In defense of the gasoline-powered internal combustion engine

As always, never ever click on URLs that are obfuscated and from posters who you don't know are safe.

PeterD wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

The URL redirects twice to something called "carlustblog", which doesn't even have an A record. Copious amounts of "random thought" text, with Javascript & hit-counters mixed in.

Might actually be legit, but I'm not gonna let any browser of mine render it. I used a utility that displays the code, but doesn't render anything.

The Honda Fit described in the article gets 35 mpg highway, not 40. Even my Ford Focus gets 35 mpg highway. Makes one wonder about the accuracy of the rest of the article.

But, overall, I liked the article and agree with it. Cars with internal combustion engines have some great advantages over other fuel-type vehicle - good for both short distance daily commutes and cross-country drives, quickly filled up, safe and reliable. Electric vehicles don't have the ability to be filled up rapidly (unless you change batteries which is technically possible to do in a few minutes but not often done that way).

Cars are clearly a major advance. So is sanitation (image what it would be like getting rid of all the body waste in an apartment building with

1000 occupants - not mention the waste of all the people in Philly, NYC or San Francisco), clean water, elevators (hard to get past 5 or so floors without elevators, made high rises possible), telephones and internet, and public transportation.

fantastic at

Today's car and

essentially a

acknowledge and

some time to

"In defense of the electric car":

"rough edges".... Would it interest your narrow vision to learn that this "miracle" has been around for over 100 years... and the "rough edges" get knocked off it quite regularly. Take a look at the EcoBoost engine - see where it is in terms of advancement and imagine what the future may bring.

So.... is the infernal (sic) combustion engine a boon? or is it a bust. The answer is a resounding "YES". It has given the world a mobility that the horse and buggy never could... and it has been the cause of much grief. Welcome to real life... this is where we experience trade offs...

As far as internal combustion technology is concerned, I am reasonably sure that the engineers favour the diesel engine over spark ignition engines - the advent of direct gasoline injection may change that - even though the diesel engine requires special, expensive after treatments to meet todays stringent clean air requirements.

Some suggested research. Procure a copy of "The High Speed Internal Combustion Engine" - this was written by Sir Harry Ricardo in 1923 and revised in 1930. If nothing else, you will come to see that physics is physics and not much can change that.

For a little wow factor, Google "Jumo 205"... this was a WW2 two stroke diesel engine used to power some German bombers... For some extra wow check out the Napier Deltic.

Now... comparing the gasoline that a Honda might use to the fuel that a train might use is going to serve what? Let's take the cargo that the train was hauling and put it in the Honda... Just the cargo..... The Honda can't carry that much fuel let alone the fare paying cargo that the train has... talk about a useless comparison.

If we could just get people to refrain from defeating emissions controls......

That's your opinion. However TODAY'S internal combustion engine is 20th century technology, with a bit of 21st century technology coaxing it along. Or you could say it is 21st century technology moving some 20th century mechanicals. What differnetiates the 21st century internal combustion engine from the 19th century technology it is "loosely" based on is the 21st century controls that allow it to produce more power out of less fuel with lower exhaust emissions than you could have drempt of, on all 3 levels, 25 to 50 years ago.

As for metal rubbing on metal???? Today's lubrication technology combined with the quality of mechanical finish almost totally eliminates metal to metal friction at the molecular level.

Is the internal combustion engine the engine of the future??? Long term, most likely not, but within our lifespan??? I'd say, for most of us, an almost unqualified YES.

Petroleum powered? Most likely, and very hopefiully - - NOT. Cellulose based Ethanol and bio-sourced oils are most likely to be the mid-term fuel of choice for transportation.

I envision high temperature thermally efficient ceramic engines running on fuel derived from fast-growing algae using direct injection, spark ignition with a combination of variable compression, variable displacement and variable valve timing, running unthrottled like most current deisels and pushing 70% thermal efficiency within 10 years. Mabee not totally of the "tit" of petroleum that soon - but the basic technological advances WILL be there.

Care to point out some verifiable examples of where this is happening?

FWIW, Death of the Electric Car: Li-ion Batteries Too Valuable for Plug-In Vehicles

Again either post the REAL url, or STFU... Clicking on obfuscated URLs is one of the dumbest things that an Internet user could do.

Certainly it matters. If it was brought up, it must matter.

Define 'its'?

I see only one idiot, and it ain't me!

So even you can't define "its" in that poorly written bit of prose. Oh, well, not surprising.

"Mike Hunter" wrote in news:4b5b857a$0$2501$ snipped-for-privacy@news-radius.ptd.net:

What?

Conscience wrote in news:hjg3ta$nkl$ snipped-for-privacy@news.albasani.net:

Sorry, but this sentence appears to contradict itself.

Someone would want the demise of emissions controls but be unwilling to give his up?

Conscience wrote in news:hjii2s$2ge$ snipped-for-privacy@news.albasani.net:

Then maybe you meant to put your sentence the other way: wanting the strict /imposition/ of emissions controls for others, but not for one's self.

Could you please take a remedial English course, and learn to use English properly? "Their"? WTF?

But, but, but he SAID he was an MD, he must know all about the effects of alcohol on a person. LOL

You must be a liberal-democrat. While being technically correct, your mind isn't sophisticated enough to overlook the error and move on without a jab instead of a reasonable retort. You feel the need to piss people off, because you are an Obama sheeples.

Gore to hypocritical POS. Like they said, it was all about the money. Not abbout the cause, even Obama is proving the righties on this. Obama the talk and spend a lot promises to buy America out of debt.

LMAO. Liberals are scum.