Behold the CityCAT air car, powered by compressed air.

I disagree about ignoring the inefficiency. Worse, even a simple requirement
like passenger heat is not presently in TheAirCar design. The manufacturer
claims TheAirCar is quieter than conventional combustion engines (listen to
the low speed demo and you may doubt even that) but admits it lacks the
silence of EVs. EVs have so many advantages and are well enough proven that
competing technologies can't just say, "We can do half that stuff at half
the efficiency!" and expect a following. The manufacturer's promo material
shows lift trucks powered by air, but battery powered lift trucks have been
popular for many decades. The company doesn't even speculate when production
will begin. In the meantime, production EVs have actually been on the road.
Compressed air is way too little, too late.

Do you have any particular reason for concern about battery disposal
(recycling) as currently carried out? In the US we go through roughly a
hundred million lead-acid car and truck batteries every year, and those are
about as toxic as batteries come. I think if it were a problem we'd be
hearing about it.

Mike

 

" I think if it were a problem we'd be hearing about it."

Uh, huh? What makes you think that? Certainly not any historical precedence.

In any case, whether it be fuel cells or batteries, disposal is a problem
that can be solved as a part of the cost of the energy. The same arguments
apply in either case.

 

" I think if it were a problem we'd be hearing about it."

Uh, huh? What makes you think that? Certainly not any historical precedence.

In any case, whether it be fuel cells or batteries, disposal is a problem
that can be solved as a part of the cost of the energy. The same arguments
apply in either case.

 

Efficiency is *everything*. You can make alleged 'green' cars that are less
efficient than current ICE powered ones too such as hydrogen powered ones but it
makes no sense because that energy still has to come from somewhere. Usually
somewhere with a big chimney.

How the heck do you think the air gets compressed in the first place ? Just
because it has no tailpipe emissions doesn't make a car 'green'.

Well, you're wrong. It will sink without trace. Compressed air vehicles a
re used only where they have specific advantages such as in potentially
explosive environments like mines.

What chemicals ?

Dangerous in what way ?

Graham

 

Efficiency is *everything*. You can make alleged 'green' cars that are less
efficient than current ICE powered ones too such as hydrogen powered ones but it
makes no sense because that energy still has to come from somewhere. Usually
somewhere with a big chimney.

How the heck do you think the air gets compressed in the first place ? Just
because it has no tailpipe emissions doesn't make a car 'green'.

Well, you're wrong. It will sink without trace. Compressed air vehicles a
re used only where they have specific advantages such as in potentially
explosive environments like mines.

What chemicals ?

Dangerous in what way ?

Graham

 

How about the thousands of reporters who are drooling to find such a story
and the lawyers waiting to get rich off it? Think Love Canal....

Nike

 

How about the thousands of reporters who are drooling to find such a story
and the lawyers waiting to get rich off it? Think Love Canal....

Nike

 

I think that the issues pollution of gasoline powered vehicles shadow that
of batteries and that's why it's not typically discussed. It will only be
at the forefront of the consumers mind when they don't have to worry about
fuel burning cars. I do agree with you about the noise for sure. I saw
the demo and was surprised to hear how noisy it was. That being said, I
don't concider noise a drawback. After all we've been living with noisy
diesel engines for a long time.

And I do agree that even if air cars are viable, they are still a ways off
in terms of perfecting the technology. I think companies are talking about
it now because they're trying to drum up interest for investor dollars.

 

I think that the issues pollution of gasoline powered vehicles shadow that
of batteries and that's why it's not typically discussed. It will only be
at the forefront of the consumers mind when they don't have to worry about
fuel burning cars. I do agree with you about the noise for sure. I saw
the demo and was surprised to hear how noisy it was. That being said, I
don't concider noise a drawback. After all we've been living with noisy
diesel engines for a long time.

And I do agree that even if air cars are viable, they are still a ways off
in terms of perfecting the technology. I think companies are talking about
it now because they're trying to drum up interest for investor dollars.

 

Efficiency is *everything*. You can make alleged 'green' cars that are

If efficiency was everything, everybody would by buying a honda, VW or
toyota, yet by some miracle GM and Ford are still hanging in there with
their SUV's and inefficient engines. In fact, by some accounts, engines
have become less efficient in the last 20 years.

I never said that no tailpipe emissions makes a car green. But It's likely
far 'greener', at least in this case.

What chemicals? Uhhh... there's lots used in batteries. Batteries are not
exactly environmentally friendly. Not the battery itself, the manufacturing
process, or the disposal.

Ahh, the definitive answer! Thanks for that. Stop stating your opinion as
fact.

I consider negative environmental impact dangerous.

 

Efficiency is *everything*. You can make alleged 'green' cars that are

If efficiency was everything, everybody would by buying a honda, VW or
toyota, yet by some miracle GM and Ford are still hanging in there with
their SUV's and inefficient engines. In fact, by some accounts, engines
have become less efficient in the last 20 years.

I never said that no tailpipe emissions makes a car green. But It's likely
far 'greener', at least in this case.

What chemicals? Uhhh... there's lots used in batteries. Batteries are not
exactly environmentally friendly. Not the battery itself, the manufacturing
process, or the disposal.

Ahh, the definitive answer! Thanks for that. Stop stating your opinion as
fact.

I consider negative environmental impact dangerous.

 

The diesels fitted in modern European cars are a lot quieter than Americans will
be used to hearing.

Diesel powered cars are around 50% of all new sales in some European countries
now.

Graham

 

The diesels fitted in modern European cars are a lot quieter than Americans will
be used to hearing.

Diesel powered cars are around 50% of all new sales in some European countries
now.

Graham

 

A friend told me that as well. Not sure why this is the case.

 

A friend told me that as well. Not sure why this is the case.

 

Because they're cheaper to run of course.

Graham

 

Because they're cheaper to run of course.

Graham

 

I am hearing conflicting reports, with Europeans mostly saying the noise
level ouside the cars is about the same, reduced a bit by under-hood
measures to dampen the racket. Noise levels inside the vehicle are much
reduced.

In the US we have mostly direct injection with conventional injector pumps.
In Europe diesels are going to common rail injection, the high pressure
counterpart of our multiport fuel injection for gasoline engines. The
advantages in startup and response are supposed to be impressive, and the
injector pump is much quieter. Not much can be done about the main source of
the characteristic diesel rattle, though. The high combustion pressures are
part of the nature of the beast.

Disclaimer - most of this is from a few months in a diesel forum a couple of
years ago. It may be outdated or have limited perspective.

Mike

 

I am hearing conflicting reports, with Europeans mostly saying the noise
level ouside the cars is about the same, reduced a bit by under-hood
measures to dampen the racket. Noise levels inside the vehicle are much
reduced.

In the US we have mostly direct injection with conventional injector pumps.
In Europe diesels are going to common rail injection, the high pressure
counterpart of our multiport fuel injection for gasoline engines. The
advantages in startup and response are supposed to be impressive, and the
injector pump is much quieter. Not much can be done about the main source of
the characteristic diesel rattle, though. The high combustion pressures are
part of the nature of the beast.

Disclaimer - most of this is from a few months in a diesel forum a couple of
years ago. It may be outdated or have limited perspective.

Mike

 

as i understand it, common rail/electronic injection control makes
diesels /much/ quieter though. you can get up to 5 injection events per
ignition cycle - one to start the flame, and subsequent events to keep
the process going. since the fuel is not all exploding at once, and
burning fuel is much quieter than igniting fuel, there's subsequently
much reduced diesel "knock".