The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: Punjab The Sailor Man on 24 Sep 2007 19:22 BradGuth wrote: > On Aug 8, 5:47 pm, RichD <r_delaney2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Jul 28, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> This is another reason why hybrids make more sense. Pure EVs >>>>>> have too many limitations. >>>>> If they could recharge in 10 mins, the US power grid would burn out >>>> What about these? >>>> http://altairnano.com/markets_amps.html >>> Shockingly expensive. $75,000 per vehicle just for batteries. >>> http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/07/altair_nanotech.html >> Expensive, who cares? We're talking about the >> ENVIRONMENT, we can't worry about filty lucre. >> What are you, a greedy Republican? >> >> Let the gov't fund it, won't cost a farthing! That's >> why we need visionaries like Al Gore, bold men >> not afraid to take on the special interests, leading >> by example. > > I agree. What else is our government good for, if not to impress us > with all of it's wizardly expertise and can-do mindset. > - > > The all electric car is technically doable, although having even a > small onboard ICE for the minimal cruising needs of sustaining 60+ mph > might represent a good compromise, especially if it's contributing > zero NOx and minimal CO2 at a hybrid usage of 200 empg per fossil fuel > usage. > > The Electric Car / sci.electronics.design > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.design/browse_frm/thread/2bfee708dee351b9? > On Sep 22, 5:26 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: >> BradGuthwrote: >>> Eeyore wrote: >>>> BradGuthwrote: >>>>> Luck has little if anything to do with those regular laws of physics, >>>>> although the R&D science of getting this 100 empg Hummer or the 200 >>>>> empg GM Volt into the dumbfounded hands of the typical village idiot >>>>> end-user is going to require some degree of luck. >>>> The 'regular laws of physics' are going to prevent both of those ever happening. >>> Arnt you being a silly brown-nosed clown again, and for otherwise >>> being stuck in that land of naysayism, as representing your one and >>> only status quo norm. >> I suggest you find out the frontal area and drag coefficient of a Hummer, plus its >> weight and rolling resistance. >> >> If you had the ability to do the required 'sums' I'm sure you'll find that the power >> required to propel it under a typical driving regime will never allow '100 mpg' or its >> equivalent. Ditto for 200 mpg and the Volt. > > Double ditto right back at you, as I've been there and done that. Of > course double-ditto-duh once again, as it's hybrid city or local > commute empg, and having replaced our mostly N2 atmosphere with that > robust fluid of h2o2, so that we obtain the most clean energy and best > amount of bang per gallon of whatever fossil or biofuel, is actually > accomplished within existing physics and doable technology. > > I believe the mass ratio is something like roughly 7:1 up to 7.2:1 for > h2o2/c12h26 (hydrogen peroxide / kerosene or RP-1), a little better on > certain heavier fuel oils such as diesel No.2 and perhaps nearly as > good enough with plain old gasoline, and a bit worse off with certain > biofuels, though all dual fuel injected and 100% computer controlled > (of course), so that your little zero NOx engine for that hybrid > Hummer or GM Volt can safely mix and match to almost any combination > of fossil and biofuels as your heart desires. > http://www.dunnspace.com/alternate_ssto_propellants.htm > > We're also talking about a fairly small radial turbine or some other > rotary efficient engine that's driving a direct coupled high speed > alternator. I suppose you've got those insurmountable problems with > that as well. > > What's your sorry excuse for being such an all-knowing naysay stick in > the mud? > - Brad Guth - > How about a propane hybrid?
From: John Fields on 24 Sep 2007 19:37 On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:17:25 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >BradGuth wrote: > >> Isn't 10% of something that's clean and renewable better off than 100% >> of what's further pillaging, raping and polluting of mother Earth >> that's anything but renewable? > >Meaningless MORONIC mumbo-jumbo. --- Typical response from someone who's ancestry dictates that raping and pillaging is de rigueur. -- JF
From: Eeyore on 24 Sep 2007 20:18 John Fields wrote: > Eeyore wrote: > >BradGuth wrote: > > > >> Isn't 10% of something that's clean and renewable better off than 100% > >> of what's further pillaging, raping and polluting of mother Earth > >> that's anything but renewable? > > > >Meaningless MORONIC mumbo-jumbo. > > --- > Typical response from someone who's ancestry dictates that raping > and pillaging is de rigueur. Meaningless MORONIC mumbo-jumbo.
From: JosephKK on 24 Sep 2007 23:20 BradGuth bradguth(a)gmail.com posted to sci.electronics.design: > On Sep 24, 10:05 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: >> John Larkin wrote: >> >BradGuthwrote: >> >> > >> Wild idea breakthroughs are a staple around here. The burden >> > >> of proof is on the presenter, to explain why it might work and >> > >> then to explain why it isn't already being done. Sorry, >> > >> conspiracy theories are not accepted. >> >> > >I've posted such numbers dozens of times, and your PC or MAC can >> > >otherwise search for and thus uncover all the fancy numbers >> > >you'd care >> > >to review. However, from time to time I'll edit and thereby >> > >revise upon a given application. >> >> > OK, refresh my memory: if we convert aluminum oxide to metallic >> > aluminum by electrolytic smelting, and convert the aluminum back >> > to electricity in a Al-H2O2 battery, what's the net efficiency? >> >> Brad Gruth doesn't care about efficiency. In his world there will >> be limitless FREE solar power to do this. > > I guess you know lots more than most of us village idiots, as to > where that 64,000+ teraWatts of solar energy is going, along with > the 7.2e20 kw that's continually existing somewhere between us and > our moon, not to mention terrestrial wind that's seriously kicking > our AGW butts, plus tidal flows and geothermal energy that's clearly > for the taking by those half as smart as Warren Buffett, and that's > only demanding that you be 1% as smart as our resident LLPOF > warlord(GW Bush). > > Are you saying thar Eeyore and company isn't 1% as smart as GW Bush? > >> >> At which point of course he simply shows himself to be a clueless >> IDIOT. > > At least the mindset of this supposed "clueless IDIOT" hasn't > imposed or otherwise caused any collateral damage or carnage of the > innocent. How about your energy sucking and global polluting self? > - Brad Guth - Well, hell, there you go throwing some large numbers around. where do they come from? Do you even know? Where did you get 64,000 terawatts? Where did you get 7.2E20 kW?
From: bill on 24 Sep 2007 23:35
On Sep 24, 7:22 pm, Punjab The Sailor Man <boobooililili...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > BradGuth wrote: > > On Aug 8, 5:47 pm, RichD <r_delaney2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 28, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>> This is another reason why hybrids make more sense. Pure EVs > >>>>>> have too many limitations. > >>>>> If they could recharge in 10 mins, the US power grid would burn out > >>>> What about these? > >>>>http://altairnano.com/markets_amps.html > >>> Shockingly expensive. $75,000 per vehicle just for batteries. > >>>http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/07/altair_nanotech.html > >> Expensive, who cares? We're talking about the > >> ENVIRONMENT, we can't worry about filty lucre. > >> What are you, a greedy Republican? > > >> Let the gov't fund it, won't cost a farthing! That's > >> why we need visionaries like Al Gore, bold men > >> not afraid to take on the special interests, leading > >> by example. > > > I agree. What else is our government good for, if not to impress us > > with all of it's wizardly expertise and can-do mindset. > > - > > > The all electric car is technically doable, although having even a > > small onboard ICE for the minimal cruising needs of sustaining 60+ mph > > might represent a good compromise, especially if it's contributing > > zero NOx and minimal CO2 at a hybrid usage of 200 empg per fossil fuel > > usage. > > > The Electric Car / sci.electronics.design > >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.design/browse_frm/thre... > > On Sep 22, 5:26 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> > > wrote: > >> BradGuthwrote: > >>> Eeyore wrote: > >>>> BradGuthwrote: > >>>>> Luck has little if anything to do with those regular laws of physics, > >>>>> although the R&D science of getting this 100 empg Hummer or the 200 > >>>>> empg GM Volt into the dumbfounded hands of the typical village idiot > >>>>> end-user is going to require some degree of luck. > >>>> The 'regular laws of physics' are going to prevent both of those ever happening. > >>> Arnt you being a silly brown-nosed clown again, and for otherwise > >>> being stuck in that land of naysayism, as representing your one and > >>> only status quo norm. > >> I suggest you find out the frontal area and drag coefficient of a Hummer, plus its > >> weight and rolling resistance. > > >> If you had the ability to do the required 'sums' I'm sure you'll find that the power > >> required to propel it under a typical driving regime will never allow '100 mpg' or its > >> equivalent. Ditto for 200 mpg and the Volt. > > > Double ditto right back at you, as I've been there and done that. Of > > course double-ditto-duh once again, as it's hybrid city or local > > commute empg, and having replaced our mostly N2 atmosphere with that > > robust fluid of h2o2, so that we obtain the most clean energy and best > > amount of bang per gallon of whatever fossil or biofuel, is actually > > accomplished within existing physics and doable technology. > > > I believe the mass ratio is something like roughly 7:1 up to 7.2:1 for > > h2o2/c12h26 (hydrogen peroxide / kerosene or RP-1), a little better on > > certain heavier fuel oils such as diesel No.2 and perhaps nearly as > > good enough with plain old gasoline, and a bit worse off with certain > > biofuels, though all dual fuel injected and 100% computer controlled > > (of course), so that your little zero NOx engine for that hybrid > > Hummer or GM Volt can safely mix and match to almost any combination > > of fossil and biofuels as your heart desires. > >http://www.dunnspace.com/alternate_ssto_propellants.htm > > > We're also talking about a fairly small radial turbine or some other > > rotary efficient engine that's driving a direct coupled high speed > > alternator. I suppose you've got those insurmountable problems with > > that as well. > > > What's your sorry excuse for being such an all-knowing naysay stick in > > the mud? > > - Brad Guth - > > How about a propane hybrid? Please don't feed the troll. Guth is a stupid freak, and replying to him is pissing in the wind. |