Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OMG - The Electric Thing is Really Happening

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Actually if I were an engineering student I'd like to build a hybrid. Internal combustion engines are the most efficient when tuned to run at one power level and rpm. Not good for driving but great for spinning a generator. A power cell could store up enough for demand.

    Plus I still say electric cars en masse will stink. If not battery fumes then just any arcing. Brushless technology will help. Boy howdy though, wait till tuners start digging into brushless controllers.
    My hobby is needing a hobby.

    Comment


    • #17
      Just my opinion, but hybrids are the way to go if one insists on some part of the drive train being electric.
      Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

      Comment


      • #18
        I'd rather save the weight and complexity and have a more mildly-tuned engine if I need mpg that bad. But we all know this isn't about mpg, really--it's about the emissions. And electric cars have none! The horrible coal plants are the killers and we should close all of them down immediately; don't even get me started on the satan that is nuke power. It should all be wind and flower fields and something else.

        <end sarcasm>

        Doesn't matter honestly, the biggest problem is that there are too many goddamn people. There is not one single eco-problem that you can't fix immediately by reducing the world population to under a billion. But that is never remotely considered by anyone, instead we blame the car.

        Comment


        • #19
          Doesn't matter honestly, the biggest problem is that there are too many goddamn people. There is not one single eco-problem that you can't fix immediately by reducing the world population to under a billion. But that is never remotely considered by anyone, instead we blame the car.
          If ANYONE believes THAT horseshit, they should start by offing themselves IMMEDIATELY.

          Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

          Comment


          • #20
            Well I think all of us would like there to be less of us as long as it isn't us we have to not have...

            Originally posted by Russell View Post
            Don't trains use diesel-electric engines / motors? Been that way for for 50 years. Wonder why they don't make trucks that way?
            The diesel-electric thing in trains is; to not have to use a mechanical transmission. Clutching and gears for 3000hp to apply full power from zero-to-whatever mph pulling however-many-million pound of rail cars (particularly when multiple locomotives are involved) would be impractical, so the diesel drives a generator which then powers electric motors to the wheels, and as noted previously the full torque at 0 rpm to get going is possible without a guy in the cab slipping a clutch or there being an inefficient fluid torque converter. Otherwise turning diesel fuel into heat, then into mechanical motion, then into electricity, then back into mechanical motion, isn't the the most best way to drive something when inefficiencies occur at each turn. The best reason (imo) to have electric motors in cars, dynamic braking returning energy to the batteries, isn't even used in locomotives as their version of dynamic braking just sends electricity produced into a resistor and blows it out the top as heat. Whatever batteries there are in a locomotive are for other uses. That is, as I understand it, I ain't the expert, I think Shep here is the guy who knows trains.

            In my years of riding bicycles for transportation, where you really care about how much energy something is taking, the one thing I wished for was some way to convert braking energy produced back into power at the wheels. As said in above posts, that is what I'd now believe electric motors powering cars would be good for, along with the possibility of having a small gas or diesel engine running constantly at it's prime efficiency with batteries then being a reservoir to accommodate varied power needed. As Stude says, the huge load of batteries you have to carry around for pure electric use is too big of a negative for this to be the answer to any but a narrow range of needs.

            I say just stop building housing tracts that are an hour drive away from where you could get work, then we get to use all the gas on the weekends having fun instead of sitting in traffic on the freeway Mon. - Friday.
            ...

            Comment


            • #21
              Locomotives don't spend a lot of their time accelerating, do they? or braking? So, not having batteries is probably a good thing, since the batteries needed would be incredibly expensive.

              But in stop and go traffic, like those commuters deal with, regenerative braking is a good thing.

              The overall end-to-end cost of electric cars vs. fuel burning cars vs. hybrid cars, both in $$$ and materials and energy use to make all this stuff, is something that's difficult to put a real number on. At least I've never seen a good, unbiased comparison.

              The future will be an interesting place, I guess I better enjoy what we have, while I can. And let the youngsters worry about it. Us old folks sure aren't doing a very good job of looking ahead.
              My fabulous web page

              "If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk

              Comment


              • #22
                Us old folks spent our lives making the world as it is. 'Tis always left to the next generation to look ahead...hopefully with some good advice from us if we have any...
                ...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by squirrel View Post
                  Locomotives don't spend a lot of their time accelerating, do they? or braking? So, not having batteries is probably a good thing, since the batteries needed would be incredibly expensive.
                  Expense, and weight. Locomotives are already built up to the limits of what railroad equipment like turntables can handle. I could image somebody gutting a locomotive shell and replacing the prime mover with batteries, then sandwiching it in between a pair of standard locomotives and wiring them together.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I really don't believe that the internal combustion engine will make it out of this century.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I expect it will be used less than it is now, but I really doubt it will go away...it's just too damn useful.
                      My fabulous web page

                      "If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by squirrel View Post
                        I expect it will be used less than it is now, but I really doubt it will go away...it's just too damn useful.
                        I'm with Jim on this one though I'll wager that the fuels (plural) will be different. Internal combustion is still the best thing going for distance travel in places like the US, Canada, Australia, etc. where there may be mega-miles to burn to get where you're going. In places like England, Japan, and much of Europe where things tend to be closer together electric and other power sources may well get the job done.

                        I suspect that hydrogen and other fuels may make inroads into the internal combustion world along with engines with permanent lubrication which would largely eliminate the waste stream from lubricants. I'm still chewing on the idea of fuel cells though they may offer some solutions, too. Nuclear powered steam? (Though probably not until fusion becomes possible).
                        Last edited by DanStokes; March 27, 2019, 10:57 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DanStokes View Post
                          Nuclear powered steam? (Though probably not until fusion becomes possible)
                          Dan
                          Bring it on! The future is looking good.

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.menaredelicious.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F07%2FSteampunk-Cafe-Racer-04.png&amp;f=1.png
Views:	20
Size:	611.7 KB
ID:	1238639



                          Of all the paths you take in life - make sure a few of them are dirt.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            The railroads have recently been experimenting with batteries, also with natural gas. They look for anything to save on fuel...it being by far there most expensive cost.
                            Last edited by Shep48COE; March 27, 2019, 01:04 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Shep48COE View Post
                              The railroads have recently been experimenting with batteries, also with natural gas. They look for anything to save on fuel...it being by far there most expensive cost.
                              The railroads and the trucking industry have forever been in competition. The railroads have the numbers, cost per ton/mile. It's sort of like passenger miles with the airlines. That's what makes flying "safer" than driving, by the numbers. Put 200 people on a big jet and fly 2000 miles. That's 400,000 passenger miles right there in a few hours. It takes one person a real long time to drive a car that far.
                              Charter member of the Turd Nuggets

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Also, almost all locomotives are equipped with auto start/ shut down. If not used in 10 minutes they shut down.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X