Car powered by Compressed Air

[Milton Platt]

Do you think this is a good idea? will it catch on?

How green it is depends upon the energy needed to compress the air, the energy needed to make he car and it's heavy tank to hold said compressed air, and what kind of fuel is consumed to compress the air.

 

[columbus]

All compressors run on the same thing, electricity. I don't see how a compressed air car could outperform an electric car with regenerating brakes.
Unless the compressors were run by some kind of waste energy from something else. But even then, feeding an electricity grid seems more sensible.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

All compressors run on the same thing, electricity. I don't see how a compressed air car could outperform an electric car with regenerating brakes.
Unless the compressors were run by some kind of waste energy from something else. But even then, feeding an electricity grid seems more sensible.
Tom

You're on to the reason why we see no one doing it on a commercial scale.

Let's examine a hypothetical compressed motor without any math.
Burn propane in an engine to compress air.
Let's say it's an efficient engine....30%
The compressor it powers loses much energy to heat.
Transfer compressed air to a car's tank.
More energy is lost here.
Air from tank runs the motor.
More energy is lost.

Compare that with just burning propane a car engine.....30% efficiency.
Look at all the losses avoided by skipping the air compression & expansion processes.
It's not quantitative analysis, but it illustrates where the losses are with an air motor.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Where does the energy for running the air compressor come from?

That depends on what you hook it up to. An air compressor can be powered by multiple sources, many of which are 100% renewable, though I'm sure you already know this.

 

[jonathan180iq]

How green it is depends upon the energy needed to compress the air, the energy needed to make he car and it's heavy tank to hold said compressed air, and what kind of fuel is consumed to compress the air.

Even with all things being equal, a car that's manufactured using 100% non-renewable energy but runs on renewable sources still manages a net loss in resources consumed and pollution emitted when compared to a modern vehicle which burns gas.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I am not too impressed myself. Storing mechanical energy, like air or flywheels, just isn't very efficient compared to chemical storage like batteries or fuel.
The real problem I see is that, at least in the USA, people expect one vehicle to do everything. A vehicle that is excellent for one transportation purpose is stupid for others. For example,
A short commute to work daily, with a batch of small crucial errands.
Getting quickly and on schedule between big cities.
Taking the family on a road trip to visit relatives scattered across Texas.

Investing in technology for one purpose, the first example but not the others, isn't really going to do much good. Producing electric bullet trains like we did the "freeway" system, and a rental vehicle market aimed at the occasional long trip in groups, would get us much further.
Living on a quaint little tourist attraction of an island as you do, you may find things very different. But Great Britain is already a leader in "carbon footprint" reduction.
Tom

UK is lagging at #174 on the list of 214 countries - ordered by smallest CO2 per capita,-.

The countries way ahead of all of us, holding the coveted top 10 rankings:

#1 Mali
#2 Congo
#3 Chad
#4 Burundi
#5 Afghanistan
#6 Tanzania
#7 Uganda
#8 Somalia
#9 Rwanda
#10 Niger

America lags woefully behind at #202, near countries like
Luxembourg
Australia
Canada
United Arab Emirates

But maybe if we flush enough wealth down the crapper into Solyndra, Tesla, etc we can hope to catch up to those fabulous, green, carbon-smart economies one day

 

[jonathan180iq]

UK is lagging at #174 on the list of 214 countries - ordered by smallest CO2 per capita,-.

The countries way ahead of all of us, holding the coveted top 10 rankings:

#1 Mali
#2 Congo
#3 Chad
#4 Burundi
#5 Afghanistan
#6 Tanzania
#7 Uganda
#8 Somalia
#9 Rwanda
#10 Niger

America lags woefully behind at #202, near countries like
Luxembourg
Australia
Canada
United Arab Emirates

But maybe if we flush enough wealth down the crapper into Solyndra, Tesla, etc we can hope to catch up to those fabulous, green, carbon-smart economies one day

If per capita is your sole means of judgement, then we can argue that China really doesn't pollute all that much... But that would be stupid.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html

In 2011, we produced more CO2 than Russia, India, Japan, and Germany combined.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

This is a very old idea.
Early factory trucks ran on compressed air when competing technologies were relatively spendy (electric, IC engine, steam). But they suffer from inherent inefficiency, which is why they died a natural death.
Without using advanced quantificated laser calucus.....
- It takes much more energy to compress the air than can be extracted from it.
- Energy density is low.
- "Refueling" is trickier.
- Liquid air (proposed in the video) has huge handling problems.

You cynic! it only failed because we didn't pump enough tax payer dollars into it, we could be running the whole country on compressed air if big oil wasn't keeping us all down man!

But seriously, yes- most 'green' technologies are not new, they are just so old and bad they have been long forgotten.

Many people are surprised to learn that electric cars predated the combustion engine, which made them redundant nearly a century ago,

using windmills for electricity, likewise goes back a couple of centuries, until we found more sustainable methods (sustainable when the wind stops blowing)

 

[Revoltingest]

Many people are surprised to learn that electric cars predated the combustion engine, which made them redundant nearly a century ago,

They're surprised because it's wrong.
The first car (self-powered) was steam.
The first actual production cars were gasoline powered.
(Thanx to Gottlieb Daimler for his revolutionary high-speed liquid fueled engine.)
Electrics came along soon thereafter.....died off....& are now resurging,
due solely to government subsidies & regulation.

Running replica of Daimler's first experimental engine.....

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That depends on what you hook it up to. An air compressor can be powered by multiple sources, many of which are 100% renewable, though I'm sure you already know this.

We are also unable to even come close to replacing our total energy needs with these "renewable" sources. I'm not sure at all that you already knew this.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

They're surprised because it's wrong.
The first car (self-powered) was steam.
The first actual production cars were gasoline powered.
(Thanx to Gottlieb Daimler for his revolutionary high-speed liquid fueled engine.)
Electrics came along soon thereafter.....died off....& are now resurging,
due solely to government subsidies & regulation.

Running replica of Daimler's first experimental engine.....

Okay interesting thanks!

But in terms of popularity/ market share, EVs peaked about 100 years ago when they outsold gasoline cars yes? gas engines/ drive trains were more advanced, complex than a simple electric motor and so took longer to develop

But the combustion technology improved to where EVs didn't make sense anymore, and, I'd argue, that technological gap has widened ever since- to the point that even many electric golf carts have been replaced with smooth quiet gasoline versions.

If EVs can't compete economically in a market for small, slow, simple, open air, short range vehicles- in ideal weather conditions.. that's not too promising for everyday real world use.

 

[jonathan180iq]

We are also unable to even come close to replacing our total energy needs with these "renewable" sources. I'm not sure at all that you already knew this.

True. Because our consumption rate is exorbitant and the infrastructure needed to replace the current system has yet to be implemented. But that does not mean it is impossible and that the technology does not already exist to do so. It means that a combination of factors, namely market expectation and a willingness to change, are hindering growth in the renewable industry. The attitude that you've expressed within just a few posts supports this claim.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

True. Because our consumption rate is exorbitant and the infrastructure needed to replace the current system has yet to be implemented. But that does not mean it is impossible and that the technology does not already exist to do so. It means that a combination of factors, namely market expectation and a willingness to change, are hindering growth in the renewable industry. The attitude that you've expressed within just a few posts supports this claim.

That's one perspective.

 

[Revoltingest]

The solution is easy, albeit politically impossible......
- High energy tax (accompanied by income tax reduction)
- Eliminate tax disincentives for capital improvements to conserve energy.
- Kick back, & watch the market cut energy usage by cost effective conservation & new technologies.

Libertarian pipe dream....socialist nightmare....either way, tis my favorite fantasy.

 

[columbus]

If per capita is your sole means of judgement, then we can argue that China really doesn't pollute all that much... But that would be stupid.

Why is that stupid? Sounds totally reasonable to me.
Awhile back I posted a link to a list of countries by "per capita carbon dioxide". In tons per capita, Canada, USA, and Saudi Arabia were ~17. Most industrial nations, like Japan, Israel, and Germany were in the~ 10-12 range. Great Britain and China were ~6.
In other words, fossil fuel waste is not necessary to have a quality life. We in the USA waste more per capita than most people use in total.
Recognition of this fact is crucial to making progress.
Tom

 

[Skwim]

All compressors run on the same thing, electricity. I don't see how a compressed air car could outperform an electric car with regenerating brakes.
Unless the compressors were run by some kind of waste energy from something else. But even then, feeding an electricity grid seems more sensible.
Tom

No problem. Using the generator described below all such problems are resolved. Unfortunately, it's too late for any of us to get in on the investment action. The window of opportunity to make millions on this incredible device closed, as noted below, on Friday October 3, 2014 at 8:50 am PDT.

.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Why is that stupid? Sounds totally reasonable to me.
Awhile back I posted a link to a list of countries by "per capita carbon dioxide". In tons per capita, Canada, USA, and Saudi Arabia were ~17. Most industrial nations, like Japan, Israel, and Germany were in the~ 10-12 range. Great Britain and China were ~6.
In other words, fossil fuel waste is not necessary to have a quality life. We in the USA waste more per capita than most people use in total.
Recognition of this fact is crucial to making progress.
Tom

His response wasn't directed at understanding the purpose that studying per capita useage can play in making progress. It was an attempt to defend our waste and pollution rate as not being "too bad", because by only looking at per capita rates, you'd think there wasn't a problem. That is what's stupid - and why I used China as an example. Per capita, they aren't too wasteful. (6.5 metric tons per person compared to our 17.6.) However, you can't go outside on certain days because the air quality is so poor and that nation, equal in land mass to ours, produces 27% of the world's CO2, compared to our 17%.

Thus, it's a stupid argument and why I said it shouldn't be your sole method of discernment.

 

[Acim]

Do you think this is a good idea? will it catch on?

Yes, I think it's a good idea.

Has a ways to go to catch on. Lots of competing interests, some of which won't play fairly. Even without competition and just comparing it to what exists, I'd want this for certain purposes (driving solo, at leisurely place, to go around the neighborhood), but not likely wanting this for taking long trips, hauling things, or traveling with people.

 

[ShivaFan]

Well, there are some giving what looks like some valid scientific assessment on energy, saving energy, cost, and argument against using compressed air.

Yet I will remain very optimistic on this - and would buy any IPO, stock, of any start up on this production of such vehicles in the US. I am convinced from the video, in fact I can see it with my own eyes, these vehicles work - and believe will only improve and soon. Perhaps electric cars are currently more energy efficient, and certainly I will be buying one very soon as my retirement "present" to myself. But this isn't the only selling point for the compressed air vehicles, I like the idea of using compressed air over batteries, I like their small size, and I like that they are actually fairly simple to maintain and repair. I will buy one if I can. And while perhaps not as "efficient" as electric, I think they are zero emission which I also like. I know those who use compressed air to power very powerful tools and construction tools and they prefer them over to electric power tools. There must be a reason.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, there are some giving what looks like some valid scientific assessment on energy, saving energy, cost, and argument against using compressed air.

Yet I will remain very optimistic on this - and would buy any IPO, stock, of any start up on this production of such vehicles in the US. I am convinced from the video, in fact I can see it with my own eyes, these vehicles work - and believe will only improve and soon. Perhaps electric cars are currently more energy efficient, and certainly I will be buying one very soon as my retirement "present" to myself. But this isn't the only selling point for the compressed air vehicles, I like the idea of using compressed air over batteries, I like their small size, and I like that they are actually fairly simple to maintain and repair. I will buy one if I can. And while perhaps not as "efficient" as electric, I think they are zero emission which I also like. I know those who use compressed air to power very powerful tools and construction tools and they prefer them over to electric power tools. There must be a reason.

Air tools are very inefficient compared to electric tools, but they're used because of great
power in a compact size. Poor efficiency doesn't matter because air tools have very low
power compared to cars.
Compressed air cars would be bad for the environment because of increased energy usage.
One might think that they're low emission, but this is wrong....they move the emissions from
the tailpipe to the smokestack. Moreover, the only way to make them even remotely practical
is with gas burners preheating the air ahead of the motor (which conserves air supply).
Now, we're back to tailpipe emissions. (Although external combustion heat engines have
fuel flexibility & potential for cleaner burning.)