The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: BradGuth on 29 Sep 2007 00:54 On Sep 28, 4:18 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > Who cares about footprints and foundations? Making the windmill towers > out of skinny carbon-fiber-kevlar composites could reduce their > cross-sectional area by a factor of 10. So what? Is kilowatts per > square foot of tower cross-section some sort of figure of merit? Nothing fancy, just stick with a good alloy of steel, perhaps with a wee bit of titanium tossed in for good measure. The actual reinforced foundation is entirely underground, thus out of sight and out of mind, whereas just the base diameter of the tower itself is taking away terrestrial space that can't be otherwise utilized, that is unless you created the likes of offices or daycare facilities within the tower itself, in which case the energy density/m2 is greater yet because the wholesale footprint of what's taken away is even smaller. I bet China could supply those kinds of 100~125 meter tall towers (some assembly required) at 10 cents on our badly inflated dollar. - Brad Guth -
From: JosephKK on 29 Sep 2007 08:05 John Fields jfields(a)austininstruments.com posted to sci.electronics.design: > On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 08:04:41 -0700, John Larkin > <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 07:20:50 GMT, "rick_sobie(a)hotmail.com" >><me(a)my.com> wrote: > >>>And bumble bees cannot fly. >>> >> >>They sure can't do math. > > --- > They can't write it down, but they can sure do it. > > You must mean something very different than typical usage. ;~(
From: John Larkin on 29 Sep 2007 11:52 On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:28:41 -0700, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Sep 28, 2:46 pm, rick_so...(a)hotmail.com wrote: >> >> Well I guess you could go for a rotary engine as well. Or anything you >> wanted if you design it yourself. >> The nice thing is, that the fuel system, is the simplest part. When a >> big car company like GM sets out to make a concept car, they spend >> millions. With HHO or whatever water system you can invent, it costs >> little to make the thing. >> So then you just put it in a nice car. >> >> These guys here send a car builder to your house, and help you build a >> car, in less than 7 days,http://www.lonestarclassics.com/index.cfm >> >> Here is a concept car, that someone is building from scratch as a >> hobby. http://www.baileyspeed.com/ http://www.kitcarsforum.com/b1-concept-kit-project-t8766.0.html > >Actually any old existing car will do just fine and dandy with my h2o2/ >c12h26 IC engine. I could get a 1956 Buick or even a Ford Edsel up to >100+ empg without hardly trying, and at zero NOx to boot. "Could"? Then why don't you do it? John
From: Rich Grise on 29 Sep 2007 17:14 On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 08:52:25 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:28:41 -0700, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>On Sep 28, 2:46 pm, rick_so...(a)hotmail.com wrote: >>> >>> Well I guess you could go for a rotary engine as well. Or anything you >>> wanted if you design it yourself. >>> The nice thing is, that the fuel system, is the simplest part. When a >>> big car company like GM sets out to make a concept car, they spend >>> millions. With HHO or whatever water system you can invent, it costs >>> little to make the thing. >>> So then you just put it in a nice car. >>> >>> These guys here send a car builder to your house, and help you build a >>> car, in less than 7 days,http://www.lonestarclassics.com/index.cfm >>> >>> Here is a concept car, that someone is building from scratch as a >>> hobby. http://www.baileyspeed.com/ >>> http://www.kitcarsforum.com/b1-concept-kit-project-t8766.0.html >> >>Actually any old existing car will do just fine and dandy with my h2o2/ >>c12h26 IC engine. I could get a 1956 Buick or even a Ford Edsel up to >>100+ empg without hardly trying, and at zero NOx to boot. > > "Could"? Then why don't you do it? He probably wants to scare up some "funding" first. ;-) Cheers! Rich
From: daestrom on 29 Sep 2007 18:32
"BradGuth" <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1191040723.575140.113310(a)g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > On Sep 28, 12:44 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: >> BradGuth wrote: >> > Brown's Peroxide Gas would make a good enough go-between to otherwise >> > having my full blown liquid h2o2/c12h26 one-cycle little engine for >> > those hybrid Hummers. >> >> C12H26 ? >> >> Bwahahahaahahahaahahaa >> >> You mean diesel fuel ? > > c12h26 is just your most basic diesel/kerosene formula. Use whatever > fossil heating oil or biofuel that makes you a happy camper, because > the h2o2 will simply get the most thermaldynamic worth out of that > fossil or biofuel, and without introducing zilch worth of NOx. > Why bother with h2o2? Straight O2 would result in even higher temperatures. Why add another two more water molecules to the reaction and have to heat them up as well? Of course, straight O2 is a bit hard to package in a vehicle, so use LOX. It's about as easy to come by as hi-grade h2o2. I mean, if you're going to dream, dream big. daestrom |