[ausev] Electric is good, but gas is worse

[John Rumsey]

I am thinking that the future will have a place for
all kinds of vehicles, pure EV, EC and IC, because
each type has its own strengths. People living in
cities, who never drive far, small delivery vehicles
for short runs and such would be happy with EV's, as
you are. I live 20 miles from work and can easily put
on over 100 miles a day. Then with the same vehicle I
need to be able to drive over 300 miles, refuel and
continue driving to reach my destination in a
reasonable time and carry all the luggage and perhaps
4 passengers. I am suggesting a car which would
replace the standard IC family passenger car or SUV.

Your "willies" are based on IC auto lies. No Stanley
boiler ever blew up and it was not as safe as Doble's
water tube boiler. Since a remote relative, James
Rumsey invented the water tube boiler, the steamboat
and the hydrojet I am partial to steam power, but my
research has shown that I should be.

First I imagine using a smaller version of the Doble 2
cylinder double-acting uniflow engine with lighter
modern alloys. Turbines are not efficient. There is no
need for extremely high pressure steam since the
engine is turning an alternator, not directly powering
the wheels. Water tube boilers do not explode. The
pressure is inside of stainless steel tubes that are
within a housing which is open to the exhaust line. A
burst tube would simply release all the pressure out
the exhaust. Water tube boilers are not heavy. What
you are thinking of is stationary powerplants which
are designed heavy and use "teakettle" type boilers
because they are cheaper and no consideration is given
to weight. Look up the Doble steam car circa 1930-32
and the Stanley Steamer and you will see the
simplicity of the engines and the reliability of the
boilers.

--- Sarah & Erik <electricbasset at gmail.com> wrote:

> John,
> 
> I think of this as different tools for different
> jobs.  I drive my EV
> everyday, and I can resolutely say that it doesn't
> matter that my car
> can't do 400 miles at highway speed, or that it
> takes more than 5
> minutes to charge. Would I like more, faster,
> better? Sure, but I
> don't need it. It doesn't matter because most of my
> driving is to and
> from work with other runs to the grocery store, Home
> Depot and
> Blockbuster. If I need to go further I take my gas
> car.
> 
> Remember to ask the tough questions in both
> directions. Can you decide
> where your gas comes from? Why don't the emissions
> on a gas car get
> better as time goes on? (newer power plants are
> typically cleaner than
> old ones) Why is the well-to-wheels efficiency so
> low on my gas car?
> 
> I would agree that PHEVs are a great way to bridge
> the gap and bring
> EVs into common use, and what I've read show
> biofuels to be a net
> positive.
> 
> Getting off topic here... (but less so if you
> imagine the boiler
> driving a generator to drive an electric motor)
> External combustion can have fantastic cycle
> efficiencies, but tends
> to need very heavy equipment. Turbines have somewhat
> fixed losses, so
> the larger they are, the less the losses make up of
> the total. Boilers
> need to be heavy to hold high pressure in (the
> higher the pressure the
> greater the efficiency). Also, the idea of driving
> around with a
> turbine doing 100k RPM and a pressurized steam
> vessel under the hood
> give me the willies!
> 
> Erik
> 
> On 5/15/07, John Rumsey <beesidemeusa at yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > EV's that I have read about either have low
> speeds,
> > short ranges, high cost and long recharge times
> [when
> > you can find a place to plug in], or some
> cobination
> > of these. There is definitely a place for the EV
> in
> > the mix of vehicles. I have not yet seen an EV
> that
> > will go 400 mi.at highway speeds, recharge in 5
> min
> > and cost about the same as an IC hybrid. Since the
> > idea is to have less pollution there is another
> way to
> > go.
> >
> > Start with a plug-in EV that has short range, for
> > those little trips, for slow traffic, but which
> could
> > go 100 mph. Use the lowest pollution engine to
> drive
> > an on board alternator which keeps the batteries
> > charged for long trips. External Combustion has
> the
> > least pollution because using a forced air flame
> > results in very complete combustion. Biofuels work
> > very well in EC use, while in IC engines they
> still
> > require petroleum blends to run "properly" and
> still
> > produce unburned hydrocarbons and other
> pollutants.
> > Biofuels simply recycle CO2 and add no more to the
> > atmosphere, which is the aim of using EC.
> >
> > An EC engine is a steam engine. The majority of
> > electricity is produced by steam power, why not in
> > vehicles too? I have attached my ideas so far. I
> wish
> > I had $ and thumbs that would work [2 left ones]
> so I
> > could build it. I would like to see someone do it
> and
> > would like to discuss the idea further.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
___________________________________________________________
> > What kind of emailer are you? Find out today - get
> a free analysis of your email personality. Take the
> quiz at the Yahoo! Mail Championship.
> >
>
http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://mail.yahoo.net/uk
> > _______________________________________________
> > AusEV mailing list
> > AusEV at austinev.org
> > http://www.austinev.org/mailman/listinfo/ausev
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> AusEV mailing list
> AusEV at austinev.org
> http://www.austinev.org/mailman/listinfo/ausev
> 



      ___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for
your free account today http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/mail/winter07.html