NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8oJ4


... This sort of links into the Hybrid Car thread and how we're being screwed over just to make a profit...

Comments?

I think theyre planning to release that in America...If its affordable i so intend to buy an Air Car...

I think theyre planning to release that in America...If its affordable i so intend to buy an Air Car...

Well its more than affordable, if they truly can get it to run completely on air, where it refills itself continuously you'd be set.

Well its more than affordable, if they truly can get it to run completely on air, where it refills itself continuously you'd be set.

Oh i know, but my budget for buying a new car is about $4000...so, 15 aint happenin at the moment...

Id so like one though, the money youd save in fuel would quickly pay for itself...

Oh i know, but my budget for buying a new car is about $4000...so, 15 aint happenin at the moment...

Id so like one though, the money youd save in fuel would quickly pay for itself...

Its like a God send to many current problems in Industrialized societies.

Well its more than affordable, if they truly can get it to run completely on air, where it refills itself continuously you'd be set.

it runs on compressed air. It takes energy to compress the air.

it runs on compressed air. It takes energy to compress the air.

Watch the video, they could generate that energy through ... Compressed Air, so its a continuous life cycle.

it runs on compressed air. It takes energy to compress the air.

Not all energy is created economically or environmentally equal, though.

I wonder what the ratio is, of energy put in to compress the air, to energy you get out of it.

Though even if the same net amount of carbon emissions are created because of the energy needed to compress the air, then it's still a good thing because the pollution won't be clogging up our streets where pedestrians breathe it in. Still, it's not ideal in the slightest if it still requires carbon emissions to compress the air.

Sounds hopeful at the endof the video though, where they talk about the generator of compressed air being able to run on compressed air. It'll be really interesting to see how this develops.

I wonder what the ratio is, of energy put in to compress the air, to energy you get out of it.

Thats obsolete really, when you gain energy through the compressed air.

Not all energy is created economically or environmentally equal, though.

yes I would love to have the specs on how much compressed air, how far you can go on it and the efficiency of converting what I assume to be electrical energy into compressed air energy and converting compressed air energy to mechanical energy.

If it is low then the original poster should be just as upset with this car as he was with the hybird.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8oJ4


... This sort of links into the Hybrid Car thread and how we're being screwed over just to make a profit...

Comments?

The Tata has been talked about already... (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=554943)

Watch the video, they could generate that energy through ... Compressed Air, so its a continuous life cycle.

sound cards broke(and wont fix until after my Korea trip this summer) co can you link an article ?

The Tata has been talked about already... (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=554943)

Never knew that had been posted ... Well thanks for telling me.

Never knew that had been posted ... Well thanks for telling me.

No problemo, I think my thread had fallen down to page 6 anyways, so no harm done.

It was pretty good.

Right up until the idiot who was presenting it mentioned "perpetual motion"

Kinda hard to keep the car running if 100% of its energy is going right back into compression, isn't it?

Watch the video, they could generate that energy through ... Compressed Air, so its a continuous life cycle.

You won't ever be able to get it to run indefinitely. The makers of this technology aren't that stupid. The presenter is. If you used the compressed air to compress air you'd get exactly nothing out of it. Most likely, you'd lose a bit of energy in the process. What you could do is save energy by compressing air using any left-over energy that doesn't go towards making the car run forward, but that will still not make it run indefinitely.

You won't ever be able to get it to run indefinitely. The makers of this technology aren't that stupid. The presenter is. If you used the compressed air to compress air you'd get exactly nothing out of it. Most likely, you'd lose a bit of energy in the process. What you could do is save energy by compressing air using any left-over energy that doesn't go towards making the car run forward, but that will still not make it run indefinitely.

Yeah, it was a bit rose-tinted.

Still, I'm impressed. I think it's a great step forward.

No problemo, I think my thread had fallen down to page 6 anyways, so no harm done.

Page 6???

That's...that's off the map!

Yeah, it was a bit rose-tinted.

Still, I'm impressed. I think it's a great step forward.



Page 6???

That's...that's off the map!

It's still on my map...

Seriously, I had to search for my threads to find it.

Yeah, it was a bit rose-tinted.

Still, I'm impressed. I think it's a great step forward.

I'm impressed as well and I applaud the makers/inventors.

However, the presenter needs to get the boot. He's putting way too much expectation on this. Way more than there is and it'll make the inventors look dumb. Perpetual motion does not exist! Never has, never will (unless you can start messing with universes... even then, it's not perpetual motion).

It was pretty good.

Right up until the idiot who was presenting it mentioned "perpetual motion"

Kinda hard to keep the car running if 100% of its energy is going right back into compression, isn't it?

i bet you have to plug this in at night or you have to fill it up at a compressed air station. and so I wonder is the energy worth it? Or will it just transfer the Co emission to power plants.

I'm impressed as well and I applaud the makers/inventors.

However, the presenter needs to get the boot. He's putting way too much expectation on this.

It's not the presenter though - he's most likely just a voice actor they've got in and he's just reading what is in front of him.

But I agree with you that the presentational content is overly souped up.

i bet you have to plug this in at night or you have to fill it up at a compressed air station. and so I wonder is the energy worth it? Or will it just transfer the Co emission to power plants.

Given that power plants have become more effective, it may actually be preferable.

If, again, there was a way to make sure that you didn't suck the grid dry and thus require the power plants to fire up more than usual.

Now that's technology that would be worth something.

i bet you have to plug this in at night or you have to fill it up at a compressed air station. and so I wonder is the energy worth it? Or will it just transfer the Co emission to power plants.

It does have an ICE for the purpose of maintaining/rebuilding air pressure.

here's an article on it...
Zero-Pollution Car Coming to U.S. (http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/mar2008/bw2008032_603456.htm?chan=autos_autos+--+lifestyle+subindex+page_top+stories)

It does have an ICE for the purpose of maintaining/rebuilding air pressure.

here's an article on it...
Zero-Pollution Car Coming to U.S. (http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/mar2008/bw2008032_603456.htm?chan=autos_autos+--+lifestyle+subindex+page_top+stories)

the air must be compressed from energy in some way shape or form.

i bet you have to plug this in at night or you have to fill it up at a compressed air station. and so I wonder is the energy worth it? Or will it just transfer the Co emission to power plants.

Power plants produce far less CO2 than ICEs in per-unit terms, not the least because of the higher efficiency of power plants compared to engines when it comes to energy production. Also, since we only get ~70% of our electricity from fossil fuels, a much smaller amount of CO2 will be produced.

Power plants produce far less CO2 than ICEs in per-unit terms, not the least because of the higher efficiency of power plants compared to engines when it comes to energy production. Also, since we only get ~70% of our electricity from fossil fuels, a much smaller amount of CO2 will be produced.

Coal plants are worse then running a gasoline engine.
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c01.html
coal generates 54% of us electricity currently in the US.
and is the #1 polluter in the US.
So I am willing to bet there is a chance this car has a higher net carbon emission per mile traveled then a hybrid engine which is about to get a big boost to efficiency with the four stroke motor(compression ignition).

Sounds hopeful at the endof the video though, where they talk about the generator of compressed air being able to run on compressed air. It'll be really interesting to see how this develops.

Perpetual motion machines don't exist.

I guess, they can regenerate some energy from the braking and downhill driving (many hybrids already do that)....but that's about it.

....then a hybrid engine which is about to get a big boost to efficiency with the four stroke motor(compression ignition).

Current car engines are all four strokes. Only some bikes are two strokes to get more power (you get one power stroke per 2 instead of one per four).

Petrol / Gasoline needs higher compression ratio to self-ignite. That's why they are spark-ignited. Diesel can be compression ignited and that's what they already do currently.

I am sorry to say...but you really have to read a lot about auto engines.:p

Perpetual motion machines don't exist.

I guess, they can regenerate some energy from the braking and downhill driving (many hybrids already do that)....but that's about it.

the perpetual motion answer is the only one i get when i ask how much energy does this use.

Tell me how much compressed air at how many PSI per tank fill up and how far one can expect to drive on a tank of compressed air. or give me an amount in electricity to fill up the cars compressed air tank.
Until then I cant figure out if this is just transferring carbon out out to power plants and if it is a net lose or gain of carbon emissions.

Current car engines are all four strokes. Only some bikes are two strokes to get more power (you get one power stroke per 2 instead of one per four).

Petrol / Gasoline needs higher compression ratio to self-ignite. That's why they are spark-ignited. Diesel can be compression ignited and that's what they already do currently.

I am sorry to say...but you really have to read a lot about auto engines.:p

my bad i meant to put diesel cycle anyways using diesel cycle in a gasoline engine GM has increased efficacy by 20% (to about 40 or 50%)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8oJ4


... This sort of links into the Hybrid Car thread and how we're being screwed over just to make a profit...

Comments?

I know that perpetual motion is impossible and the air tank that supplies the compressor will have to be recharged at some point in time, but I think it is a hell of a good idea. I also like the price of around $15k. I defiantly consider getting one but wouldn't take a long trip in it. Being that small I think it would be great for around tow but not on a drive from Louisiana to Massachusetts or Alabama.

I wonder what the ratio is, of energy put in to compress the air, to energy you get out of it.

Though even if the same net amount of carbon emissions are created because of the energy needed to compress the air, then it's still a good thing because the pollution won't be clogging up our streets where pedestrians breathe it in. Still, it's not ideal in the slightest if it still requires carbon emissions to compress the air.

Sounds hopeful at the endof the video though, where they talk about the generator of compressed air being able to run on compressed air. It'll be really interesting to see how this develops.

Why not use a min nuclear power plant? :eek: Zero carbon emissions. ;) No thanks, I'll take the air car thank you. goes to service station with a roll of quarters to recharge tank and adjust tire pressure

Why not use a min nuclear power plant? :eek: Zero carbon emissions. ;) No thanks, I'll take the air car thank you. goes to service station with a roll of quarters to recharge tank and adjust tire pressure

or just use batteries and plug into a nuclear power plant for a recharge.

What about a solar cell on the car to generate electricity to compress more air?

I propose nuclear powered cars...or GN Drives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mobile_Suit_Gundam_00_technology#GN_Drive) :D

What about a solar cell on the car to generate electricity to compress more air?

yes and a really rainy week when you most want to take your car to work you cant because there is not enough sun.

Eventually, we'll be using so much air for cars that we wont have enough to breathe

Eventually, we'll be using so much air for cars that we wont have enough to breathe

Er... it is being released again as soon as the compressed air is put to use.

Not to mention it would take a MASSIVE amount of material to build enough compression tanks to hold so much air that we wouldn't be able to breathe.

Not to mention we probably won't be using that technology in any widespread form.

Not to mention is also a very odd way to start to mention something.