The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 30 Sep 2007 12:09 In article <n9sif3lhbmsjssgl9g157k44lep378dh7v(a)4ax.com>, jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says... > 8. Petrochemicals are far too valuable as motor vehicle fuels and > chemical feedstocks to waste producing inefficient stuff like > hydrogen. 8a. ...or as other stationary fuels, like heating. > 9. Things that work made it to the top of the heap because they work. > > 10. The engineering mindset is to design new things, but things that > work. > > 11. H2O2 is nasty, dangerous, expensive, silly stuff. Next he's going to want to use red-fuming nitric acid. Hey, it worked, sorta, for rocket fuel too. -- Keith
From: krw on 30 Sep 2007 12:24 In article <pan.2007.09.30.11.56.08.561604(a)cerebrumconfus.it>, excretatauris(a)cerebrumconfus.it says... > On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:32:07 -0400, daestrom wrote: > > > 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. > > Better still, use supercritical O2. Imagine the scene, driving down the > interstate: "Give the tanks a stir, honey" ;-) Better yet, use the air around the vehicle (it's free) and forget all this bullshit about H2O2. -- Keith
From: daestrom on 30 Sep 2007 16:25 "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:46FEE2E4.FAB793FC(a)earthlink.net... > BradGuth wrote: >> >> On Sep 27, 10:54 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> >> wrote: >> > BradGuth wrote: >> > >> > > Eeyore is simply a traditional usenet naysaying Yid, as a spook, mole >> > > or whatever that's working for and/or on behalf of ExxonMobil, or >> > > else >> > > working for Hitler's Third Reich. >> > >> > > Eeyore is opposed to everything that's not of his idea, and he really >> > > doesn't have any such ideas because it's not within the authority of >> > > his official job. >> > > -BradGuth- >> > >> > While you are just a bottom feeding troll. >> >> What exactly is your insurmountable hatred of humanity and total >> disdain against or utter disregard of our badly failing environment >> all about? > > > The thing I *hate* the most on this earth is the 'incurably > ignorant'. Its not just that they don't know, but that they don't want > to know. > As a comedian is fond of saying, you can fix ugly, but you can't fix stupid. daestrom
From: daestrom on 30 Sep 2007 16:28 "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:MPG.2169978dcd62c49498aaaa(a)news.individual.net... > In article <pan.2007.09.30.11.56.08.561604(a)cerebrumconfus.it>, > excretatauris(a)cerebrumconfus.it says... >> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:32:07 -0400, daestrom wrote: >> >> > 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. >> >> Better still, use supercritical O2. Imagine the scene, driving down the >> interstate: "Give the tanks a stir, honey" ;-) > > Better yet, use the air around the vehicle (it's free) and forget all > this bullshit about H2O2. > Aw... But then you have to either separate it from the N2 on the fly, or you run the risk of creating NOx. And all that N2 lowers your flame temperature. Two things Brad is obsessed with avoiding, no matter how much it takes. daestrom
From: BradGuth on 30 Sep 2007 18:53
On Sep 29, 8:52 am, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:28:41 -0700, BradGuth <bradg...(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? Love to. Would you or anyone you know of care to help? We'll need a master wizard in ceramics and a few other good minds, as otherwise most everything else is off-the-shelf (sort of speak). - Brad Guth - |