I recently saw a print article about this topic, not sure if this is
the full thing, but quite interesting to me.
"The chassis that's sitting in a workroom on the campus of San Diego
State University is painted a shade of red you'd expect to see on the
lips of an attention-starved woman. On a car, the color conjures up
speed, sass, and power. But this car's looks are deceptive. Although
it can blast from a standstill to 60 miles per hour in less than five
seconds, a single gallon of fuel can propel the vehicle 80 miles. The
engine is augmented by a battery-powered motor, which can be recharged
by plugging a cord into an ordinary wall socket. And the engine fuel?
You can run it on diesel if that's convenient. But soybean oil works
just as well."
"San Diego State University Professor Jim Burns says people have asked
him where they could buy a car like this. "Nowhere," he has to say.
When Burns and his team of engineering students designed and built the
car -- which they called the "Enigma" -- they weren't trying to develop
a commercial product. Instead they wanted to prove that it was possible
to make an automobile that used no fossil fuels, got phenomenal
mileage, and looked and performed like a race car. Four years later,
Burns and a new team of students are attempting to transform
Chevrolet's Equinox into the kind of SUV even an environmentalist could
love. Their work is part of the Challenge X competition, which is being
cosponsored by General Motors and the Department of Energy. Theirs is
one of 17 teams, and hardly among the front-runners."
The team's site is at:
It is used as a power source, just not the only power source. There are
many modes of operation where the power required by a hybrid exceeds
what the gasoline engine alone can provide and then the battery pack is
a power source.
They proved that there was a market for HIGHLY subsidized electric
vehicles. If they had charged what these vehicles actually cost them,
they market would have likely been zero. A subsidized market doesn't
reflect the true underlying demand.
Yep, the glow will wear off in a few more years as the first vehicles
begin to require substantial maintenance and replacement of expensive
Which is the best make and model of Hybrid cars and/or fuel cells
I guess all the major car companies have at least one for you to try
Lets say ordinary petrol/diesel cars have a lifespan of 10 years with
all their moving parts
The fuel cell cars have a lot less moving parts and theoretically they
could last for decades
We are then talking about comfort and usability of the cars
You do not take ordinary car and turn it into a fuel cell car
Because we are in fact talking about a revolution, there is hardly any
experince with these cars yet
Even if the numbers are marginal at the moment in a few years they will
be taking over from the others
There is not much production capacity for these cars yet
It is changing dramatically and fast
All the infrastructures for energydistribution needs to be built up and
The need for oil will eventually drop
Fuel cells can be used for heating up houses and in your cell phones
Nuclear plants will be built to generate electricity
There is a lot riding on this new technology
We may not need to pay terrorists for the energy in the future
Yes exactly. We have a few squillion square miles of unused dirt (so have you)
that we could store horrendous amounts of waste. If you fly over Canada you get
some idea of just how much unused dirt we really have. It's even bigger then
Texas! (O: (O:
fusion has only helium and energy as results
What you may be thinking of are some experiments have needed fission as
then you may get some waste from the starter
Other methods of starters give no waste
Fusion contained in a magnetic fields and started by electricity is the
future of nuclear
Until then fission is a good alternative and has a proven very good
Nuclear will rise again
No. You are ignoring the facts of real engineering, as opposed to
an ideal thought experiment - which can never be realized in the
physical world. All current experiments in fusion have resulted
in radioactive waste - google TFTR, or google fusion waste if you
All fusion reactors will, unavoidably, produce radioactive waste,
mostly due to the interaction of the neutron flux produced as it
impacts the vessel walls or coolant.
The fission solution is available, safe, competitive, reliable,
operational. The problem of high
activity waste disposal is, objectively, a minor problem, changed into
a severe social
problem by mass medias. The nuclear waste problem is tiny compared to
the gigantic one
generated by billions tons of CO2, SO2, NOX sent every year in our
Fusion is without waste
You don't think we could re-enrich it and send it to be stored where
we get all of our oil from at the moment? We've got lots of unused
ICBM's sitting around ;-) Kidding of course ;-)
BTW How much waste is generated by fusion reactors? can't be too much.
I believe that there's more radioactive medical waste generated than
power plant radioactive waste. (but I could be wrong) No one is
saying that we should quit treating people to reduce pollution are
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.