Car powered by compressed air?

G

Greegor

Guest
http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm

http://www.mdi.lu/english/

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2010/10/27/ef.air.pod.car.bk.c.cnn

Car powered by compressed air.

French Company MDI, Cyril and Gee Negre, Motor Development
International

Euros 7K or $15K US per car, called "Airpod"

They have a compressor which can be run from
the released air before venting to recover some
more of the stored energy.

It looks very light and the front wheel diameter worries me.

Would a beefier version of this work for US Commuters, trucks, etc?

What would the drawbacks of such technology be?
 
"Greegor"
http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm
http://www.mdi.lu/english/
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2010/10/27/ef.air.pod.car.bk.c.cnn

Car powered by compressed air.
Click to expand...
** Compressed by what ?

French Company MDI, Cyril and Gee Negre, Motor Development
International
Euros 7K or $15K US per car, called "Airpod"
They have a compressor which can be run from
the released air before venting to recover some
more of the stored energy.
It looks very light and the front wheel diameter worries me.
Would a beefier version of this work for US Commuters, trucks, etc?
What would the drawbacks of such technology be?
Click to expand...

** Many and massive.

See:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/news/compressed-air-car-myth

" Last year, Schipper co-authored a study showing compressed air's
inefficiency: per volume, it contains only 12 percent of the energy in
lithium-ion batteries and 1 percent in that of gasoline. Worse: as clean as
it sounds environmentally, the air vehicle isn't all that clean-but the
emissions come from the power plant instead of the tailpipes. "

To coin a phrase - it's all a load of hot air.



...... Phil
 
On 3/14/2011 2:34 AM, Phil Allison wrote:
"Greegor"
http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm
http://www.mdi.lu/english/
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2010/10/27/ef.air.pod.car.bk.c.cnn

Car powered by compressed air.

** Compressed by what ?

French Company MDI, Cyril and Gee Negre, Motor Development
International
Euros 7K or $15K US per car, called "Airpod"
They have a compressor which can be run from
the released air before venting to recover some
more of the stored energy.
It looks very light and the front wheel diameter worries me.
Would a beefier version of this work for US Commuters, trucks, etc?
What would the drawbacks of such technology be?


** Many and massive.

See:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/news/compressed-air-car-myth

" Last year, Schipper co-authored a study showing compressed air's
inefficiency: per volume, it contains only 12 percent of the energy in
lithium-ion batteries and 1 percent in that of gasoline. Worse: as clean as
it sounds environmentally, the air vehicle isn't all that clean-but the
emissions come from the power plant instead of the tailpipes. "

To coin a phrase - it's all a load of hot air.



..... Phil
Click to expand...

Correct. In addition, you cannot recover the released energy without
reducing the driving energy. TANSTAAFL.

John
 
"Greegor"

Can it be made safe enough and
economical enough for trucks and cars?
Click to expand...

** You falsely presume it is anywhere near capable of such a task.




..... Phil
 
Greegor wrote:

Somebody commented that to get 100 HP
output the compressor would burn 800 HP
worth of electricity.

Is that true?

Yes.
Click to expand...

Dragging 400 Lbs of battery plates and electrolyte
around and replacing it at $20K every few years
sure doesn't seem very efficient either.

Nope.
Click to expand...

Buying foreign oil just seems like it supports
our enemies too much.
Click to expand...
Yup.
We've got a lot of LP/Natural gas, right?

Yup.
Click to expand...

Can it be made safe enough and
economical enough for trucks and cars?
Click to expand...
Well, probably, since they've been doing it for decades.

What do they use for free energy on Planet Googlegroups?

Thanks,
Rich
 
Somebody commented that to get 100 HP
output the compressor would burn 800 HP
worth of electricity.

Is that true?

Dragging 400 Lbs of battery plates and electrolyte
around and replacing it at $20K every few years
sure doesn't seem very efficient either.

Buying foreign oil just seems like it supports
our enemies too much.

We've got a lot of LP/Natural gas, right?

Can it be made safe enough and
economical enough for trucks and cars?
 
On 3/14/2011 3:34 AM, Phil Allison wrote:
"Greegor"
http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm
http://www.mdi.lu/english/
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2010/10/27/ef.air.pod.car.bk.c.cnn

Car powered by compressed air.

** Compressed by what ?

French Company MDI, Cyril and Gee Negre, Motor Development
International
Euros 7K or $15K US per car, called "Airpod"
They have a compressor which can be run from
the released air before venting to recover some
more of the stored energy.
It looks very light and the front wheel diameter worries me.
Would a beefier version of this work for US Commuters, trucks, etc?
What would the drawbacks of such technology be?


** Many and massive.

See:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/news/compressed-air-car-myth

" Last year, Schipper co-authored a study showing compressed air's
inefficiency: per volume, it contains only 12 percent of the energy in
lithium-ion batteries and 1 percent in that of gasoline. Worse: as clean as
it sounds environmentally, the air vehicle isn't all that clean-but the
emissions come from the power plant instead of the tailpipes. "

To coin a phrase - it's all a load of hot air.



..... Phil
Click to expand...
Worse is the "Excuse me, I have to stop and blow up my car..."



--
I'm never going to grow up.
 
Worse: as clean as
it sounds environmentally, the air vehicle isn't all that clean-but the
emissions come from the power plant instead of the tailpipes.
Click to expand...
Just like electric cars - they run on coal.

Sylvia.
 
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:01:51 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:

On 3/14/2011 3:34 AM, Phil Allison wrote:
"Greegor"
http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm
http://www.mdi.lu/english/
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2010/10/27/ef.air.pod.car.bk.c.cnn

Car powered by compressed air.

** Compressed by what ?

French Company MDI, Cyril and Gee Negre, Motor Development
International
Euros 7K or $15K US per car, called "Airpod"
They have a compressor which can be run from
the released air before venting to recover some
more of the stored energy.
It looks very light and the front wheel diameter worries me.
Would a beefier version of this work for US Commuters, trucks, etc?
What would the drawbacks of such technology be?


** Many and massive.

See:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/news/compressed-air-car-myth

" Last year, Schipper co-authored a study showing compressed air's
inefficiency: per volume, it contains only 12 percent of the energy in
lithium-ion batteries and 1 percent in that of gasoline. Worse: as clean as
it sounds environmentally, the air vehicle isn't all that clean-but the
emissions come from the power plant instead of the tailpipes. "

To coin a phrase - it's all a load of hot air.



..... Phil



Worse is the "Excuse me, I have to stop and blow up my car..."
Click to expand...

He'll huff, and he'll puff and he'll... blow your car up!

Air motors couldn't even haul three little pigs, much less at American
highway speeds.
 
Wimpie wrote:
On 14 mar, 08:19, Greegor<greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm

http://www.mdi.lu/english/

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2010/10/27/ef.air....

Car powered by compressed air.

French Company MDI, Cyril and Gee Negre, Motor Development
International

Euros 7K or $15K US per car, called "Airpod"

They have a compressor which can be run from
the released air before venting to recover some
more of the stored energy.

It looks very light and the front wheel diameter worries me.

Would a beefier version of this work for US Commuters, trucks, etc?

What would the drawbacks of such technology be?

Hello Greegor,

Their website shows some figures:

Tank volume: 175 liters, pressure 350Barg

When isothermally discharging this volume to 1 Barg, you will get 28
MJ from the tank. I can hardly imagine that the exhaust gas
temperature will be equal to ambient temperature, so the net energy
will be less.

For comparison, Petrol and Diesel have energy densities of about 35 MJ/
liter.

This shows that the amount of stored energy in the pressure cylinders
is less then that of 1liter petrol. To have a useful range, this
requires extreme change in driving behavior and car design.

Overall efficiency is another issue.
Air compression is inefficient if you can't use the generated heat.
You need to add more then twice the mechanical energy to the gas to
compress the air to 350 bar.

Given the efficiency of the compressor itself (friction, leakage, etc)
I have doubts whether they will reach 25% efficiency for pressurizing
the tanks. Of course, during winter the generated heat can be used for
heating.

When you "charge" the tanks at home (from the mains), you also have to
include the (low) overall efficiency of the electrical energy (from
power plant to the socket at home).

Besides some niches (explosive environments?), electric traction will
outperform the "air" variety in my opinion (better efficiency, better
control).
Click to expand...

Not to mention being a lot safer in a collision.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058

email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) net
http://electrooptical.net
 
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:51:27 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Wimpie wrote:


When isothermally discharging this volume to 1 Barg, you will get 28
MJ from the tank. I can hardly imagine that the exhaust gas
temperature will be equal to ambient temperature, so the net energy
will be less.

For comparison, Petrol and Diesel have energy densities of about 35 MJ/
liter.

This shows that the amount of stored energy in the pressure cylinders
is less then that of 1liter petrol. To have a useful range, this
requires extreme change in driving behavior and car design.

Overall efficiency is another issue.
Air compression is inefficient if you can't use the generated heat.
You need to add more then twice the mechanical energy to the gas to
compress the air to 350 bar.

Given the efficiency of the compressor itself (friction, leakage, etc)
I have doubts whether they will reach 25% efficiency for pressurizing
the tanks. Of course, during winter the generated heat can be used for
heating.

When you "charge" the tanks at home (from the mains), you also have to
include the (low) overall efficiency of the electrical energy (from
power plant to the socket at home).

Besides some niches (explosive environments?), electric traction will
outperform the "air" variety in my opinion (better efficiency, better
control).


Not to mention being a lot safer in a collision.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
Click to expand...
Since they'll only do 30 kph when (lightly)loaded!
 
Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:51:27 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Wimpie wrote:


When isothermally discharging this volume to 1 Barg, you will get 28
MJ from the tank. I can hardly imagine that the exhaust gas
temperature will be equal to ambient temperature, so the net energy
will be less.

For comparison, Petrol and Diesel have energy densities of about 35 MJ/
liter.

This shows that the amount of stored energy in the pressure cylinders
is less then that of 1liter petrol. To have a useful range, this
requires extreme change in driving behavior and car design.

Overall efficiency is another issue.
Air compression is inefficient if you can't use the generated heat.
You need to add more then twice the mechanical energy to the gas to
compress the air to 350 bar.

Given the efficiency of the compressor itself (friction, leakage, etc)
I have doubts whether they will reach 25% efficiency for pressurizing
the tanks. Of course, during winter the generated heat can be used for
heating.

When you "charge" the tanks at home (from the mains), you also have to
include the (low) overall efficiency of the electrical energy (from
power plant to the socket at home).

Besides some niches (explosive environments?), electric traction will
outperform the "air" variety in my opinion (better efficiency, better
control).


Not to mention being a lot safer in a collision.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Since they'll only do 30 kph when (lightly)loaded!
Click to expand...
Tell that to the truck that knocks a hole in a 5000 psi carbon fibre air
tank a foot away from you!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058

email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) net
http://electrooptical.net
 
On 14 mar, 08:19, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm

http://www.mdi.lu/english/

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2010/10/27/ef.air....

Car powered by compressed air.

French Company MDI, Cyril and Gee Negre, Motor Development
International

Euros 7K  or $15K US per car, called "Airpod"

They have a compressor which can be run from
the released air before venting to recover some
more of the stored energy.

It looks very light and the front wheel diameter worries me.

Would a beefier version of this work for US Commuters, trucks, etc?

What would the drawbacks of such technology be?
Click to expand...
Hello Greegor,

Their website shows some figures:

Tank volume: 175 liters, pressure 350Barg

When isothermally discharging this volume to 1 Barg, you will get 28
MJ from the tank. I can hardly imagine that the exhaust gas
temperature will be equal to ambient temperature, so the net energy
will be less.

For comparison, Petrol and Diesel have energy densities of about 35 MJ/
liter.

This shows that the amount of stored energy in the pressure cylinders
is less then that of 1liter petrol. To have a useful range, this
requires extreme change in driving behavior and car design.

Overall efficiency is another issue.
Air compression is inefficient if you can't use the generated heat.
You need to add more then twice the mechanical energy to the gas to
compress the air to 350 bar.

Given the efficiency of the compressor itself (friction, leakage, etc)
I have doubts whether they will reach 25% efficiency for pressurizing
the tanks. Of course, during winter the generated heat can be used for
heating.

When you "charge" the tanks at home (from the mains), you also have to
include the (low) overall efficiency of the electrical energy (from
power plant to the socket at home).

Besides some niches (explosive environments?), electric traction will
outperform the "air" variety in my opinion (better efficiency, better
control).

With kind regards,



Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
without abc, PM will reach me
 
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:52:02 -0700 (PDT), Wimpie <wimabctel@tetech.nl>
wrote:

On 14 mar, 15:21, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSensel...@electrooptical.net
wrote:
Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers wrote:



On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:51:27 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSensel...@electrooptical.net>  wrote:

Wimpie wrote:

When isothermally discharging this volume to 1 Barg, you will get 28
MJ from the tank. I can hardly imagine that the exhaust gas
temperature will be equal to ambient temperature, so the net energy
will be less.

For comparison, Petrol and Diesel have energy densities of about 35 MJ/
liter.

This shows that the amount of stored energy in the pressure cylinders
is less then that of 1liter petrol.  To have a useful range, this
requires extreme change in driving behavior and car design.

Overall efficiency is another issue.
Air compression is inefficient if you can't use the generated heat.
You need to add more then twice the mechanical energy to the gas to
compress the air to 350 bar.

Given the efficiency of the compressor itself (friction, leakage, etc)
I have doubts whether they will reach 25% efficiency for pressurizing
the tanks. Of course, during winter the generated heat can be used for
heating.

When you "charge" the tanks at home (from the mains), you also have to
include the (low) overall efficiency of the electrical energy (from
power plant to the socket at home).

Besides some niches (explosive environments?), electric traction will
outperform the "air" variety in my opinion (better efficiency, better
control).

Not to mention being a lot safer in a collision.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

   Since they'll only do 30 kph when (lightly)loaded!

Tell that to the truck that knocks a hole in a 5000 psi carbon fibre air
tank a foot away from you!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058

email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) nethttp://electrooptical.net

Hello Phil,

They mention to have approval for road use and they use same type of
cylinders as used for natural gas. They also mention rupture pressures
700bar.

We have public transport and private cars that run on CNG, as far as I
know, without accidents involving failure of the gas cylinders. The
cylinders are on top of the bus.

Probably you know the Seoul bus explosion.
Click to expand...
Five of them, so far.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
Click to expand...
Yikes! google

cng tank explosion

I wonder how much energy it takes to convert methane into something
more reasonable, like propane or butane or even octane? The USA has
lots of natural gas.

John
 
On 14 mar, 15:21, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSensel...@electrooptical.net>
wrote:
Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers wrote:



On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:51:27 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSensel...@electrooptical.net>  wrote:

Wimpie wrote:

When isothermally discharging this volume to 1 Barg, you will get 28
MJ from the tank. I can hardly imagine that the exhaust gas
temperature will be equal to ambient temperature, so the net energy
will be less.

For comparison, Petrol and Diesel have energy densities of about 35 MJ/
liter.

This shows that the amount of stored energy in the pressure cylinders
is less then that of 1liter petrol.  To have a useful range, this
requires extreme change in driving behavior and car design.

Overall efficiency is another issue.
Air compression is inefficient if you can't use the generated heat.
You need to add more then twice the mechanical energy to the gas to
compress the air to 350 bar.

Given the efficiency of the compressor itself (friction, leakage, etc)
I have doubts whether they will reach 25% efficiency for pressurizing
the tanks. Of course, during winter the generated heat can be used for
heating.

When you "charge" the tanks at home (from the mains), you also have to
include the (low) overall efficiency of the electrical energy (from
power plant to the socket at home).

Besides some niches (explosive environments?), electric traction will
outperform the "air" variety in my opinion (better efficiency, better
control).

Not to mention being a lot safer in a collision.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

   Since they'll only do 30 kph when (lightly)loaded!

Tell that to the truck that knocks a hole in a 5000 psi carbon fibre air
tank a foot away from you!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058

email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) nethttp://electrooptical.net
Click to expand...
Hello Phil,

They mention to have approval for road use and they use same type of
cylinders as used for natural gas. They also mention rupture pressures
700bar.
Click to expand...
We have public transport and private cars that run on CNG, as far as I
know, without accidents involving failure of the gas cylinders. The
cylinders are on top of the bus.

Probably you know the Seoul bus explosion.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
 
On 3/14/2011 5:11 AM, Greegor wrote:
Somebody commented that to get 100 HP
output the compressor would burn 800 HP
worth of electricity.

Is that true?
Click to expand...
It might be, but I don't know offhand. Consider that, when you compress
air, it heats up. Most compressors have fins for cooling. This implies
that there is a large heat loss in the compression process. So, it seems
to me that you start off with a loss before you ever get around to
putting it in the engine.

We could make some calculations, if we weren't too lazy :)

Cheers,
John
 
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:21:29 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:51:27 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Wimpie wrote:


When isothermally discharging this volume to 1 Barg, you will get 28
MJ from the tank. I can hardly imagine that the exhaust gas
temperature will be equal to ambient temperature, so the net energy
will be less.

For comparison, Petrol and Diesel have energy densities of about 35 MJ/
liter.

This shows that the amount of stored energy in the pressure cylinders
is less then that of 1liter petrol. To have a useful range, this
requires extreme change in driving behavior and car design.

Overall efficiency is another issue.
Air compression is inefficient if you can't use the generated heat.
You need to add more then twice the mechanical energy to the gas to
compress the air to 350 bar.

Given the efficiency of the compressor itself (friction, leakage, etc)
I have doubts whether they will reach 25% efficiency for pressurizing
the tanks. Of course, during winter the generated heat can be used for
heating.

When you "charge" the tanks at home (from the mains), you also have to
include the (low) overall efficiency of the electrical energy (from
power plant to the socket at home).

Besides some niches (explosive environments?), electric traction will
outperform the "air" variety in my opinion (better efficiency, better
control).


Not to mention being a lot safer in a collision.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Since they'll only do 30 kph when (lightly)loaded!

Tell that to the truck that knocks a hole in a 5000 psi carbon fibre air
tank a foot away from you!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
Click to expand...

Far better to use a standard reciprocating piston engine and compressed
Hydrogen.

I would sit at home, watching TV, and pumping the exercise bike to run
the H O separator each night. Could let a small sterling engine sit out
in the sun all day and do it while I am at work too!
 
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:52:02 -0700 (PDT), Wimpie <wimabctel@tetech.nl>
wrote:

On 14 mar, 15:21, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSensel...@electrooptical.net
wrote:
Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers wrote:



They mention to have approval for road use and they use same type of
cylinders as used for natural gas. They also mention rupture pressures
700bar.

We have public transport and private cars that run on CNG, as far as I
know, without accidents involving failure of the gas cylinders. The
cylinders are on top of the bus.

Probably you know the Seoul bus explosion.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
Click to expand...
CNG tanks are NOT 5000 psi cylinders. (If they are, they gas is
certainly not being kept at that level.

LNG is at a higher pressure.
 
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:01:46 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


Yikes! google

cng tank explosion

I wonder how much energy it takes to convert methane into something
more reasonable, like propane or butane or even octane? The USA has
lots of natural gas.

John
Click to expand...
Why 'convert' it first, idiot?
 
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 17:52:41 -0700, Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers
<theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:52:02 -0700 (PDT), Wimpie <wimabctel@tetech.nl
wrote:

On 14 mar, 15:21, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSensel...@electrooptical.net
wrote:
Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers wrote:



They mention to have approval for road use and they use same type of
cylinders as used for natural gas. They also mention rupture pressures
700bar.

We have public transport and private cars that run on CNG, as far as I
know, without accidents involving failure of the gas cylinders. The
cylinders are on top of the bus.

Probably you know the Seoul bus explosion.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl

CNG tanks are NOT 5000 psi cylinders. (If they are, they gas is
certainly not being kept at that level.

LNG is at a higher pressure.
Click to expand...
LNG doesn't need to be at high pressure. It only needs to be cold.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquefied_natural_gas

Typical pressure is only a few PSIG.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top