@ShootMyMonkey Your whole focus seems to be based on "long road trips" but I am more interested in clean cheap transport for everyday use for everyday ppl. For that electric drive is clearly the winner, as Proaudiohd has already explained so clearly. If you are so anti-grid then why not direct your research to Tesla's wireless energy distribution patents? Wireless induction charging. Nokia is developing a phone that trickle charges from the energy in the signal!
@RockManAU The simple fact is that a many orders-of-magnitude load increase is far more manageable if it's localized point loads, because local augmentation is possible. It doesn't matter its wired or wireless.
Also, if there was nothing to consider but day-to-day driving, then mass transit electric is superior still (and doable right now). The reason people buy cars (at least in the US) is to be able to transit of their own volition and have the choice to do those exceptional cases on a whim.
@RockManAU ... robbing them of that option entirely means you won't have market acceptance. If you don't have that, then it's no different than the product being entirely useless.
Other than that, the main mistake that both you and proaudio make is extrapolating what can be done on a tiny scale to what can be done on a full scale. Engineering doesn't work like that. All technologies have scaling limits. It's why, whether you go battery or fuel cell, nuclear is the one and only usable source
@ShootMyMonkey the whole world can be powered by solar right now, there's heaps of space. Range is not an issue with electric cars, as I said, replace battery pack and go driving all year with no recharge time. Don't ignore the facts of what can already be done now.
Forget H-cells, imagine how efficient SOLAR would be now if the budget of the LHC or the TOKAMAK was directed to it.
H-cells have bigger whole of life carbon footprint than Li-Ion batteries.
"the whole world can be powered by solar right now, there's heaps of space."
Only if you assume that resource demands will never grow. Even 100% efficient solar is insufficient.
"replace battery pack and go driving all year with no recharge time. Don't ignore the facts of what can already be done now."
Wrong. You're forgetting the need to be able to charge the replacements. It's doable now only because the load is small. If the majority goes electric, the load is 5-6 orders of magnitude larger.
Solar powered battery pack replacement stations mean the charge time is as fast as H filling but you don't even have to get out of your car! It's greener, safer and cheaper.
@RockManAU I'm sorry, but do you seriously think SOLAR can handle that kind of load of constantly recharging battery packs? Top-of-the-line solar panels can't do that without needing several acres of footprint, and that's for current electric loads. If you're talking about a condition where electric vehicles are even 15% of the market, it's simply out of the question. Each filling station would have be the size of an entire city
It's also not necessarily greener, due to the nature of batteries.
I must say that if you are more concerned about the thrill of driving or feeling "connected" to the car (like myself) you need to have a manual gearbox.
HOWEVER,
if you want your car to be faster than everyone else's, nothing beats a dual clutch, to anyone that disagrees go test drive one they are absolutely incredible.
i can say its crappy it breaks down, way faster than normal manual gearbox, maybe it drives good,but it breaks, and it will break, and it will be expensive to repair
@SimpleAsHell Why sohould it break down faster than a manual gearbox? Don't compare DSG and CVT. CVT is crap but DSG works just like a manual gearbox except the two clutches which are controlled by hydraulic cylinders.
I have just got a NEW Polo 1.4 with 7 speed DSG and it is amazing. For the first week I though the petrol gauge had packed up. It goes like the clappers and the 3d body looks good too. Its a great car and about the same size inside as a Mk3 Golf.
electrical cars are the worst...using h/c,nuclear,water power and all other ways to produce mechanical energy that will be transformed to electricity and then again to mechanical energy has very low efficiency...you have losses from every fermentation and they are not invertible..
I too want to think so as I enjoy steam trains, but it takes a fire to create steam, which makes it neccesary for something to burn and also makes the area very hot. Now take the size of a train boiler and try to fit it in the place of a car engine. fit? I don't think so.
@jayguy173 not sure why you say that unless you're simply trolling... steam died a long time ago because even though it's very powerful, it's incredibly inefficient. For example, the stanley steamer steam cars from the turn of last century were lucky to get a mile to the gallon of kerosene.
@lilbrudder32 Ever tried putting a cup of water in a microwave? Not saying that microwaves are the answer, just saying that there are other ways to heat up water.
@Jeridiculous a microwave is still only about 60% efficient between the wall outlet and the actual energy that heats the water. You'd be better off using the electricity to directly create electromotive force, than to heat water for a steam engine. Not to mention, the steam engine is still pretty darn inefficient in capturing energy from the steam, the more efficient ones use multiple expansions from the steam. Electric vehicles are about 80-90% efficient overall, steam is much less regardless.
Fuel cells became obsolete the day lithium polymer batteries where invented. Look at r/c cars the electrics blow away the nitro powered ones. Five years ago it was just the opposite. The technology is here is just being kept under raps but that can't last forever!
"H fuel cells require electrodes made of very expensive metals that are dissolved as they are used."
That's not actually true. The electrodes themselves are not expensive, but they do have catalyst coatings made of expensive metals. Those catalysts do not dissolve with use, but they can wear out if the heat output is not properly managed. The temperature needs to stay w/in a certain range to maintain peak output. No different from the catalytic converters in your current petrol/diesel car.
It is fair to say, however, that this is very difficult. Especially with H as your fuel source, since the reaction with oxygen is highly exothermic. Different fuel sources than H are possible (and safer to store), and can require less expensive catalyst materials within the cell itself. e.g. borohydride, methane, Polysulfide-Bromine, ethanol, etc.
While making these fuels is obviously less energy efficient than direct-to-battery, they're infinitely more usable, and still an improvement on ICE.
Oil is not going to be this plentiful and cheap forever. Enjoy it now, I do too. But the future is electric. It will have to be. Unless you prefer horses. Judging by your name I think you do.
The future is hydrogen fuel cells, not electric. Most of the Earths electricity is generated by coal, so "electric" powered cars are actually coal powered. alosr batteries take ALOT of power in their creation.
Extracting hydrogen requires electricity. Fuel cells just turn the hydrogen back into electricity inside the car, to power an electric motor.. Only there is a huge loss so you end up with far less electricity than you started with. Plus the problem of a giant new infrastructure to make and store a leaky, cryogenic, explosive liquid. Why even bother? We already have an electric grid, why not just take that electricity and put it straight into the car. Making and using hydrogen is a waste.
@proaudiohd You're correct, but you're overlooking a fatal problem -- the weak link in electric is the battery. Fuel cells mean more energy stored in a smaller lighter package than any battery or supercapacitor without exception. Moreover, storage in a chemical medium means the recharge time is measured in seconds. Batteries need to be charged slowly lest they be damaged, so recharge times can never go below the several-hours threshold. From a usability standpoint, this is utterly unacceptable.
@ShootMyMonkey - No doubt current batteries have their limitations. Charge times are not quite as big an issue because cars are parked all night anyways. How long does it take to fully charge your cell phone? I bet you don't know. You just plug it in overnight and use it all day. I think a 250 mile battery that charges in 8 hrs or less will be the game-changing point. It exists, just a little too expensive right now. Prices are coming down and all mfrs have an electric in the works.
@proaudiohd Actually, I do know about the cell phone. In my case, from completely dead, it takes approximately 1 hour to fully charge it. Again, the idea of plug-in charging while parked is a serious infrastructure problem if you have many electric vehicles -- the grid-wide load will grow by orders of magnitude. Moreover, it just doesn't work when you need on-demand charging (e.g. road trip stops). Anything over 5 min. is intolerable for that
Fuel tanks/cells can do that, but batteries never can
@proaudiohd Also, while supercapacitors can be charged quickly and don't suffer for it, their energy density is still far too small even compared to lead-acid batteries. They're suitable for large bursts at high output.
As far as being able to go 250 miles on an 8-hour charge, compare that to 400+ miles on a 90-second charge, and that's what you're up against with ICEs or hydrocarbon fuel cells for that matter. That raises the general usability of the vehicle by a massive factor.
@ShootMyMonkey -Electricity is available from your garage today, hydrogen is not. Lets not forget, the energy from hydrogen comes from the grid too. Besides upgrading the grid, you'd also have to design and build the hydrogen infrastructure from scratch. Why do that? Filling times are the only big advantage hydrogen has. If you left home with 250 miles of range everyday, you wouldnt really care about filling times. How often do you burn thru two tanks of gas in a single day? Not very.
@proaudiohd Most people don't have a garage. Either way, point loads (for fuel plants) are easier to handle and support than distributed load growth (all homes). It also doesn't answer for the need to charge in parking lots or apartments.
As for the range -- 250 is not a lot for anyone who takes a road trip. Sure, they're a minority, but there's always someone doing it on any given day. Electric means you've eliminated that possibility entirely. It also means no more 100+ mile commutes to work.
@proaudiohd Thirdly, you seem to conflate fuel cells with H. I don't think H is the ideal fuel source, either. It sounds good because of the energy density per unit mass, and because you get only water exhaust.
You can make fuel cells run on a lot of things besides H, and they're much cheaper, much safer, still don't produce greenhouse gases, and can be produced in far more efficient ways. Hell, even hydrocarbon fuel sources can be acquired in ways that reduce overall greenhouse emissions.
@ShootMyMonkey - Electric drive is the future. The question is- how to get the electricity from the grid into the car. Sure the first gen. batteries will have limited range because they're expensive, so they don't cover every scenario. But H and fuel cells are much more expensive, not as efficient, and will take far longer to get to market. Plus you'd still have to buy liquid fuel from a filling station. I'd rather charge at home and leave with a full 'tank' every morning.
@proaudiohd Having to fill at a station is not exactly a change from current state. What is not valid is the claim that batteries will catch up. They won't. Even the least effective of fuel cells today are already superior in range, output, lifespan, AND COST than the state of the art of batteries could hypothetically be by 2025.
Also, longer to market isn't quite true either, because battery tech is still far far behind. Fuel Cell tech from 40 yrs ago is still superior, and not by a small gap.
@angrygunsmith - ethanol is not a source of energy, it actually takes more energy to make it than you get from it. Plus we don't have enough farmland, even if we quit growing food. Then you're still using an inefficient combustion engine, and purchasing fuel at a station. Ethanol is a subsidy-driven waste of time, so is hydrogen. We need to advance batteries. We really need to figure out nuclear FUSION power plants. That will be our next true revolution - unlimited energy
@proaudiohd how does it take energy, just plant bamboo, the energy comes from the sun, photosynthesis, maybe some fertilizer, i understand how compli cations could develop on the larger scale. personally id just hate to know that were gna be driving electric cars as i love combustion engines os i wanna keep combustion engines alive. i dont want to come to terms iwth the said truth
@proaudiohd Only problem with that is that a lot of that power comes from fossil fuels anyway, so we're back to square one, just now we have to rebuild our entire energy infrastructure. No one wants to waste that much money, unfortunately. Second, Batteries are severely ineffective. Even modern ones don't last as long as they would need to drive a full electric car.
@proaudiohd Plus you have large machines that require that extra horsepower that simple charging them will not deliver.Hydrogen Fuel Cells are just as horrible, they are very inefficient just as you said. I think It would be worth looking into hydrogen combustion however. We would only need to store it as a gas at that point. Simply, We are going to need something radically different if we are to create an energy infrastructure that is efficient and unreliable on fossil/foreign fuels.
@proaudiohd electricity must be stored somewhere. hydrogen has much greater energy density than traditional batteries. but you don't have to burn it to get energy back, just use fuel cells, they are efficient and safe
i can't wait for my DSG Polo GTI =) this just makes me more and more excited hahaha
doubleexclusive 7 months ago
bullshit video!!! :P
but i still like DSG!!! ;)
srtn21 7 months ago
bei 1.14 22605 Hamburg, Anckelmannsplatz 1 check out @google maps :)
Danielskaufrausch 8 months ago
cheesy music
DeathlyHall0w 8 months ago
I wonder whats faster, DSG or CVT????
PistonsBroke 11 months ago
@PistonsBroke I wonder what you're doing watching this video, unless you're joking with that question.
DSG and CVT are completely different things and cant be compared, but DSG is much much better.
derbigpr500 10 months ago
@PistonsBroke DSG...CVT would not even come close.
lamborghiniexotics 8 months ago
@ShootMyMonkey Your whole focus seems to be based on "long road trips" but I am more interested in clean cheap transport for everyday use for everyday ppl. For that electric drive is clearly the winner, as Proaudiohd has already explained so clearly. If you are so anti-grid then why not direct your research to Tesla's wireless energy distribution patents? Wireless induction charging. Nokia is developing a phone that trickle charges from the energy in the signal!
Why reinvent the wheel man?
RockManAU 1 year ago
@RockManAU The simple fact is that a many orders-of-magnitude load increase is far more manageable if it's localized point loads, because local augmentation is possible. It doesn't matter its wired or wireless.
Also, if there was nothing to consider but day-to-day driving, then mass transit electric is superior still (and doable right now). The reason people buy cars (at least in the US) is to be able to transit of their own volition and have the choice to do those exceptional cases on a whim.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@RockManAU ... robbing them of that option entirely means you won't have market acceptance. If you don't have that, then it's no different than the product being entirely useless.
Other than that, the main mistake that both you and proaudio make is extrapolating what can be done on a tiny scale to what can be done on a full scale. Engineering doesn't work like that. All technologies have scaling limits. It's why, whether you go battery or fuel cell, nuclear is the one and only usable source
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@ShootMyMonkey the whole world can be powered by solar right now, there's heaps of space. Range is not an issue with electric cars, as I said, replace battery pack and go driving all year with no recharge time. Don't ignore the facts of what can already be done now.
Forget H-cells, imagine how efficient SOLAR would be now if the budget of the LHC or the TOKAMAK was directed to it.
H-cells have bigger whole of life carbon footprint than Li-Ion batteries.
You don't get Geo-thermal in your area?
RockManAU 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"the whole world can be powered by solar right now, there's heaps of space."
Only if you assume that resource demands will never grow. Even 100% efficient solar is insufficient.
"replace battery pack and go driving all year with no recharge time. Don't ignore the facts of what can already be done now."
Wrong. You're forgetting the need to be able to charge the replacements. It's doable now only because the load is small. If the majority goes electric, the load is 5-6 orders of magnitude larger.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
fsg
disapearwitoutatrace 1 year ago
This car might be nice to drive but the whole hydrogen thing is totally flawed!!!
It's flawed because it uses energy to convert energy to stored energy to create energy later and then waste more energy again in an ICE.
Costly, non-renewable and highly explosive.
What's the point?
Who benefits from all that cost and waste?
NOT THE MOTORIST or the planet, that's for sure!
RockManAU 1 year ago
@ShootMyMonkey You are dreaming mate!
Solar powered battery pack replacement stations mean the charge time is as fast as H filling but you don't even have to get out of your car! It's greener, safer and cheaper.
How's that for 'general usability'?
RockManAU 1 year ago
@RockManAU I'm sorry, but do you seriously think SOLAR can handle that kind of load of constantly recharging battery packs? Top-of-the-line solar panels can't do that without needing several acres of footprint, and that's for current electric loads. If you're talking about a condition where electric vehicles are even 15% of the market, it's simply out of the question. Each filling station would have be the size of an entire city
It's also not necessarily greener, due to the nature of batteries.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
I must say that if you are more concerned about the thrill of driving or feeling "connected" to the car (like myself) you need to have a manual gearbox.
HOWEVER,
if you want your car to be faster than everyone else's, nothing beats a dual clutch, to anyone that disagrees go test drive one they are absolutely incredible.
Sandor203 1 year ago
germany really has quite good engineer's.
this really needs quite much hours of vast thinking.
supersportsamppa 1 year ago
My Father has a Golf TDI with the DSG, it has 131,000 miles on it and so far it's been excellent.
wootness3000 1 year ago
i can say its crappy it breaks down, way faster than normal manual gearbox, maybe it drives good,but it breaks, and it will break, and it will be expensive to repair
SimpleAsHell 1 year ago
@SimpleAsHell which VW are u referring to?
StingRayINC 1 year ago
@SimpleAsHell Why sohould it break down faster than a manual gearbox? Don't compare DSG and CVT. CVT is crap but DSG works just like a manual gearbox except the two clutches which are controlled by hydraulic cylinders.
MrLowAltitude 1 year ago
Don't say that DSG is crappy if you haven't ever driven it!
qettyz 1 year ago 25
@qettyz i have driven it. its crappy
waldemar31293 1 year ago
@waldemar31293 You havent even driven a bicycle in your live, so be quiet troll.
derbigpr500 10 months ago
I have just got a NEW Polo 1.4 with 7 speed DSG and it is amazing. For the first week I though the petrol gauge had packed up. It goes like the clappers and the 3d body looks good too. Its a great car and about the same size inside as a Mk3 Golf.
rolandsparling 1 year ago
@rolandsparling
Which one is that mate ? the 85HP one or the :devil: 1.4GTI 180HP engine ? What kind of MPG (l/100km) do you get ?
ecoLaurentiu 1 year ago
Crappy
chr6600 1 year ago
electrical cars are the worst...using h/c,nuclear,water power and all other ways to produce mechanical energy that will be transformed to electricity and then again to mechanical energy has very low efficiency...you have losses from every fermentation and they are not invertible..
georgerelax 1 year ago
@georgerelax
It's still more efficient then producing hydrogen or burning patrol you fucking idiot
nurbsenvi 1 year ago
steam driven cars are the future
jayguy173 2 years ago
@jayguy173
I too want to think so as I enjoy steam trains, but it takes a fire to create steam, which makes it neccesary for something to burn and also makes the area very hot. Now take the size of a train boiler and try to fit it in the place of a car engine. fit? I don't think so.
HappyLappyNappy 1 year ago
@jayguy173 not sure why you say that unless you're simply trolling... steam died a long time ago because even though it's very powerful, it's incredibly inefficient. For example, the stanley steamer steam cars from the turn of last century were lucky to get a mile to the gallon of kerosene.
lilbrudder32 1 year ago
@lilbrudder32 Ever tried putting a cup of water in a microwave? Not saying that microwaves are the answer, just saying that there are other ways to heat up water.
Jeridiculous 1 year ago
@Jeridiculous a microwave is still only about 60% efficient between the wall outlet and the actual energy that heats the water. You'd be better off using the electricity to directly create electromotive force, than to heat water for a steam engine. Not to mention, the steam engine is still pretty darn inefficient in capturing energy from the steam, the more efficient ones use multiple expansions from the steam. Electric vehicles are about 80-90% efficient overall, steam is much less regardless.
lilbrudder32 1 year ago
Sorry but proaudihd is right!
Anyway it's ridiculous to argue electric cars use coal because they can be recharged with wind & solar power. The grid is going the same way too!
Don't forget it takes electricity to make hydrogen... and heaps of it!
H fuel cells require electrodes made of very expensive metals that are dissolved as they are used.
The whole point is to stop using non-renewable commodities!
Best part is they are very very FAST
Tesla Roadster all-electric 0-60mph 3.9sec
H sux!
RockManAU 2 years ago
Fuel cells became obsolete the day lithium polymer batteries where invented. Look at r/c cars the electrics blow away the nitro powered ones. Five years ago it was just the opposite. The technology is here is just being kept under raps but that can't last forever!
024reredrum 2 years ago
"H fuel cells require electrodes made of very expensive metals that are dissolved as they are used."
That's not actually true. The electrodes themselves are not expensive, but they do have catalyst coatings made of expensive metals. Those catalysts do not dissolve with use, but they can wear out if the heat output is not properly managed. The temperature needs to stay w/in a certain range to maintain peak output. No different from the catalytic converters in your current petrol/diesel car.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
It is fair to say, however, that this is very difficult. Especially with H as your fuel source, since the reaction with oxygen is highly exothermic. Different fuel sources than H are possible (and safer to store), and can require less expensive catalyst materials within the cell itself. e.g. borohydride, methane, Polysulfide-Bromine, ethanol, etc.
While making these fuels is obviously less energy efficient than direct-to-battery, they're infinitely more usable, and still an improvement on ICE.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
amazing machinery, electric cars will make it all unnecessary!
proaudiohd 2 years ago 3
electric cars can blow me
HawaiiSurf10 2 years ago
What are you ? some kinda FAG ? Friggin QUEER.
DutchyBoy113 2 years ago
Oil is not going to be this plentiful and cheap forever. Enjoy it now, I do too. But the future is electric. It will have to be. Unless you prefer horses. Judging by your name I think you do.
proaudiohd 2 years ago
The future is hydrogen fuel cells, not electric. Most of the Earths electricity is generated by coal, so "electric" powered cars are actually coal powered. alosr batteries take ALOT of power in their creation.
Stinky42O 2 years ago
Extracting hydrogen requires electricity. Fuel cells just turn the hydrogen back into electricity inside the car, to power an electric motor.. Only there is a huge loss so you end up with far less electricity than you started with. Plus the problem of a giant new infrastructure to make and store a leaky, cryogenic, explosive liquid. Why even bother? We already have an electric grid, why not just take that electricity and put it straight into the car. Making and using hydrogen is a waste.
proaudiohd 2 years ago 14
@proaudiohd You're correct, but you're overlooking a fatal problem -- the weak link in electric is the battery. Fuel cells mean more energy stored in a smaller lighter package than any battery or supercapacitor without exception. Moreover, storage in a chemical medium means the recharge time is measured in seconds. Batteries need to be charged slowly lest they be damaged, so recharge times can never go below the several-hours threshold. From a usability standpoint, this is utterly unacceptable.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@ShootMyMonkey - No doubt current batteries have their limitations. Charge times are not quite as big an issue because cars are parked all night anyways. How long does it take to fully charge your cell phone? I bet you don't know. You just plug it in overnight and use it all day. I think a 250 mile battery that charges in 8 hrs or less will be the game-changing point. It exists, just a little too expensive right now. Prices are coming down and all mfrs have an electric in the works.
proaudiohd 1 year ago
@proaudiohd Actually, I do know about the cell phone. In my case, from completely dead, it takes approximately 1 hour to fully charge it. Again, the idea of plug-in charging while parked is a serious infrastructure problem if you have many electric vehicles -- the grid-wide load will grow by orders of magnitude. Moreover, it just doesn't work when you need on-demand charging (e.g. road trip stops). Anything over 5 min. is intolerable for that
Fuel tanks/cells can do that, but batteries never can
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@proaudiohd Also, while supercapacitors can be charged quickly and don't suffer for it, their energy density is still far too small even compared to lead-acid batteries. They're suitable for large bursts at high output.
As far as being able to go 250 miles on an 8-hour charge, compare that to 400+ miles on a 90-second charge, and that's what you're up against with ICEs or hydrocarbon fuel cells for that matter. That raises the general usability of the vehicle by a massive factor.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@ShootMyMonkey -Electricity is available from your garage today, hydrogen is not. Lets not forget, the energy from hydrogen comes from the grid too. Besides upgrading the grid, you'd also have to design and build the hydrogen infrastructure from scratch. Why do that? Filling times are the only big advantage hydrogen has. If you left home with 250 miles of range everyday, you wouldnt really care about filling times. How often do you burn thru two tanks of gas in a single day? Not very.
proaudiohd 1 year ago
@proaudiohd Most people don't have a garage. Either way, point loads (for fuel plants) are easier to handle and support than distributed load growth (all homes). It also doesn't answer for the need to charge in parking lots or apartments.
As for the range -- 250 is not a lot for anyone who takes a road trip. Sure, they're a minority, but there's always someone doing it on any given day. Electric means you've eliminated that possibility entirely. It also means no more 100+ mile commutes to work.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@proaudiohd Thirdly, you seem to conflate fuel cells with H. I don't think H is the ideal fuel source, either. It sounds good because of the energy density per unit mass, and because you get only water exhaust.
You can make fuel cells run on a lot of things besides H, and they're much cheaper, much safer, still don't produce greenhouse gases, and can be produced in far more efficient ways. Hell, even hydrocarbon fuel sources can be acquired in ways that reduce overall greenhouse emissions.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@ShootMyMonkey - Electric drive is the future. The question is- how to get the electricity from the grid into the car. Sure the first gen. batteries will have limited range because they're expensive, so they don't cover every scenario. But H and fuel cells are much more expensive, not as efficient, and will take far longer to get to market. Plus you'd still have to buy liquid fuel from a filling station. I'd rather charge at home and leave with a full 'tank' every morning.
proaudiohd 1 year ago
@proaudiohd Having to fill at a station is not exactly a change from current state. What is not valid is the claim that batteries will catch up. They won't. Even the least effective of fuel cells today are already superior in range, output, lifespan, AND COST than the state of the art of batteries could hypothetically be by 2025.
Also, longer to market isn't quite true either, because battery tech is still far far behind. Fuel Cell tech from 40 yrs ago is still superior, and not by a small gap.
ShootMyMonkey 1 year ago
@proaudiohd
There are better alternatives to hydrogen-electric projects.
Bio-accumulators (where bacteria makes an electrolyte) and
Zebra-accumulator (Na-Ni-Cell) where you can refill the solution to charge the batteries.
(the solution is used up while producing the electricity).
Both projects have already a test cars running near the development centres.
SEThatered 11 months ago
@proaudiohd basically theres no easy way out, i reckon ethanol fuels are the way of the future, electric cars? meh
angrygunsmith 10 months ago
@angrygunsmith - ethanol is not a source of energy, it actually takes more energy to make it than you get from it. Plus we don't have enough farmland, even if we quit growing food. Then you're still using an inefficient combustion engine, and purchasing fuel at a station. Ethanol is a subsidy-driven waste of time, so is hydrogen. We need to advance batteries. We really need to figure out nuclear FUSION power plants. That will be our next true revolution - unlimited energy
proaudiohd 10 months ago
@proaudiohd how does it take energy, just plant bamboo, the energy comes from the sun, photosynthesis, maybe some fertilizer, i understand how compli cations could develop on the larger scale. personally id just hate to know that were gna be driving electric cars as i love combustion engines os i wanna keep combustion engines alive. i dont want to come to terms iwth the said truth
angrygunsmith 10 months ago
@proaudiohd Only problem with that is that a lot of that power comes from fossil fuels anyway, so we're back to square one, just now we have to rebuild our entire energy infrastructure. No one wants to waste that much money, unfortunately. Second, Batteries are severely ineffective. Even modern ones don't last as long as they would need to drive a full electric car.
tmckenney7 10 months ago
@proaudiohd Plus you have large machines that require that extra horsepower that simple charging them will not deliver.Hydrogen Fuel Cells are just as horrible, they are very inefficient just as you said. I think It would be worth looking into hydrogen combustion however. We would only need to store it as a gas at that point. Simply, We are going to need something radically different if we are to create an energy infrastructure that is efficient and unreliable on fossil/foreign fuels.
tmckenney7 10 months ago
@proaudiohd or a new combustable liquid so that conversion of current vehicles is a breeze.
DjTommyKx 7 months ago
@proaudiohd electricity must be stored somewhere. hydrogen has much greater energy density than traditional batteries. but you don't have to burn it to get energy back, just use fuel cells, they are efficient and safe
Kengur8 5 months ago
@DutchyBoy113 LOL!! your funny,
seriously when do you ever use the N position with automatics
blondemax 2 years ago
On mechanic point that is true, but there is a lot to gain in how to control the electric motor (electronics wise).
nlhans1990 2 years ago
sasdsda
holyzzz36 2 years ago
cool song
sushimasta28 2 years ago
samething i was thinking wonder whos it's by
DTLSRT4 2 years ago
cool :D
frcgumak 3 years ago