the petrol/dieseldirectly.

So, unless the air is compressed without using fossils fuels it's probably very dirty.

[A.J]

It require huge amounts of energy to compress air that much. The energy may come from solar or wind, very very expensive already. More likely it comes from energy from petrol/diesel powered compressors.

Taking into account efficiency loses, you are likely to be much more greener using the petrol/dieseldirectly.

So, unless the air is compressed without using fossils fuels it's probably very dirty.

My thoughts exactly....I guess it all depends on the energy source for the compressors, otherwise its defeating the object of zero carbon travel!

[J10]

This was on BBC News (10pm) last night.

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Bloody 'ell. You post a slight 'Just for fun' link, and it gets blasted.

Wysiwyg - Unfortunately, I am neither an engineer, nor the inventor, so honestly, couldnt give you an answer.

Magpie/AJ - Instead of looking just at the initial emissions, perhaps look at it in the long term. I mean, would running a car on 0 CO2 by compressed air, say over 50000 miles, really be more or equally as un-green as running a car on petrol or diesel? Then, think how many cars et al are on our roads.

Do we know how the air is compressed? I guess before we jump to conclusions, we see all the facts.

Anyhow, I doubt this car will be a big seller, but at least progress is being made.

Edited February 13, 2008 by ChrisL

[Osbourne One-Nil]

Cool - but how do you compress the air?

With a huge great big 7 litre V12 Aston Martin petrol engine running at 6000rpm.

[A.J]

Bloody 'ell. You post a slight 'Just for fun' link, and it gets blasted.

Hehe Chris...thats what happens when you post it in a serious thread....

OON.....

Here's my zero carbon car blue print....should be ready tomorrow :lol:

[wysiwyg]

With a huge great big 7 litre V12 Aston Martin petrol engine running at 6000rpm.

Now that's what I'm talkin about. Does it come free with air powered car ?

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Hehe Chris...thats what happens when you post it in a serious thread....

Its environment change sub-forum, not the serious discussion sub-forum

[Coast]

Unfortunately, I am neither an engineer, nor the inventor, so honestly, couldn't give you an answer.

But these guys can:

At the core of all CAT models is a four-piston engine powered by compressed air that is stored in tanks at 4,500 pounds per square inch. The lightweight tanks, a thermoplastic container surrounded by a carbon-fiber shell, are made by Airbus Industries and hold nearly 3,200 cubic feet of air.

To propel the vehicle, compressed air from the tanks is injected into a small chamber, where it expands and cools. This expansion drives a downstroke of the piston. But as the ambient temperature begins to reheat the air in the first chamber, that air is forced into a second neighboring chamber, where it expands again to drive an upstroke. Using ambient heat helps capture more of the energy in the compressed air, ultimately improving the efficiency and expanding the range of MDI's Air Car. And compared with four-stroke combustion engines, in which half of the strokes are wasted to pull air and fuel into the chamber, the air engine makes use of every stroke.

Ulf Bossel, a mechanical engineer consulting in Switzerland and organizer of the European Fuel Cell Forum, is cautiously optimistic. "I think there's something to it," says Bossel, one of the few who has performed a comprehensive analysis of MDI's approach. Even though one of MDI's compressed-air tanks would carry the energy equivalent of just one gallon of gasoline, the use of that air in the engine is 90 percent efficient.

The idea is for the car to provide zero pollution when driven in cities, and lower emissions when driven faster, as in suburban and rural settings. "It's a little more like a hybrid," says Haydon. "The new innovation will make it more appealing to the average buyer. In terms of the carbon dioxide emissions, it will have five times less than the average vehicle."

The MDI prototype from The Air Car Company:

And if your French is good: MDI Enterprises S.A.

Edited February 14, 2008 by Coast

[Louby]

Why do they feel the need to make these eco cars so bloody god awful to look at? and why so small? Us giants of the world haven't got a chance in hell of getting in them!

[Red Raven]

The BBC article suggests it can be recharged with a home compressor run from the mains for abot 4 hours - thats quicker than an electric car and therefore probably less energy intensive. Other figures given say it can do an equivalent of 120mpg, so presumably that factors in the recharge costs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7241909.stm

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Why do they feel the need to make these eco cars so bloody god awful to look at?

*Scurrys off*

Bring~Ring - "Mr Carp. Its Mr L. You know the new car you bought Louby, I think you better cancel it"

*Scurrys back into room*

[Coast]

Why do they feel the need to make these eco cars so bloody god awful to look at? and why so small? Us giants of the world haven't got a chance in hell of getting in them!

But let's be honest Loubs, you can't even get out of my car and its 4.6M long bumper to bumper!!!!!

[Louby]

But let's be honest Loubs, you can't even get out of my car and its 4.6M long bumper to bumper!!!!!

I could when the you were going topless!!

*Scurrys off*

Bring~Ring - "Mr Carp. Its Mr L. You know the new car you bought Louby, I think you better cancel it"

*Scurrys back into room*

he knows it would be more than his life was worth!!

Seriously though, why can't they make then with at least a tidgy bit of style?

[Coast]

Seriously though, why can't they make then with at least a tidgy bit of style?

Ok, how about this:

The K1 Attack is a hybrid car designed and built by students of West Philadelphia High School's Academy for Automotive and Mechanical Engineering. It uses a 200 bhp AC propulsion electric motor in the front which generates electricity and charges the battery through regenerative braking, as well as a 1.9 TDI diesel engine from a junked Volswagen Jetta at the rear that uses biodiesel generated from soybean oil.

Or how about the Toyata Volta concept car:

'Toyota furnished Italdesign-Giugiaro with a derivative of its ultimate hybrid system, the one adopted on the Lexus RX 400. On the Volta, the 3.3 liter V6 petrol engine is fitted behind the rear axle and not connected directly to the wheels. Indeed, motion is ensured by two electrically powered motors, one per axle thereby securing all-wheel drive'

408 HP output, top speed limited at 250 km/h with acceleration from 0 to 100 km/hr in 4.03 seconds.

[Louby]

Now that is more like it!! not that I would ever be able to get in or out of them B)

0-60 in just over 4 secs :o

Given the choice between those and a shoe box or kids trainer on wheels, I know which I would go for!

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Actually, its interesting. MrsL flicked on to Nuts TV last night (honestly!). They were discussing the new CO2 congestion charge in London, and when asked which cars would be included in the <120Co2/g (of whatever the donotion is), they just mentioned the Prius and another car.

Well, actually, there are plenty more than that on the market. And looking at some of the concept cars, you can see there is a real drive towards cleaning up cars (and making them look pretty for Louby of course B) ).

As a company car owner, Co2 emissions are important to me, as it will of course effect how much tax I pay on it (especially as I also pay tax on fuel).

Strangely enough, out of the family/exec cars, BMW are pretty much top for me, and would cost me less to have than say, a Vectra (or Saab if you want a posh GM motor)/Mondeo of similar power/speed/refinement. I think it is only the Prius and Honda Accord which have lower CO2 emissions.

[Coast]

As a company car owner, Co2 emissions are important to me, as it will of course effect how much tax I pay on it (especially as I also pay tax on fuel).

Strangely enough, out of the family/exec cars, BMW are pretty much top for me, and would cost me less to have than say, a Vectra (or Saab if you want a posh GM motor)

Easy Tiger!!!!!! B) I know unfortunately its the only thing in common between Oon and me, but owning both a Vectra and a SAAB, I can say they are not one and the same!

Actually I am just looking out of my window at the factory parking space next door and the owner and his wife both have one of these:

I'm not a fan of the looks but they make me laugh when they drive off as it sounds like the milkman leaving!!! :o

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

Easy Tiger!!!!!! B) I know unfortunately its the only thing in common between Oon and me, but owning both a Vectra and a SAAB, I can say they are not one and the same!

:o I saw OON reading and wondered if he would take the bait. Unfortunately not B)

Just kidding though, I mean, its not like they share the same chassis *snigger*.

Love the pic of the Lexus. Apart from sounding like a milkman driving off, they seem to have raised the suspension by a couple of foot :o

Have seen that bio power Saab too. Looks nice. Its quite expensive isnt it? Cant remember. I'll have to trawl through the net at some of the concept cars, but I think VW have a few under the hat.

[Coast]

Have seen that bio power Saab too. Looks nice. Its quite expensive isn't it? Cant remember. I'll have to trawl through the net at some of the concept cars, but I think VW have a few under the hat.

The big drawback with the SAAB Biopower is the lack of places to get the bioethanol E85 in England. I would have to drive to Crowborough every time I wanted to fill up and that starts eating into any savings.

Check here first.

0-60 times are down on the current petrol equivalents but the hybrid concept 93 convertible with 2.3 litre BioPower engine and its three electric motors delivers 14% more power and 11% more torque when running on E85 bioethanol compared to petrol. B)

[Bobby]

Bloody 'ell. You post a slight 'Just for fun' link, and it gets blasted.

Wysiwyg - Unfortunately, I am neither an engineer, nor the inventor, so honestly, couldnt give you an answer.

Magpie/AJ - Instead of looking just at the initial emissions, perhaps look at it in the long term. I mean, would running a car on 0 CO2 by compressed air, say over 50000 miles, really be more or equally as un-green as running a car on petrol or diesel? Then, think how many cars et al are on our roads.

Do we know how the air is compressed? I guess before we jump to conclusions, we see all the facts.

Anyhow, I doubt this car will be a big seller, but at least progress is being made.

The car isn't a Zero-CO2 car unless no CO2 is burnt at any stage in the fuel. Now you could consider the car zero-CO2 if the air is compressed with electricity from solar panels for example, but it's going to be a very inefficient and expensive process. How many solar panels would you need for example if 50% of cars in the UK were to be these air cars? I shudder to think, the number must be enormous and very impractical.

The car is useless after all unless it's widely taken up. It's easy to create a prototype that works but to say it'll work cheaply and practically on a large scale is a completely different story.

Also I recall one study that said that biofuels create far more CO2 in their lifecycle than if you burned petrol in the car. It takes lots of fossil fuels after all to grow the crops, to produce the pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, to plant the seeds, irrigation pumps to water the crops, to the run the tractors, harvesters etc, to process the crops, then transport them around the world. Not to mention all the infastructure that will have to be built.

A healthy dose of realism and scepticsm is always needed.

Edited February 15, 2008 by Magpie

[PersianPaladin]

The car isn't a Zero-CO2 car unless no CO2 is burnt at any stage in the fuel. Now you could consider the car zero-CO2 if the air is compressed with electricity from solar panels for example, but it's going to be a very inefficient and expensive process. How many solar panels would you need for example if 50% of cars in the UK were to be these air cars? I shudder to think, the number must be enormous and very impractical.

The car is useless after all unless it's widely taken up. It's easy to create a prototype that works but to say it'll work cheaply and practically on a large scale is a completely different story.

Also I recall one study that said that biofuels create far more CO2 in their lifecycle than if you burned petrol in the car. It takes lots of fossil fuels after all to grow the crops, to produce the pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, to plant the seeds, irrigation pumps to water the crops, to the run the tractors, harvesters etc, to process the crops, then transport them around the world. Not to mention all the infastructure that will have to be built.

A healthy dose of realism and scepticsm is always needed.

You don't need fossil fuels to grow the crops...silly. (True when it comes to transportation, etc however.)

If we can implement wind farms around the entire coast of our country and import electricity from that as specialised for recharging the cars then its clean. Wind farms don't continue to churn out CO2 like other power generators. Concentrated solar power, tidal energy and maybe (for absolute practical and realisitc reasons) a small amount of nuclear energy to power everything else.

[Shiny_Bottom_1]

The car isn't a Zero-CO2 car unless no CO2 is burnt at any stage in the fuel. Now you could consider the car zero-CO2 if the air is compressed with electricity from solar panels for example, but it's going to be a very inefficient and expensive process.

A healthy dose of realism and scepticsm is always needed.

Sorry Magpie, but you've missed my point. We could nit-pick almost anything to do with reducing carbon emissions. The point being, reducing carbon emissions can only be a good thing, right?