It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


200 to 300 Miles Per Gallon for a car is to good to import to America ? Mileage tax ?

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 30 2014 @ 01:53 PM
a reply to: Grimpachi

Hydrogen takes 50-60 kWh of electrical power to make 1kg by electrolysis of water. That is quite a lot of power and it will cost at least as much as petrol/gasoline or diesel, or more depending on your power prices. Solar panels won't be able to make that kind of power unless you have a lot of them.

Cost of hydrogen

According to these calculations, which are in line with my own approximate calculations, the cost of hydrogen is about the same as petrol or diesel and in some cases more expensive so there is no point using it. Unless you want zero carbon emissions.

Vehicles require energy to move. The bigger and heavier the vehicle the more energy it needs to move around. That's why all of these ultra fuel economy vehicles are all tiny little lightweight things, that is the best way to increase fuel economy, decrease weight and drag.

edit on 30-4-2014 by JimTSpock because: add

posted on Apr, 30 2014 @ 04:14 PM
a reply to: JimTSpock

I assume you are referring to the new process the navy has come up with and not my redneck engineering feat on my truck.

There is no doubt that it will take more energy to produce the liquid fuel from water than what we will get out of it and currently the navy has said the cost to do so would be approximately $6 a gallon however I don't think you were following my train of though on the matter which is most likely my fault for not explaining it well.

As I am sure you know the current power grid in the US is set up in a way that even if we built the wind farms or geothermal even huge solar farms to produce the bulk of the nations energyout in the Midwest that the current grid couldn't deliver it without a new infrastructure being built to handle it.

I am also sure you are aware that the current coal fire plants at given times of day produce excess electricity because it isn't like they can simply turn off or cut back on production because that would wind up being even costlier restarting furnaces and such so right now that excess energy is just waste.

In those cases their could be seawater to liquid fuel refineries built close by or on site that would use that excess electricity in the conversion process. Doesn't that seem like a practice application for the excess or wasted electric currently benefiting no one ATM.?

Now the reason I brought up the current infrastructure isn't so much for solar however maybe one day in the future it could be implemented but for now that seems pretty far off. I have been reading some interesting reports on geothermal breakthroughs the past few years however for the US the infrastructure needed for that energy to be developed just doestnt exist due to location of most our geothermal. What I propose is for geothermal plants be used primarily in the production of electric for the seawater conversion process. Instead of building power lines to carry the electric from areas like Yellowstone to the rest of the US such facilities could be used specifically for seawater conversion. Lines would still be needed but far less.

Currently when discussing the seawater to liquid fuel conversion the cost is estimated at $6 dollars a gallon basing the cost in no small part on electric prices (with the nvy that would be nuclear) but when you start to figure a different source of the electric such as geothermal that otherwise such a factory would be to costly due to an old infrastructure to consider...well it could be a game changer.

I am considering this for capturing excess or waste electrict and utilizing otherwise untapped energy sources. I really do think that the breakthrough in seawater conversion to liquid fuel has the potential to change the world in a very positive way.

I do plan on writing a thread going into depth on how the above mentioned breakthrough and several other breakthroughs in the respective energy fields has the potential to change the course of our history. Overall I find that this is a very exciting era of energy technology.

I thinking of the possibilities and big picture of things. There is a point in useing hydrogen but only if we use it in conjunction with energy production and storage of that energy. As you can tell I am not speaking of useing a pure hydrogen gass but the ability to convert that with co2 to produce liquid fuel.

I really need to sit down and write that thread but ATM it is not possible in fact I am on a crappy iPad.

Edit to add I did misunderstand your post.

As far as my truck goes that is a whole different story and works for me but would like to improve on the system I had just thought you may have had some knowledge you could share on permanent magnet alternators. Btw the solar panels on the roof of my truck only charge the deep cycle throughout the day they were never intended to to be a direct hydrogen splitter. The battery runs the dry cell for limited time which is why I am thinking of building a squirl cage fan and place it in the bed of the truck to spin a permanent magnet alternator to keep a longer charge on the deep cycle. The stainless tank is a separate system converting aluminum cans to hydrogen in a chemical slurry.

The truck and system is a project/hobby.
edit on 30-4-2014 by Grimpachi because: De

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 03:21 AM
a reply to: Grimpachi

What you are talking about could give us another option in the future for energy production and enable us to continue to use internal combustion engines for a long time to come without relying heavily on fossil fuels and black gold, oil. There are a number of ways to produce oil substitutes and as the technology matures they might become more economically viable.

As for your truck I think you are probably wasting your time and money on it unfortunately and changing to a more efficient alternator won't do much for you. A big heavy 5.9 litre cast iron pushrod V8 is never going to be a super economical powerplant for a passenger vehicle and if you really want a significant improvement in fuel economy you will probably have to change to a smaller lighter more efficient car like a hybrid, that's my opinion.

There are some simple things you can do to improve your fuel economy which don't cost a cent.

Drive more gently, accelerate gently and use the least amount of throttle you need.
Make sure your tyres are inflated correctly.
Make sure you are not carrying things you don't need like stuff in the boot.
Roof racks and other drag inducing things can be removed.
Make sure your engine air filter is clean and your vehicle is well maintained.
If you follow the guides below you could save 10-15% in fuel.

Don't waste your money on scam products which claim improved mileage. None of the products in this test did anything and some of them were harmful. With the exception of low rolling resistance tyres which can have a small improvement.
edit on 1-5-2014 by JimTSpock because: add

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 04:14 AM
a reply to: JimTSpock

As far as the future of energy that is exactly what I am talking about and I think it would be entirely possible. In the next few days I will definitely write the thread on it detailing further.

Now as far as my truck goes maybe I wasn't clear but the system for which I have been running the past two years has consistently delivered better economy and performance the way I use it. You have understood that I am currently running to completely independent hydrogen systems where they are non reliant on the engine to deliver any power? I am not interested in buying some new truck to replace it.

For you to say I would be wasting my time and money makes me think you havent really grasped the point of this "hobby/toy/off road beast. What I was really interested in was if you knew about permanent magnet alternators and if they delivered a difference in power or not. I thought maybe you had some insight into them.

Anyway as I had stated before my Nissan frontier is plenty fine for day to day economy driving. Oh well maybe phage cloud tell me more about permanent magnet alternators and the pros and cons about them. I might even get or build one for the trucks engine. Ideally I would like to get it to the point of running short 2 or three mile trips on just stored hydrogen from beer cans and stored electric in the deep cycle. As is it does pretty damn good except I am going to changing out the trans next month.

I do appreciate your imput but you totally missed the point of my project truck I am not trying to make an everyday driver it is specialized for fun only ie camping, off reading sometimes traversing very short distances measurable in only a few miles in a day. You are thinking mainstream on road everyday driving. This is purpose modifying.

Also as I stated from the beginning I don't buy into scams such as Stan myers. Did you take the time to check the link I provided of that high-school kids project that thing is on the up and up. The school actually has it on display. You have to realize it is only a proof of concept and wouldn't be practical for driving on the road but it is scalable.

edit on 1-5-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 05:28 AM
a reply to: Grimpachi

If it's a hobby you enjoy go for it. You could try a permanent magnet alternator but the magnets in them can be expensive and in my opinion it would make very little difference. What do you want to change the alternator for? It won't reduce friction or load on the engine in any meaningful way and you can't use the power for hydrogen generation as it will just result in an energy loss.
You might be saving some money using hydrogen but it depends where you get the hydrogen from.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 06:29 AM
a reply to: JimTSpock

You remember my repeated mention of the squirl cage fan for the rear in the bed of the truck such a setup that I have in mind would use the back flow of air trucks create by the cab positioning so any extra drag would be minimal I would also fabricate a hinging system to where I could tilt it horizontal if I camp on a hill or windy valley and recharge the deep cycles overnight or whenever.

I plan on taking this truck down to panama next year or year after to leave for return each year. This would be my second road trip of the like. From that point. I have a one way trip in mind for which the truck will not be returning.

The hydrogen that my truck currently uses come frome two sources. I am sure I have said this before
One system is a dry cell(hydrogen are you familiar) that one is directly hooked to the deepcycle battery wich are charged by the solar panels on the roof. The second system is a chemical slurry which breaks dowd beer,coke,or any aluminum product into hydrogen and ash substance. That system provides the majority of hydrogen and the chemical is cheap the aluminum is scrap found at party's,bars, even the side of the road.

I have no plans to change the chemical system but the dry cell powered by the deep cycle is lacking and can use improvement.

Also neodymium magnets are not anywhere near what I consider expensive. Whether or not there would be any benifit to also changing out the one on the engine is something I am trying to find out.

If there is any benifit then that is all I need.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 08:16 AM
a reply to: Grimpachi

Your dry cells produce hydrogen and oxygen from water using electrolysis. You need 50-60kWh for 1kg of hydrogen which is equivalent to about 2.5 gallons of petrol in a hydrogen fuel cell powered electric motor vehicle. Yours would be less efficient than this so for your application probably equivalent to about 1 gallon of petrol.

You are not going to get that kind of power from the batteries in your car or solar panels on the roof of the vehicle. You need a lot of solar panels for that amount of power so the capacity of hydrogen production in your low power dry cell system can only create a small amount of usable energy which is far too small to be able to power the vehicle. In other words it is ineffective and I doubt it would make much difference at all to the running of the engine, probably not even enough to overcome the weight of the dry cell/battery system. Try removing the entire dry cell battery solar panel system and the weight reduction might result in improved fuel economy, if it does then you know it is not worth the weight for the small amount of energy it produces.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 09:07 AM
a reply to: JimTSpock

I am about to give up on you.

My dry cell that runs off of a deep cycle battery that is charged by the panels on my roof has been working quite well for 2 years now.

So now that I made that verry clear again if you don't have any info on permanent magnet alternators then I am not sure why you are persisting with your line questions and unasked information.

Side story:

About 9 years ago I was working in the stain glass field and came up with a new kiln for firing glass out of necessity using materials inspired by the space shuttle tiles.

Now everyone told me how it wouldn't work and when I got it working they still told me why it shouldn't work. Even when my shop was featured on tv for doing hard rock casinos in record time people accused me of making an inferior glass product.

I wound up building and selling a few of those kilns to other shops where they kept them as a guarded secret. About 4 and a half to 5 years ago I was approached by a Chinese company about those kilns.

To make a long story short and cut to the chase I am not worried about spending money building something new that might not work aka the squirl cage with the permanent magnet alternator that's my worry t is going to happen whether I can find the info here on the alternator or somewhere else but if you only want to tell me what I already have working cant work well no matter how much you repeat it that will not change my mind build or the results I have already gotten.

Look I am not selling nothing I am not pushing anything. I was asking for information if you didn't have it you could have saved me some agrivation by just saying so.

You sounded knowledgeable that is why I asked maybe you are but just do not want to be helpful and that's fine. I am sorry but I simply don't have the patience for this.

If my squirl cage fails then so be it but it my time and my money which there is more than enough because of that other thing I was told couldn't possibly work.

Look I am done. I will just IM Phage.
edit on 1-5-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 10:05 AM
a reply to: Grimpachi

I've told you my opinion on the alternator and I don't think it will make any difference. It's just an alternator. Your project has a few problems I think and it doesn't quite add up. Sorry to rain on your parade but that's just my opinion.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 10:44 AM

originally posted by: network dude
I remember asking why in 1987, Honda had a CRX that got over 50MPG and today we cannot get over 40? I was told it's emission equipment. It's kind of easy to see it's big oil keeping us using exactly as much as they want us to.

This VW is the kind of thing we need to throw at the AGW crowd. President Obama? Are you listening? Didn't think so.

Isn't it blatently obvious that your government (and mine too btw) are not actually 'your' government?

This simple but ludicrously illogical fact should highlight this absolute fact very clearly indeed;

Pre-emission control engines could run a vehicle to over 50MPG, post-emission control engines can barely make 40MPG.

Why do you have emission controls? To limit the emissions produced by burning gas...without the inefficient controls vehicles burnt LESS gas, with them they burn MORE gas.

Less gas burnt, less emission...less requirement for emission controls.

Now there is producable, replicable technology readily available that can probably be easily retrofitted into existing vehicles and vehicle production by modification of engine systems, that even on the heaviest of vehicles could at LEAST increase gas efficiency by 300% but are ACTIVELY being denied to the public..when gas prices are at all time highs..when people are having to go to food banks...when the poor are too poor to fill their gas tank...if this isn't absolute proof positive of who the government actually works for and represents, i really don't know what is.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 10:48 AM
a reply to: JimTSpock

Well what you said about the alternator was you didn't think it would make much a a gain but that implies there are gains to be had. So if that's all the info or knowledge you have on the subject well ok that's fine.

But don't worry you aren't raining on parade you may think you are but seriously think about it you couldn't even give me a decent answer to a question I was asking but you think your qualified to to tell me something I have had working for quite some time doesn't work. Dude that actually has me laughing.

Sorry to break it to you but I don't know you well enough to respect your opinion so don't worry your not hurting my feelings. I just figured I would give you a shot at solving a problem but you seem to be more interested in finding your own.

I am not insulting you like I said I don't recognize you or your persona here and maybe I caught you on an off day I certainly hope that's the case. Anyway it's cool I sent Phage a PM I am sure he can answer my question thoroughly or at least point me in the direction of pertanent information of the subject. On very rare occasions he has said "I don't know" and that is cool to. I don't know is better than wild goose chases.

Anyway peace. It may be a while till I try a repor with you again I think your avatar threw me off or like I said it may be an off day.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 10:58 AM
a reply to: Grimpachi

Good post.

The Hydrogen generated from otherwise wasted electricity, could be stored and used directly to make steam to drive the generating turbines when demand is higher.

No real need to convert it to a liquid fuel first...just store it, burn it to make steam, use steam to make electricity.

Apart from doing that, the creation of newer, more compact and more efficient emergy storage mediums are needed.

Graphene batteries (super-duper-caps) look like they will be the way forwards when we start making them in MUCH larger sizes.

By H production and burning to re-generate the electricity that would otherwise be lost during off-peak demand times, although still wasteful, is probably the best choice to drive up efficiency for now.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 11:09 AM
a reply to: Grimpachi

You remember my repeated mention of the squirl cage fan for the rear in the bed of the truck such a setup that I have in mind would use the back flow of air trucks create by the cab positioning so any extra drag would be minimal I would also fabricate a hinging system to where I could tilt it horizontal if I camp on a hill or windy valley and recharge the deep cycles overnight or whenever.

Love your thinking on this.

If you positioned the squirrel cage out of airstream, you'd have very little or virtually no extra drag on your truck.

You'd need to place ducting from the air stream and feed it towards (not directly attached or fed in thru an airtight coupling) the generator, this will direct the flow and drag should be at a minimum.

Nice idea.

Maybe even have it on a motorised platform and be able to raise and lower it into and out of the stream?

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 06:53 PM
a reply to: MysterX

Thanks I have the idea sort of worked out as it will also need to work around my truck boxes. I really need to get some figures on some alternators as I have seen the ones I am talking about being used on sailboats. I may build a larger dry cell or add another deep cycle. The one I have I really didn't have anything to go by so I played with battery chargers and trickle chargers it was interesting.

I need to build this and get it down to Panama because I am planing a South American trip and I want it to be one of a kind. The biggest thing I need to consider in the design will be how to keep the locals from striping the parts.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 07:13 PM

•Volkswagen L1 - Volkswagen at one time had planned to have the L1 on the market by 2011, but have now pushed it back to 2013. Although it is a gasoline powered engine, the L1 is stripped down to the point of bare minimum in size. Volkswagen claims that it allows to the L1 to get nearly 240 miles per gallon

Another write up but the below link has some neat pics:
2014 Volkswagen XL1, The 261-MPG Car, Debuts

Less than six years after promising the world a car capable of returning a fuel economy of 1.0 liter of fuel burned per 100 kilometers driven, roughly equivalent to an insane 235 mpg, Volkswagen has done even better, revealing today, in production trim, a car capable of returning a fuel economy of 261 mpg or about 0.9 liters per 100 kilometers.

Volkswagen hasn’t given us details about how long the battery takes to charge or how much one can expect to pay for an XL1, though we should know more following the car’s launch in Geneva next month. We also don’t know what markets the XL1 will be offered in, though the U.S. is unlikely to be on that list.

Production of the 2014 Volkswagen XL1 is scheduled to commence later this year at the automaker’s plant in Osnabrück, Germany. Only around 50 examples will be built for the initial run, with Volkswagen planning to lift this figure should demand be sufficient.

posted on May, 1 2014 @ 07:20 PM
To be honest if this country wanted to save 100s and 1000s of gallons of gas a day throughout America all they would have to do is time the traffic lights so that if you drove the speed limit on a major road with crossing traffic you would never have to stop. Wichita Tx on their mail street has timed lights and you may stop once but if you do the speed limit it is clear sailing all the way. Easy to do but must be to hard or to efficient for the PTB. It would cut fuel consumption, decrease writing tickets for speeding Ooops can't have revenue loss....Hummmm?

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 11:57 AM

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: JimTSpock
I even added a dry cell which by itself I couldn't tell any difference

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: JimTSpockbut the dry cell powered by the deep cycle is lacking and can use improvement.

You yourself say you couldn't tell any difference and it is lacking. I'm sure it does need improvement. I explained why it is ineffective. These hydrogen dry cells for cars sold on the internet are scams.

Then you say you want a bigger dry cell and more battery power. Doesn't sound like you are very satisfied with the performance.
An alternator, PMA or not, connected to a fan running off airflow of the moving vehicle to charge batteries used to power the dry cell will just cause drag and energy loss. There is no free energy. Previously I was referring to the alternator on the engine.

But you say it all works fine. Good luck to you then.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 01:34 PM
a reply to: JimTSpock

You seem very intent on telling me something doesn't work.

In fact it seems you went back and reread the information I gave you from the start so I can only guess you were not paying much attention at the start. In fact I was pretty clear and reiterated more than a few times how things were set up.

Your statement about free energy is misplaced because if you had been paying attention you would know I never made that claim nor does my system even come close to giving that impression. You really seem to have a problem with my setup I don't know why and honestly your comments are merely annoying now.

My system works but not as well as I would like and that is why I asked about permanent magnet alternators, but you either do not have any knowledge about them which is why you have been less than helpful in providing requested information to me about them or you have some hang up that I can't fathom at this time which is why you persistently keep going back to the subject matter that isn't even relevant.

I could understand your position/attitude or whatever your goal is if I was trying to sell something or get people to build something, but damn man, seriously I don't get you. Oh well I am sure that winning personality is great in some circles.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 02:07 PM
a reply to: Grimpachi

I thought you were talking about the alternator on the engine so that was my mistake. I haven't been paying much attention. lol. So you don't understand why I said there is no free energy. If that's the case there's nothing more to say.

You could try reading this it might help.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 02:33 PM
a reply to: JimTSpock

That is why I said you haven't been paying attention.

I don't know where the disconnect is that you are having such a hard time. I have never, not once claimed anything about free energy with my setup. In fact I have made clear that it is not free energy.

So even after all the text that has been written on the subject within this thread you have not grasped that I would like to apologize as I have seriously miscalculated when asking if you had any information to add.

You know I never even said the aluminum was free just that it was scrap but if there is anything that is free to me it would be the aluminum but that is just because I don't have to pay anything for it.

You are correct in one sense there really is nothing more to be said between us on this matter.

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in