I think the big thing in the next 5 years will be diesel-electric
hybrids. Which people will then modify, like the prius, to be plug-in
vehicles by adding 500 pounds of batteries and charging circuitry.

Few people in our culture want to be potentially limited by not being
able to drive their car all day every day, even though we don't. This is
a main reason that people aren't as quick to adopt electric vehicles.
The person trying to sell it says "It has 120 miles range" and the
potential buyer says "that's not enough" though they probably only drove
30 miles that day.

 Hydrogen is nice in theory and all, but you mention all of the main
problems. There are promising advances in solid oxide fuel cells that
could run on alcohol, CNG, or some other hydrocarbon, but then their
efficiency and PRICE has to surpass already mature and dirt-cheap IC
technology to become viable.

Electric vehicles are quite viable, despite jokes like Olin's. Most
people don't need to drive very far. If you commute 20 miles to work, an
electric is a very real possibility for you. The only problem is that
you either need to build it yourself, buy someone else's conversion
(which may be a mixture of compromises), or buy a really expensive
rich-boy-toy (tzero, etc) - which is why I come to the conclusion that
plug-in diesel hybrids will be the next logical step.

--
Martin K

Russell McMahon wrote:
>> James Newtons Massmind wrote:
>>     
>>> Over all the future of diesel cars looks good to me.
>>>
>>> Rebuttals?
>>>       
>
> Good technology but still not good enough long term.
>
> Std diesels make particles of a size which make them amongst the most 
> carcinogenic substance known to man. Doesn't seem to be well known. 
> Hard to filter and filters that work tend to be somewhat power 
> robbing. Not insurmountable.
>
> Still a hydrocarbon IC engine. Less refined fuels than petrol and 
> easier from a bio base but still energy intensive to produce. Still 
> caught up in the peak oil catastrophe and /or "in real terms 
> everything takes more energy to produce than it makes". Fusion escapes 
> that web, but a fusion powered car seems unlikely this millennium. 
> (BTTF notwithstanding).
>
> Hydrogen, alas, is liable to have more long term potential once the 
> storage and distribution issues succumb to volume market.
> Nasty stuff. Terrible mass density. Terrible volume density. Nasty 
> storage issues. Dangerous flames (invisible). Superb energy per mass.
>
> Stirling will save you, but only after you put 100 billion odd into 
> R&D.
> If you really really really must you could make an essentially 
> identical Stirling run on petrol, diesel, LPG, alcohol, Hydrogen, 
> Methanol, bio whatever, wood, coal, tar, rice husks, paper, garbage, 
> solar, nuclear thermal, ... .  ie most thermal sources. External 
> combustion so NOX emissions can be vvvv good.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist