Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New engine sends shock waves through auto industry. 90% decrease in emissions

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
TalkingDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:01 PM
Original message
New engine sends shock waves through auto industry. 90% decrease in emissions
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42460541/ns/technology_and_... /

Despite shifting into higher gear within the consumer's green conscience, hybrid vehicles are still tethered to the gas pump via a fuel-thirsty 100-year-old invention: the internal combustion engine.

However, researchers at Michigan State University have built a prototype gasoline engine that requires no transmission, crankshaft, pistons, valves, fuel compression, cooling systems or fluids. Their so-called Wave Disk Generator could greatly improve the efficiency of gas-electric hybrid automobiles and potentially decrease auto emissions up to 90 percent when compared with conventional combustion engines.

snip

The Wave Disk Generator uses 60 percent of its fuel for propulsion; standard car engines use just 15 percent. As a result, the generator is 3.5 times more fuel efficient than typical combustion engines.

Researchers estimate the new model could shave almost 1,000 pounds off a car's weight currently taken up by conventional engine systems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. Pretty damn exciting. My daughter will take our VW to college with her
in 4 years (5 years if the school she chooses doesn't allow freshman to have a car) which means we'll be shopping. I really hope they have more engine possibilities by then. This sounds really good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Newest Reality Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. Quick!
One of the big oil companies needs to buy the rights to that technology fast, if it proves viable. It simply has to be shelved ASAP.

Then this news can once again become a brief flash in our memory and a potential that never sees implementation. Remember, we have very powerful and wealthy industries to faithfully support with our sweat and blood. Our labor and future is merely a tribute to their power and control.

The auto industry works hand-in-hand with the oil industry.

Well, hopefully, some of us will keep an eye on this one and see what comes down at the end of the year. Maybe it won't be banished to oblivion like other fuel efficient technology from the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stumbler Donating Member (599 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
69. To by honest, those are my cynical thoughts exactly...
For those who missed it, check out "Who Killed the Electric Car."
Just as with the mortgage crisis of '08 & the on-going 'War on Drugs,' there are too many entities currently making money of our existing system to allow a dramatic overhaul/improvement like this to succeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. "wave disks" I seem to remember something about that years ago
I think it was something about burning fuel in chambers of curved disks connected directly to drive shafts. Am I wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
51. Well, that could be the same.
In the video, he's holding a prototype which is a free-spinning disk in a plastic chamber. It appears to function by combusting fuel+air in little chambers on the disk, propelling it to rotate. As combustion engines go, it just seems to make sense.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boxerfan Donating Member (710 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm impressed with the claims-A "sandwiched" turbine is a simple way to describe it
Not sure what stopped Andy Granettelli but I'd love to see a working prototype.

However-I'm not sure how he got by the laws of thermal dynamics to get rid of a cooling system...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. It could be air cooled. It's a small motor.
It'll work great if the fuel efficiency is really as high as claimed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #9
52. Just picturing how it works;
Getting the timing right would be cake. On top of that, modulating the frequency would be so very easy as well. That way it can use a stepped system with just the combustion alone to run at top efficiency.

I'm really excited about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
5. It seems like I read these "amazing" stories about once a week and....
most of them never make it to market. Skeptical, but I hope it is true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. There's really nothing to be skeptical about, watch the video on the website.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
58. In the lab is one thing. On the market is another. The market is the proof. n-t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLPanhandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
26. I agree
Nearing the age of 50, I've lost count of the number of "amazing" breakthrough stories I've seen.

All look great, sound great, but fail to work as well outside of a lab/university.

Maybe this time it will be practical in the real world, but I'm skeptical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. The video says it'll be ready in 2-3 years!
I love this because it's simple and totally changes the game. It completely avoids the battery problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
7. Funded by ARPA
which (surprise) the Republicans want to defund.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
10. Torque??? Horsepower?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Prototype may be around 34 hp
"engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year."

25 kilowatts = 33.525 horsepower
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
41. So, about as powerful as my first Volkswagen
It could do about 65 on the freeway, had to wind the engine in first gear to make it over the continental divide, but it was enough power to be practical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #41
60. Put it in a hybrid, and you've got plenty of torque.
Have a bunch of batteries providing power for driving around town, and for decent acceleration, and connect the wave-disk engine to a generator that recharges the batteries and provides auxiliary power.

It'd work great in a Prius!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #60
71. That's a great approach
and it would match 99.9% of my driving. I think performance would suffer driving west from Denver, when the long uphill climb would drain the batteries and you're left with whatever a 35hp motor can get the generator to do. But, it would make it over the pass, if slowly. I'd love to buy one of these gas-sipping cars.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Torque is not as important if it is a charging system like the Volt /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. This engine will just charge batteries. The car will run on battery power. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. The video says the engine/generator makes enough power to drive the electric motors directly
Reserve battery power is only needed for extra acceleration.

That's why this solution is so interesting, it gets rid of the battery problem almost completely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #16
23. thank you.... :o)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #16
25. You are right. My bad. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unkachuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
11. how....
....are they creating isolated enough cycles, power in particular, crisp and separate to eliminate a transmission from a stop? The rotor looks more like a sump pump impeller. Or is it spinning and they're just using a clutch or torque converter?

....you still need, intake, compression, ignition, exhaust....how is that mechanism in the drawing accomplishing the basic four cycles? I'm not understanding how it's working or what they're doing....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. It drives a generator, not the wheels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unkachuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. thanks....
....is it more turbine or rotary than Otto cycle, or something else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #18
27. Yes, rotary, not Otto cycle
New Scientist article on it from a couple of weeks ago: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928035.100-shoc...

It's not a Wankel rotary engine, and not a classic turbine, but something in between.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
14. great! to sell them here they must be MADE here from bumper to bumper nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #14
42. 100mpg AND you want them made here?
now you're dreamin'

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
19. I'm seeing an updated version of the 100 MPG carburetor here.
It can be done, but 0-40 in 20 minutes.

About the weight savings. A light car gets blown around on the road from wind, trucks and even other cars. Also that weight on the drive wheels gives traction when it is wet, icy or snowy. Take a thousands pounds off and the car may be skid prone on the road.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nostradammit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:38 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. What we need are nuclear-powered automobiles, huh RC?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #21
46. Sure, why not?
It it can power a Star Trek phaser and destroy stuff, it should be able to power a wheeled vehicle. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #19
28. Sorry, are you saying that the weight of an old engine is a safety feature?
:rofl:

The weight of an engine is not above the drive wheels in a front-engined, rear-wheel drive car, and yet they manage. Being a hybrid, this also has some batteries you need to put somewhere, which can concentrate weight above an axle. And you can make it 4 wheel drive fairly easily, if traction really is a concern - this engine will just run a generator at its most efficient speed, so it would be a case of wiring to motors at the other 2 wheels.

And the acceleration of this should be fine - it's for use in a hybrid, so battery power is available for short term acceleration. And it weighs less, which makes acceleration easier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #19
30. How does a F1 car stay on the road?
They are very light. Oh, aerodynamics. And traction control solves the slippage problem. THis is almost standard anyway.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erose999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. And F-1 tires are twice as wide as your normal car's tires. And F1 tires are made of softer,

stickier rubber that only lasts a few laps so they get changed after 100 miles or so. And the suspension geometry is stiffer and tuned for maximum grip.

Most of this is impractical for passenger cars, and the wide tires in particular are terrible for fuel economy. And the stiff suspension would rattle your fillings out in short order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrightKnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #19
40. Bicycles are light and they function properly.
When you have less weight you need less to control it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #19
54. Not the same.

It's just a turbine to power an electric motor. As for acceleration, an electric car can out-accelerate any internal combustion model.

As for the lightness, that's definitely an engineering issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mosby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #19
56. you can recover the traction by using smaller, narrower tires
The wind will still push you around though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beartracks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #19
62. Add weights, like you would in a Pinewood Derby car...
... something small and compact, so there's still lots of room in the "front trunk." :)

-------------------------
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napoleon_in_rags Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
20. Haha! I told you Gregorian.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

He says "The efficiency of the auto engine can't be made much more efficient." I say they can be. And now what?

The Wave Disk Generator uses 60 percent of its fuel for propulsion; standard car engines use just 15 percent. As a result, the generator is 3.5 times more fuel efficient than typical combustion engines.

Kudos to those engineers. You RULE!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. I think what the poster meant to say was,
"The efficiency of the Otto engine can't be made much more efficient."

Nicolaus Otto improved the four-stroke piston engine and first used it in a car. The name "Otto" has since been applied to the four-stroke cycle and to automobile engines more generally. Internal combustion engines are limited by a thing I don't pretend to understand called the Carnot cycle, which is related to initial and peak heat generation, or something. As a result, the otto engine can't be expected to reach an efficiency of greater than around 37%, and in practice only approaches 20%.

This is why engineers get pissed off when some science grifter comes around every summer with a claimed improvement to the 4-stroke that triples its fuel economy. It's simply outside of the possibility of the theories which describe how it works.

But this guy seems to have performed an end-around by developing a different system which is not held back by the Otto design.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TalkingDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #22
36. Perzactly. There is nothing worse than trying to improve a design
that, in the end, gains nothing (or so close to nothing as to be worthless)

But all inventions that hope to be successful tend to gear themselves toward existing tooling. In other words: Assembly lines are set up for automobiles with a chassis and 4 wheels. 3 wheeled cars work just as well and weigh less. But nobody makes them.

Why?

Because retooling the assembly line would cost money and that would cut into short term profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #36
39. Lots of folks make three wheeled cars
:)

http://www.aptera.com /




The Twike made in Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twike





The VERY BAD ASS Campagna T-Rex
http://www.campagnamotors.com /





The Triac
http://greenvehicles.com /


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TalkingDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. Are these made in standard auto production factories?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but showing a few visual examples without comparing the overall numbers of vehicles made is not a valid refutation of my claim.

You suggest "lots" of people make these. How many is lots? How does that compare with the number of standard 4 wheeled vehicles produced? What is the price point comparison? Can an average worker afford any one of these cars?

Part of the reason people buy cars (of any type) is because they can afford to buy them. If this motor cured cancer and corrected global climate change it wouldn't matter if it isn't affordable enough for a large number of people to buy on an average wage.

Which brings me back to my statement: Auto makers claim retooling for a different (insert item of choice here: engine, chassis, etc) makes vehicles too expensive.

So what we need to be asking is: Can this engine be affordable/profitable (for auto makers) to incorporate into their vehicles, while keeping the price affordable for an average wage earner?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. To you last question, probably in 20 years if it's a feasible design
small fraction of the cars made out there have three wheels, but you do have options :)

Just used it as a reason to post ( DID I MENTION BADASS ) T-Rex 0-60 3.5 seconds, top end 157...

You can grab one used for around 30-40K 55-60K new...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOsYo9Sv43E

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #22
63. That is what I meant. And I'm not excited about this design compared to electric.
Why are we still goofing around polishing internal combustion turds? Stupid. Furthermore, things always sound nice until the details start speaking up. But it could be a more efficient design for an engine. And may actually be a valuable engine for some uses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #22
64. Carnot efficiency is actually pretty easy to understand.
Edited on Fri Apr-08-11 08:04 PM by Tesha
Basically, all of these "heat engines" work by
mining the potential energy that exists between
the source of heat and the temperature into which
the engine dumps its waste.

It's not unlike a water wheel or hydroelectric dam:
The higher the reservoir of water compared to the
height at which you dump the "used" water, the more
power you can obtain. Raise the dam or lower the
river and things get better.

And for temperature and Carnot efficiency, it all
comes down to absolute temperature: the temperature
of things above Absolute Zero (about -273 Celsius
or -460 Fahrenheit). To make things simple, scientists
and engineers use the Kelvin scale which uses Celsius-
sized degrees but places its zero point at right at
Absolute Zero.

So now we come down to it: the absolute maximum
efficiency you can get out of any "heat engine" is
the distance in Kelvins between the hot and the cold
divided by the total distance from the hot to
absolute zero.

For example, let's take a steam engine (or a steam
turbine; doesn't matter!). Maybe its boiler makes
steam at 273 Celsius / 523 Fahrenheit. That's
546 Kelvins. Let's also assume that our steam engine
rejects heat into the atmosphere or a lake or some
such and that the temperature of the air or lake is
just freezing: 0 C / 32 F / 273 Kelvins.

0----:----1----:----2----:----3----:----4----:----5----: Heat source: 546 K

0----:----1----:----2----:-- Heat sink: 273 K


The *ABSOLUTE BEST* efficiency that our steam engine can
ever reach will be about 50% because that's the proportion
of the distance from the heat source to the heat sink
compared to the total distance from the heat source to
absolute zero. That is to say that our steam engine will
*ALWAYS* waste at least 50% of the heat you provide to
it; gotta shovel more wood into the boiler's firebox!

And our steam engine will usually do worse than this
because of things like friction and the fact that we're
often rejecting the heat into air that's warmer than
freezing. (That's why nuclear power plants are so
often located next to water; that water provides a
nice, convenient, relatively-cool cheap heat sink.)

Gas turbines can be more efficient because the "heat
source" can be a lot hotter than our measly 546 K;
maybe a thousand Kelvins or more.

0----:----1----:----2----:----3----:----4----:----5----:----6----:----7----:----8----:----9----:----10 Heat source: 1000 K

0----:----1----:----2----:-- Heat sink: 273 K

Now we're talking almost 75% potential efficiency!

Perhaps this new engine does this (compared to an
internal combustion engine)?

Tesha


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burrfoot Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. Holy Shit, Tesha, that was sexy as hell.
Edited on Fri Apr-08-11 08:26 PM by burrfoot
End of message.

edited to add: :toast:

If you ever make it to Sarasota, the drinks are on me!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napoleon_in_rags Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #22
72. Possibly, Gregorian DID come back and agree with the thermal loss in the next post.
Which means he understood the inefficiencies of the status quo. But its still thrilling to see my optimism justified by this discovery...I KNEW we could do better than 15%! I am not an engineer, but I am enough of a scientist to know that thermodynamics doesn't bound us THAT much, we can and do much better in stationary power plants for instance. Even Tesha's post below says as much.

God, I would love for this thing to be just dropped into the market soon, it would be so good for the economy, environment, so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
One_Life_To_Give Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 06:41 AM
Response to Original message
24. Forget Cars, Trucks, Ships, Planes and Trains
60% fuel efficiency gives a 20% reduction in fuel consumption over Wartsilla's Record Holding diesel used in Container ships. Why start with something that spends 90% of it's life not operating. When we have machines that spend up to 90% of the time operating at load?

If it can work with Nat Gas. This beats the efficiency of our Gas Turbines used for electric generation. Seems to me that would be a good place to get it introduced to quickly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
29. I'm sure this wasn't the first, nor will it be the last alternative engine that will never see the
Edited on Fri Apr-08-11 08:06 AM by Shagbark Hickory
light of day.

Can't forget those 800 trillion dollar, non-tax-paying gorillas in the room.

I lived near a college in the early 90's that had a fleet of larger commercial vehicles (vans pickups ets) running on solar. Oil companies don't let stuff like this get off the ground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Unfortunately so. The powerful fossil fuel lobbies want us to consume more, not less
and if the wave has fewer parts to replace the auto manufacturers won't be keen on adopting it; though one WILL want to purchase the patent so that it never sees the light of day!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #33
37. They got us by the ballz.
And they aint lettin go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
31. Here's a you tube on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentauros Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
32. Sounds like a complex re-invention of the Tesla Turbine


Also a test of the design: Tesla Turbines are Very Different
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
35. which emissions? CO2?
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
38. *** A definite k & r! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thunderstruck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
45. Yawn. Get in line behind every other currently invisible revolutionary
Edited on Fri Apr-08-11 01:39 PM by Thunderstruck
propulsion system we've been told about on the nooz or in Popular Mechanics.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #45
55. Nope, this works.
In fact, it makes much more sense than piston-generators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
47. Damn those gov't-funded research parasites!
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
48. Wow! This looks like the real deal. Would also make gas generators
that are used for off-the-grid applications much more fuel efficient as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
49. BP to buy it and put on the shelf in 3. 2. 1.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
50. Looks like a kind of hybrid Wankel Diesel that spins in a stator to generate electricity directly
Edited on Fri Apr-08-11 03:32 PM by leveymg
clever - but, I'd have to know more to form an opinion as to how much more efficient, and lower it's CO emissions behavior, actually are than a conventional hybrid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
53. Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype rea
Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimlup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
57. Hold your horses ... the engineers still likely have a long way to go with these
There are likely other problems which have not been solved. I'm not saying that it is a bust, I'm just saying there is a lot of engineering behind the current internal combustion-piston engine. We'll have to wait and see if this pans out. I'll remain skeptical until I start to see engineering demonstrations and even then I'll guess it will be years away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
59. Will it meet the same fate as the Electric Car and the Tucker?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Juche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
61. I hope it works, but stories like this happen all the time
Some amazing invention happens in the lab, then you never hear from it again.

FWIW, I don't have the calculation but decreasing the weight of the car by 1000 pounds plus an engine 3.5x more efficient would give you a family sedan that got 140mpg or more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Corruption Winz Donating Member (581 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
65. Price Tag On A New Car With This Engine: 50 billions bucks. Lol....
I would hope not. Still, this is a good sign. I'm glad Michigan is responsible as Detroit and is getting a chance to help the economy around there. They need anything that they can get.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greiner3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
66. "gasoline engine that requires no transmission,"
My brother's engineering specialty is in transmissions. He works at GM, has his Masters Degree from Purdue and has worked on many of their modern transmissions. He is near retirement and we kid him that he'll die of old age while still at his 'drafting table.' No more, he's soon to become a dinosaur like so many other occupations in the last century. Who'd a thought?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HBravo Donating Member (239 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
68. big auto
In the 70's a co-worker of my father had a car that was getting 20+ mpg when the car was listed at 8-10 mpg. They pulled it into their shop and the carburetor had exp. (experimental) stamped on the side. When he took in for servicing at the dealership it came out with the correct carburetor on it. GovCorp only wants to give you what you expect. It is all about control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-08-11 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
70. Not to put a damper on the fun, but...
... 2009


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC