NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.motordeaire.com/ing/UKPressrelease.html#Eng

Not only is it cheap, but so is the fuel and so are repairs which are minimal. I'd buy stock in this company.

that is badass!

Wow...If this thing really works, then not only will the gas/oil companies have to deal with the "threat" from hybrids and electrics, but air powered cars as well. Just you wait..someone'll publish some "finding" saying cars using air are bad for the environment. ;)

Day-mn! That is a fine peice of metal! It'll be a while before it picks up and prices drop, but it has potential and I look forward to its use.

That is really neat. Thinking outside the box is always good. Even if this product fails, so long as it has some good principles in its design and funtion, someone else will take it further.

68mph? How'm I supposed to break the speed limit in that!

I've seen cleaner.

I've seen cleaner.The Flintstonemobile? ;) You've still gotta get the power from somewhere though.

I've seen cleaner.

HA! You've seen cleaner than "zero pollution"? What? Does it actually clean pollution from the environment as you drive it? I am assumign you are kidding but if not please do tell.

The Flintstonemobile? ;) You've still gotta get the power from somewhere though.
Not to mention after Fred Flintstone digests all those brontoburguers or whatever he eats.

Amazing development. Let's hope it finds success. It can be combined with a fossil fuel engine to use on highways, but by far most pollution is produced when going slowly or idling in the cities.

George Bush: "Awww man all that work for nothing, now we gotta find a country that has air. Cheny!"

As an urban dweller and lifelong pedestrian, I'll take any and all advances that reduce the amount of smog I have to breathe for the day-to-day convenience of SUV- and minivan-driving suburbanites who blight my air.

Three cheers for innovative technologies!

HA! You've seen cleaner than "zero pollution"? What? Does it actually clean pollution from the environment as you drive it? I am assumign you are kidding but if not please do tell.
How do you compress the air to run the car? Electricity from coal burning or nuclear plants? It's not all that much cleaner, it only shifts the pollution from the car to another location.

Plus it's slow.

HA! You've seen cleaner than "zero pollution"? What? Does it actually clean pollution from the environment as you drive it? I am assumign you are kidding but if not please do tell.
It's a car that runs on the power of love, hippie love so it actually cleans.

Plus it's slow.

You routinely have to be 69 miles from your current location in less than an hour? 68 miles in an hour just doesn't cut it?

What do you drive on, the intersate or the autobahn?

How do you compress the air to run the car? Electricity from coal burning or nuclear plants? It's not all that much cleaner, it only shifts the pollution from the car to another location.

Plus it's slow.


Nuclear power doesn’t generate air pollution.

How do you compress the air to run the car? Electricity from coal burning or nuclear plants? It's not all that much cleaner, it only shifts the pollution from the car to another location.

Plus it's slow.


Good point but I am okay with nuclear power and hopefully we will be implementing more of that soon and getting rid of coal. Especially since they are working on a fission reactor in France. I hope they really are making progress on that.

The slow thing I can deal with. And I bet with improved technology it will speed up.

Nuclear power doesn’t generate air pollution.


But it does generate nuclear waste right?

The slow thing I can deal with. And I bet with improved technology it will speed up.

I still gotta wonder how anyone can call 68 mph 'slow'.

You routinely have to be 69 miles from your current location in less than an hour? 68 miles in an hour just doesn't cut it?

What do you drive on, the intersate or the autobahn?

To be fair though, I regularly drive about 80 mph on the freeway. I know I shouldn't but I have a lead foot. Only two speeding tickets in my life though, *pats self on back*

Huh, when I read 'Air-powered car', I automatically thought 'air-diesel', which is pretty much the antithesis of clean transportation. :D

But it does generate nuclear waste right?

Which you can reprocess to cut down on. Also, contrary to popular belief, high-level nuclear waste is not radioactive forever. The most is thirty years, some only take hours or even minutes to decay, but, because of paranoia, they try to dispose of all of it permanently. What a waste.

Which you can reprocess to cut down on. Also, contrary to popular belief, high-level nuclear waste is not radioactive forever. The most is thirty years, some only take hours or even minutes to decay, but, because of paranoia, they try to dispose of all of it permanently. What a waste.

Oh well then - thats marvelous.

How do you compress the air to run the car? Electricity from coal burning or nuclear plants? It's not all that much cleaner, it only shifts the pollution from the car to another location.

Plus it's slow.

Hydro is clean (although initially destructive).

Anyways, putting the burden of pollution on one area (the power suppliers) is more efficient than on millions of vehicles.

Replacing the current vehicles with cleaner ones will reduce energy consumption. One reason: people in cities would use less air conditioning because the heat shield produced by smog made by cars will no longer exist.

Increasing the amount of solar power by merely putting in solar panels (which even generate power when its overcast outside) in homes would greatly put a dent in consumption. Cost of installation would be reduced not only by the tax reduction one would get for going solar but from the money one would save on fuel and repairs when they convert to an air-powered car ^^

Wouldn't additional pollution produced by the power plants in your scenario be at identical, if not less than what is made by cars?

The hybrid market is picking up. If air-powered cars get introduced they will likely push out fuel-powered cars altogether. A 'choice' in this case seems to be irrelevant.

Which you can reprocess to cut down on. Also, contrary to popular belief, high-level nuclear waste is not radioactive forever. The most is thirty years, some only take hours or even minutes to decay, but, because of paranoia, they try to dispose of all of it permanently. What a waste.

Much and all as I kinda hate asking this, but you got a link substantiating that claim?

The radioactivity has a half-life, and yes, will eventually become inert, but thirty years seems a rather optimistic estimate. And mind you, we're talking about radiation levels that are toxic to life, not just human life, but life in general.

I wouldn't want anyone to start tossing around spent fuel rods as part of a juggling act, say, just because they'd reached some arbitrary "human-safe" reduced level of radioactivity. The stuff'd still be nastily bad for most critters, and still would be bad for people if their exposure to it was prolonged.

Allow us our weakness and indulge our paranoia on this one.

And anyway, I'd always heard that waste such as spent fuel rods had a half-life of fifty years, not thirty, so maybe you might want to re-think any schemes you may already have cooked up for making paperweights or drinks coasters from tritium.

Just sayin'.

I just wanted to make a comment on the nuclear issue as well.

For one, the amount of pollution is makes is minimal compaired to coal and oil power plants. In addation, the radioactive waste isn't as big a problem as you think. It is a problem, yes, but not nearly as bad as one would anticipate.

The real enviromental problem with nuclear power is that it heats up the water source it uses. By increasing the temperature in these waters, native life tends to die out, and hence the water source begins to become null of biodiversity.

True, we have made some improvements to decrease this temperature rise for water sources, but it continues to be a problem on old nuclear plants.

Getting back to the radioactive waste, for a moment, the half-life really depends on the element that is being used for rods, if its some forms of uranium (I think it's 133, but I am not sure), the half-life is rather fast, but in the cases of some like tritum, it can be a quite long. So that all depends.

Also, we can recycle alot of the waste we have out there right now, only problem is, getting to that waste is very difficult and causes quite a bit of problems...so thats pretty much out.
-------

On the topic of the car: Very Cool. I am saving up my cash now!

You routinely have to be 69 miles from your current location in less than an hour? 68 miles in an hour just doesn't cut it?

What do you drive on, the intersate or the autobahn?
I go about 75 on the highway. Sometimes I need quick acceleration to pass other cars. 68 MPH doesn't cut it.

I found this the funniest.


The MDI car can reach a speed of 68 mph and has a road coverage of roughly 124 miles -some 8 hours of travel- which is more than double the road coverage of an electric car. When recharging the tank, the car needs to be connected to the mains (220V) for 3 to 4 hours or attached to an air pump in a petrol station for only 2 minutes.

How exactly do they get 8 hours of travel from 124 miles? That's only a little more than a trip to chicago and back for me and I do that on a regular basis.