Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    The Car Lounge
    Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
    Results 36 to 70 of 83

    Thread: What will be the car power source of the future?

    1. Member dopaz's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 17th, 2002
      Location
      Mechanicsburg, PA
      Posts
      964
      Vehicles
      [Current:] 99 Civic [Past:] 84 Rabbit, 85 Quantum, 87 Jetta, 97 Jetta, 96 Passat
      10-05-2012 01:43 PM #36
      Pure capacitance gel.


    2. Member FACTORYBOOST's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 12th, 2011
      Location
      The Fort
      Posts
      1,567
      Vehicles
      03 Jetta GLS 1.8T
      10-05-2012 01:50 PM #37
      Quote Originally Posted by 2VWatatime View Post
      You're seemingly assuming that "big oil" has undue influences on the market, whilst ignoring the industrial giants that are promoting their "energy" products.
      Oh, and ADM = Archer Daniels Midland

      Statistical averages =/= the real world, and no, there won't be "electricity everywhere", ever. The $$ alone to run heavy gauge wiring "everywhere" is just unfathomable on it's own...
      I was using simple supply/demand because economics annoys me as a science, so all the intricacies are confusing or unknown to me. And thanks for the info

      Quote Originally Posted by Preppy View Post
      Viable lithium ion polymer batteries have only been around for 20 years.

      Fuel cell technology has been around for a long time... but not in its current form; hell it's not even close to being perfected + viable. for cars.

      What reading should I do? I've already said that electric cars have been around for a long time, if it hadn't been for readily available and cheap oil, I'm sure the technology would be far more advanced today than it is.

      So it's an old concept, not an old technology.

      We said electric cars, electric cars were vastly more popular early on in automobiles before the internal combustion engine took off. Nikola Tesla had engineered ways to power these and is said to have modified a car that originally had an ICE and replaced it with his own electric motors and he drove 50 miles at up to speeds of 90 mph over like a week or something.
      Quote Originally Posted by emmettlodge View Post
      I said dance bitch. Dance.

    3. Banned justanotherusername's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 26th, 2007
      Location
      Palm Beach, FL
      Posts
      25,982
      Vehicles
      '08 135i, '00 4runner, '85 Huntsman (Toyota) RV
      10-05-2012 01:56 PM #38
      Quote Originally Posted by Preppy View Post
      Aside from major infrastructure changes... how we produce electricity is a huge factor. Right now, quite a bit of it comes from sources that will only be decreasing in viability.
      Every time fossile fuels get more expensive, solar becomes more practical. The ONLY thing preventing it from being a mainstream source right now is cost. That won't be true much longer.

    4. Member 4-Dr-W-a-T's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 19th, 2006
      Location
      Valencia, CA
      Posts
      928
      Vehicles
      2001 Golf GLS, 2013 Rogue, and some running shoes
      10-05-2012 02:01 PM #39
      Photoelectric cells (solar power)/capacitors will be for the poor. Low maintainence if well kept.

      The upper class will have some type of replenishable source (fill stations, packs, outlets). Because they can. Who knows maybe nuclear? All you have to do is purchase a nugget of radioactive isotope,... problem solved!

      The middle class will have to choose on or the other, work to keep your car on the road and live above your means, or play it smart.
      Quote Originally Posted by GreenandChrome View Post
      "We" tried it. It was called "metrosexualism" and it didn't work. Now the pendulum is on the other end, where men are trying to prove they're men by growing hillbilly beards. If they'd stop wearing their sister's jeans, it might actually work.

    5. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2011
      Posts
      300
      Vehicles
      The "U.N." garage: 2 British, 5 German, 4 Japanese, 2 American.
      10-05-2012 02:08 PM #40
      Quote Originally Posted by justanotherusername View Post
      Every time fossile fuels get more expensive, solar becomes more practical. The ONLY thing preventing it from being a mainstream source right now is cost. That won't be true much longer.
      Solar has become a great alternative for POWER, but that isn't the same as a transport fuel...at least not directly, but only indirectly through electric vehicle technology. As I always ask when people talk about alternatives: Alternative to WHAT? Power or transport? Those are two completely different markets and technologies.

      Back in 2007, I wrote a blog post on the subject to clarify some of the alternatives being discussed at the time:

      http://davesenergy.blogspot.com/2007_10_19_archive.html

    6. Banned justanotherusername's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 26th, 2007
      Location
      Palm Beach, FL
      Posts
      25,982
      Vehicles
      '08 135i, '00 4runner, '85 Huntsman (Toyota) RV
      10-05-2012 02:19 PM #41
      Quote Originally Posted by Dave_Car_Guy View Post
      Solar has become a great alternative for POWER, but that isn't the same as a transport fuel...at least not directly, but only indirectly through electric vehicle technology. As I always ask when people talk about alternatives: Alternative to WHAT? Power or transport? Those are two completely different markets and technologies.

      Back in 2007, I wrote a blog post on the subject to clarify some of the alternatives being discussed at the time:

      http://davesenergy.blogspot.com/2007_10_19_archive.html
      When we're talking about electric cars, the answer is BOTH. Electric cars will be the mode of transportation for all local travel in the near future (20 years). The range will keep increasing and the charge times will come down and they will replace more and more commuter vehicles, and eventually they'll get to the point where they can replace a traditional small car powered by an ICE. Cost is the inhibiting factor right now.

    7. Member G0to60's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 23rd, 2003
      Location
      Milwaukie, OR
      Posts
      5,592
      Vehicles
      1990 VW Corrado, 2002 Audi allroad
      10-05-2012 03:16 PM #42
      I think that hydrogen is the best option IF they find a way to produce it economically. They can't do that now and it really doesn't look like they will be able to in the near (20 years) future. If they do figure it out then it will be much easier to get the infrastructure going. The gas stations are already there. They just need to convert them to pump hydrogen.

      Battery powered electric is probably going to be the way things go. As battery capacity increase and recharge time decrease it will become more main stream. The power grid (at least up here in the PNW) can easily handle the load that more electric cars will put on the grid. While talking with one of the engineers at the Bonneville Dam on the Columbia we got to talking about usage. The dams are in a slight battle with the wind farms that are going up. Many times they are producing way more then can be used so either they need to shut down some of the wind turbines or they have to divert more water around the generators. Neither really want to do that.

      Nuclear is a terrible idea. We can't rid of the spent fuel we have now so how will we get rid of millions of spent fuel pellets for cars and trucks?

    8. Member ILL02GTI's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 16th, 2004
      Location
      Bergen county
      Posts
      189
      Vehicles
      '09 Passat 2.0t, '14 Mazda CX-5
      10-05-2012 03:38 PM #43
      If I had to wager a guess, I'd say either

      this


      or whatever this guy is looking at

    9. Member FACTORYBOOST's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 12th, 2011
      Location
      The Fort
      Posts
      1,567
      Vehicles
      03 Jetta GLS 1.8T
      10-05-2012 03:38 PM #44
      Quote Originally Posted by G0to60 View Post
      Nuclear is a terrible idea. We can't rid of the spent fuel we have now so how will we get rid of millions of spent fuel pellets for cars and trucks?
      The nuclear they are proposing isn't even remotely as harmful as using Uranium ore. The Thorium doesn't produce gamma radiation (or very little) and it doesn't produce as much nuclear waste as the Uranium Fission reactor. Also, while you basically need to bury a Uranium reactor to protect from the radiation, the beta radiation from a Thorium reactor can be stopped by sheet metal basically. Beta radiation is an actual particle as opposed to the energy waves of gamma radiation.
      Quote Originally Posted by emmettlodge View Post
      I said dance bitch. Dance.

    10. Member Crimping Is Easy's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 13th, 2012
      Location
      Findlay, Ohio
      Posts
      3,224
      Vehicles
      2001 Honda Prelude, 1984 Honda Gyro
      10-05-2012 03:56 PM #45
      I don't think you can say there will be one definitive power source for cars and no others. What's wrong with having EV's as well as hydrogen cars and whatever else power source comes along?
      Quote Originally Posted by JalopnikMatt View Post
      Everyone who writes for Jalopnik is an excellent writer and journalist.
      Quote Originally Posted by al@absolute View Post
      Go to bed or we're going for a drive in the Durango.

    11. Member G0to60's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 23rd, 2003
      Location
      Milwaukie, OR
      Posts
      5,592
      Vehicles
      1990 VW Corrado, 2002 Audi allroad
      10-05-2012 04:13 PM #46
      Quote Originally Posted by FACTORYBOOST View Post
      The nuclear they are proposing isn't even remotely as harmful as using Uranium ore. The Thorium doesn't produce gamma radiation (or very little) and it doesn't produce as much nuclear waste as the Uranium Fission reactor. Also, while you basically need to bury a Uranium reactor to protect from the radiation, the beta radiation from a Thorium reactor can be stopped by sheet metal basically. Beta radiation is an actual particle as opposed to the energy waves of gamma radiation.
      That's all well and good but multiply that by millions and you still have a problem of disposal. If they can neutralize the spent fuel and use it as something else then great but if they can't then it's just going to have to be put in some sort of spent fuel dump. I think we have enough garbage dumps for just house hold waste. We don't need to add spent fuel to that pile.


    12. Member
      Join Date
      Sep 13th, 2007
      Location
      Chicago, IL
      Posts
      5,026
      Vehicles
      Honda CB400T
      10-05-2012 04:35 PM #48
      The next big power source will be nuclear; the one after that will use pedals.
      "Motorcycles - the cigarettes of transportation." Seth Meyers

    13. 10-05-2012 04:39 PM #49
      Quote Originally Posted by Crimping Is Easy View Post
      I don't think you can say there will be one definitive power source for cars and no others. What's wrong with having EV's as well as hydrogen cars and whatever else power source comes along?
      Exactly this. The prediction business is pi$$ poor stupid, but if one must play, the reality is that we'll see a greater mix of drive types that take advantage of particular strengths.
      20 years, though? ICE will still be the majority of vehicles on the road. Believing anything else is

      Quote Originally Posted by Dave_Car_Guy View Post
      Two great books on opposite ends of the subject:

      This one ("Electric and Hybrid Cars: A History")

      And this ("The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power") is probably one of the greatest stories ever told...it won the Pulitzer Price:
      I look forward to reading the former, and after reading it thrice I have decreasing respect for the latter.

      You make assumptions. Petro fules became extremely inexpensive to purchase.

      Fact is, liquid petro fuel will only be going up in price and less viable as time goes on...
      And I'm making assumptions?
      Last edited by 2VWatatime; 10-05-2012 at 04:47 PM.

    14. Member FACTORYBOOST's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 12th, 2011
      Location
      The Fort
      Posts
      1,567
      Vehicles
      03 Jetta GLS 1.8T
      10-05-2012 04:57 PM #50
      Quote Originally Posted by G0to60 View Post
      That's all well and good but multiply that by millions and you still have a problem of disposal. If they can neutralize the spent fuel and use it as something else then great but if they can't then it's just going to have to be put in some sort of spent fuel dump. I think we have enough garbage dumps for just house hold waste. We don't need to add spent fuel to that pile.
      Oh, well yea; I thought you meant the actual danger of the waste. Technically you could argue a waste problem with gas and EV now; there is always going to be a waste problem...
      Quote Originally Posted by emmettlodge View Post
      I said dance bitch. Dance.

    15. Member G0to60's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 23rd, 2003
      Location
      Milwaukie, OR
      Posts
      5,592
      Vehicles
      1990 VW Corrado, 2002 Audi allroad
      10-05-2012 05:05 PM #51
      Yes but exhaust gases can be cleaned and batteries can be nearly completely recycled.

      Also there's the marketing of nuclear fuel for transport. Regardless of how safe it is people will see Chernobyl and Fukushima at the first mention of it.

    16. Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jun 1st, 2012
      Location
      Boxborough MA
      Posts
      86
      Vehicles
      2010 Candy White Jetta TDI
      10-05-2012 05:33 PM #52
      Quote Originally Posted by FACTORYBOOST View Post
      The nuclear they are proposing isn't even remotely as harmful as using Uranium ore. The Thorium doesn't produce gamma radiation (or very little) and it doesn't produce as much nuclear waste as the Uranium Fission reactor. Also, while you basically need to bury a Uranium reactor to protect from the radiation, the beta radiation from a Thorium reactor can be stopped by sheet metal basically. Beta radiation is an actual particle as opposed to the energy waves of gamma radiation.
      Also very important to note that it is impossible for a LFTR to experience failures like what we have seen at Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, etc. The reaction cannot run out of control.

      The Thorium fuel is one of the most plentiful elements found on Earth. Smaller, neighborhood reactors are easily feasible, simplifying the grid. The reaction is also much more thorough than our current fission reactors, leaving significantly less spent waste that is much easier and safer to maintain.

    17. Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jun 1st, 2012
      Location
      Boxborough MA
      Posts
      86
      Vehicles
      2010 Candy White Jetta TDI
      10-05-2012 05:38 PM #53
      Great resources to learn about Thorium reactors:


      http://energyfromthorium.com/

      A TED talk regarding Thorium power

    18. 10-05-2012 05:38 PM #54
      Self charging batteries through wind force.

    19. Senior Member AZGolf's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 6th, 2000
      Location
      Phoenix area
      Posts
      22,130
      10-05-2012 05:39 PM #55
      Quote Originally Posted by Preppy View Post
      I think the generation of hydrogen through electrolysis could be facilitated by more enviro friendly means 20 years from now? Say tidal, solar, wind...?
      There's been no radical improvements in energy generation since nuclear power was commercialized some 55+ years ago. Why anyone thinks we'll suddenly have massive amounts of cheap energy in another 20 years is beyond me. If anything, energy costs are going UP in real terms. Most people just don't notice it because so many things that consume energy are becoming much more efficient. If anything, I would bet that energy costs, adjusted for inflation, will be at least 50% higher in 20 years, if not double what they are today. This is due to the political and environmental impact of coal and nuclear fuel use, which are our cheapest energy sources today. Natural gas is the most logical stop-gap fuel, but in 50-100 years we'll have to be on almost entirely renewable energy which means likely another 2 to 4x increase in the real cost of energy production relative to today's costs.

    20. 10-05-2012 06:02 PM #56
      Quote Originally Posted by AZGolf View Post
      There's been no radical improvements in energy generation since nuclear power was commercialized some 55+ years ago. Why anyone thinks we'll suddenly have massive amounts of cheap energy in another 20 years is beyond me. If anything, energy costs are going UP in real terms. .

      For example, NYC per capita electrical demand went from just over 2,000 kWh to just under 8,000 kWh (with a pop increase from 7.781M to 8.214M). That's a lot of power, and solar/wind/wishing won't fill the demand.http://www.nae.edu/Publications/Brid...aResource.aspx

    21. Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jun 1st, 2012
      Location
      Boxborough MA
      Posts
      86
      Vehicles
      2010 Candy White Jetta TDI
      10-05-2012 06:33 PM #57
      Quote Originally Posted by AZGolf View Post
      There's been no radical improvements in energy generation since nuclear power was commercialized some 55+ years ago. Why anyone thinks we'll suddenly have massive amounts of cheap energy in another 20 years is beyond me. If anything, energy costs are going UP in real terms. Most people just don't notice it because so many things that consume energy are becoming much more efficient. If anything, I would bet that energy costs, adjusted for inflation, will be at least 50% higher in 20 years, if not double what they are today. This is due to the political and environmental impact of coal and nuclear fuel use, which are our cheapest energy sources today. Natural gas is the most logical stop-gap fuel, but in 50-100 years we'll have to be on almost entirely renewable energy which means likely another 2 to 4x increase in the real cost of energy production relative to today's costs.


      our current Nuclear infrastructure was built specifically because there was a military use for a small portion of the waste (PU-239). Thorium does not produce PU-239 as a byproduct, and thus is of no use to the military.

      While Thorium isn't a "new improvement" in energy generation, it is an important option to review. There is significant potential in this technology, with very low risks when compared to hydroelectric, conventional uranium based fission, and hydrocarbon energy generation.


      reference: http://csis.org/blog/thorium-and-its...nproliferation

    22. Member
      Join Date
      May 7th, 2000
      Location
      San Francisco, CA
      Posts
      866
      Vehicles
      1983 Jeep CJ-8 Scrambler
      10-05-2012 06:44 PM #58
      I finished my mechanical engineering degree about ten years ago. As an upperclassman I chose to focus on alternative fuels and advanced technology vehicles.

      I will never forget what one of my professors once said in 2002: "Hydrogen is the fuel of the future, and always will be".

      That was ten years ago and he's still correct as of now.

    23. 10-05-2012 07:08 PM #59
      Quote Originally Posted by BillyD View Post
      I will never forget what one of my professors once said in 2002: "Hydrogen is the fuel of the future, and always will be".That was ten years ago and he's still correct as of now.
      It's an old line, and is as correct as when I first heard it (the 70s) as today...

    24. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 4th, 2009
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      207
      10-05-2012 07:24 PM #60
      I think we may possibly make our way into sustainable biodiesel. Currently we have only a few ways to produce it, but it's not feasible due to the high amount of land/water it takes to farm the oil required. Algae/Microalgae has a high operational/capital for the amount of oil it yields when cultivated, but we are progressing to more efficient algae growing factors. So while technically not solar, we may still use the (free)sunlight to our advantage in basically growing our own biofuel.

      That, and the fact that we have some pretty good mpg from current diesel engines while still operating within emissions laws, i think that it is a big possibility.

    25. Banned caddy 2 dope's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 18th, 2004
      Location
      Phoenix
      Posts
      7,771
      Vehicles
      81 vw caddy, 02 gmc sonoma crewcab
      10-06-2012 01:19 AM #61

    26. Banned caddy 2 dope's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 18th, 2004
      Location
      Phoenix
      Posts
      7,771
      Vehicles
      81 vw caddy, 02 gmc sonoma crewcab
      10-06-2012 01:56 AM #62
      This is a great clip, but do watch the entire gashole doc if you can.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vJe...e_gdata_player


    27. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 31st, 2005
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      16,480
      Vehicles
      Corvette & SV650
      10-06-2012 02:25 AM #64
      Quote Originally Posted by zhenya00 View Post
      I think it will be electric with batteries, much like we are moving towards today. 20 years is not all that long in the car industry, so the wheels are already in motion, so to speak.
      For electric cars, absolutely. And yeah, 20 years is not that long. It hasn't even been 20 years since the GM EV1 and electric cars are still in their infancy.


      Quote Originally Posted by SirSpectre View Post
      Cars of the future won't have batteries. There have been some huge advancements recently in Ultra capacitors. These are devices that can hold 1000x more power in a given space than batteries and charge instantly, and energy density about the same as batteries. The problem being right now, is the length of time they hold the charge. Right now they can get it hold for about 5 minutes I see once those come up to a week, we'll start seeing them in cars. Not likely for 40-50 years I bet though.

      VAG, Tesla, and Ford have been doing tests with them in various technologies, including battery/cap setup, gas-hybrid/cap setups for storage and regen braking, and diesel setup like the Chevy Volt. not quite there yet.
      I'd like to see this realized. If they're small enough and can hold a charge for a few hours, it could be part of the solution for quick charging. Give a quick charge to the capacitors in the car and let it bleed the charge into the batteries.
      Quote Originally Posted by apizzaparty View Post
      never thought once to use my lefty for the brake. sorry in my opinion it is dumb.

    28. Senior Member feels_road's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 27th, 2005
      Location
      East Bay Area
      Posts
      22,344
      Vehicles
      2010 MkVI MT TDI Golf, 2000 B5 4M Passat Wagon
      10-06-2012 02:49 AM #65
      Quote Originally Posted by FACTORYBOOST View Post
      Honestly, I think we will see a rise in alternative combustibles e.g. bio-fuels, ethanol from corn and sugar cane, that sort of stuff.
      There isn't enough useful agricultural surface area out there to cover our energy needs - not even those just for transportation, by a long shot. Ethanol from corn is a horrible idea, because it is barely CO_2 emissions neutral, if at all.

      Growing switchgrass etc. on areas that currently can't be used for agriculture makes some sense, so do algae-based processes.
      Aung San Suu Kyi

    29. Member FACTORYBOOST's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 12th, 2011
      Location
      The Fort
      Posts
      1,567
      Vehicles
      03 Jetta GLS 1.8T
      10-08-2012 09:51 AM #66
      Quote Originally Posted by feels_road View Post
      There isn't enough useful agricultural surface area out there to cover our energy needs - not even those just for transportation, by a long shot. Ethanol from corn is a horrible idea, because it is barely CO_2 emissions neutral, if at all.

      Growing switchgrass etc. on areas that currently can't be used for agriculture makes some sense, so do algae-based processes.
      I haven't really done much research on the subject in all honestly, at least concerning growth and yield and all that, but the algae did seem to be the most plausible because you can just have giant tanks that make lots o' green!
      But it would require diesel engines of a sort, which I'm perfectly fine with.
      Quote Originally Posted by emmettlodge View Post
      I said dance bitch. Dance.

    30. Member Slipstream's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 8th, 2002
      Location
      Omaha, NE
      Posts
      10,068
      Vehicles
      WRB ZC6L
      10-08-2012 10:33 AM #67
      Two pages and nobody has fired up the TurbioDiesel! signal?
      14 torque-less wonder | 08 sorority special | seventwosix | flickr

    31. Member BluMagic's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 9th, 2008
      Location
      snohomish, WA
      Posts
      5,061
      Vehicles
      2011 Genesis 3.8 R-spec
      10-08-2012 11:15 AM #68
      POO POWER FTW!!!!!



      Opting for unconventional business ideas has always been appealing. To be precise, coming with something out of the box have always grabbed attention. Same is the case with Japan’s ace toilet maker, Toto Ltd, as the company has come up with something different in its own domain. The Japanese firm recently unveiled an interesting poop-powered motorcycle in a Fujisawa showroom.


      The motorcycle, to run on excrement, can actually travel as far as 300 kilometers with the tank fully loaded with animal waste. The motorcycle, being advertised as the maiden waste-powered vehicle, has been a project since 2009 and has been christened Toilet Bike Neo. The most interesting feature of the three-wheeler is the placement of the tank. The place of regular seat has been replaced with a toilet along with a huge paper roll at the back of it.

      But if you’re thinking that the 250cc trike, Toilet Bike Neo, would run on its riders’ waste, my friend you certainly have mistaken. The machine simply runs on livestock waste or waste water. Talking to a few reporters in a Tokyo suburb, Toto Ltd’s spokesperson, Kenji Fujita confirmed it by saying,

      “The biogas it uses as fuel is not made from human waste. It’s made from livestock waste and sewage.”

      Now a question must have risen in your mind, why did Toto induced a toilet-derived seat then. Well! It’s just because of the prospective publicity that the company would gain that it has been featured.
      Quote Originally Posted by winstonsmith84 View Post
      He did this at 22 old. He is world strongest man. President Obama ordered him to stop but truth must come out. Buy silver in middle of week.

    32. 10-08-2012 11:33 AM #69
      I think it will be water

    33. Member FACTORYBOOST's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 12th, 2011
      Location
      The Fort
      Posts
      1,567
      Vehicles
      03 Jetta GLS 1.8T
      10-08-2012 12:05 PM #70
      Quote Originally Posted by Slipstream View Post
      Two pages and nobody has fired up the TurbioDiesel! signal?
      My main suggestion is basically a Turbo Diesel with a biodiesel (algae)
      Quote Originally Posted by emmettlodge View Post
      I said dance bitch. Dance.

    Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •