Alternative fuels?

[JKTide]

Question that I am surprised no one has asked. Instead of paying all this money for R&D on a new fuel supply, why not have R&D on how to make our current cars get better gas mileage?? I KNOW that car manufacturers have the technology, and have had it for a long time, to produce cars that get 90mpg, however, the oil companies pay them huge bucks to keep them on the shelf. So, to me, it makes sense for us to invest wisely in the future and come up with cars that simply get better gas mileage. I refuse to believe that the absolute best gas mileage that my 05 pathfinder can possibly get is 16.9mpg. I refuse to believe that IF Nissan wanted to, they couldn't make it get 35mpg.

We can land on the moon, orbit the earth, split an atom and trace DNA but we can't produce cars that get better gas mileage? Ridiculous. Instead, the argument has been shifted away from that and has been focused on making cars run on other fuel sources. While I do believe that is an important area to research, we need to also really focus on making our current fuel source more efficient.

Sorry for the rant, but I just filled up and it cost me $37.00.

 

[Bamaro]

I KNOW that car manufacturers have the technology, and have had it for a long time, to produce cars that get 90mpg, however, the oil companies pay them huge bucks to keep them on the shelf.

That little gem has been floating around for years but is totally untrue.

 

[Queasy1]

Those cars that get 90mpg are 'special' and you won't see them on the road anytime soon because they cost a ton to produce and are nothing more than concept cars that would be impractical for everyday use. As it stands, gas-electric hybrids are the the current development trend and are slowly beginning to see their way into SUVs.

 

[bamabake]

We need more oil.

 

[Displaced Bama Fan]

More spigots in Alaska, California, Mexico and Venezuela!

 

[bamabake]

More spigots in Alaska, California, Mexico and Venezuela!

rgr that

 

[IHateUT]

10-4 :biggrin2:

 

[ValuJet]

...

 

[IH8Orange]

I've got nothing against searching for more energy sources, but I agree that we have the technology to stretch the efficiency of our present sources and we should attempt to see just how efficient we can get with them.

Definitely, the energy suppliers also have a motive to suppress that technology. As consumers and citizens, it is our choice as to which direction we will go. As an engineer, I want to address the challenge of energy efficiency. There's no worthwhile reason as to why we should be the slaves of the oil industry or the former sand hoboes who now use our own dollars to attack us.

 

[bamabake]

I've got nothing against searching for more energy sources, but I agree that we have the technology to stretch the efficiency of our present sources and we should attempt to see just how efficient we can get with them.

Definitely, the energy suppliers also have a motive to suppress that technology. As consumers and citizens, it is our choice as to which direction we will go. As an engineer, I want to address the challenge of energy efficiency. There's no worthwhile reason as to why we should be the slaves of the oil industry or the former sand hoboes who now use our own dollars to attack us.

I am right with you. Let me ask a question, not a loaded on but your opinion.
What is the best way for us to have and implement all of the various ways we could be more efficient ? I know that hybred cars are becoming a bit more popular as they become more suited to what consumers want and so forth. What is the best approach to take as a country in your opinion?

 

[IH8Orange]

I am right with you. Let me ask a question, not a loaded on but your opinion.
What is the best way for us to have and implement all of the various ways we could be more efficient ? I know that hybred cars are becoming a bit more popular as they become more suited to what consumers want and so forth. What is the best approach to take as a country in your opinion?

I don't know if the issue should be handled necessarily "as a country". The industry should put the money into research on the expectation that the costs of fossil fuels may continue to rise at an even greater pace because of the reliance on a volatile political area as one of their major sources. I think that is a reasonable hedge for the consumer and commercial automobile market.

It is certain that practical fuel-efficient vehicles are going to cost more because of the high R&D investment. If the operating costs over the lifetime of the car save enough money to offset the higher up-front costs, then consumers will purchase them.

Gasoline combustion became the primary means of propulsion for automobiles mainly because its efficiency and simplicity made it the best solution of the early 20th century. There are many exotic ways to stretch the efficiencies of not only the combustion cycle itself, but also in energy transfer and recovery strategies. The internal combustion engine transfers chemical energy into thermal energy into gas pressure into compressive stress into torque. The transmission converts torque into fluid pressure and then back into torque again. The universal joints transfer the torque via axial stress, shear stress, and tension to the driveshaft. The driveshaft transfers the torque along its length through torsion. The differential transfers torque to the wheels through shear stress, compression, and torsion. The wheels then transfer angular momentum to the tires.

Certainly a lot of frictional energy is lost in all those various methods of transfer.

 

[bamabake]

I don't know if the issue should be handled necessarily "as a country". The industry should put the money into research on the expectation that the costs of fossil fuels may continue to rise at an even greater pace because of the reliance on a volatile political area as one of their major sources. I think that is a reasonable hedge for the consumer and commercial automobile market.

It is certain that practical fuel-efficient vehicles are going to cost more because of the high R&D investment. If the operating costs over the lifetime of the car save enough money to offset the higher up-front costs, then consumers will purchase them.

Gasoline combustion became the primary means of propulsion for automobiles mainly because its efficiency and simplicity made it the best solution of the early 20th century. There are many exotic ways to stretch the efficiencies of not only the combustion cycle itself, but also in energy transfer and recovery strategies. The internal combustion engine transfers chemical energy into thermal energy into gas pressure into compressive stress into torque. The transmission converts torque into fluid pressure and then back into torque again. The universal joints transfer the torque via axial stress, shear stress, and tension to the driveshaft. The driveshaft transfers the torque along its length through torsion. The differential transfers torque to the wheels through shear stress, compression, and torsion. The wheels then transfer angular momentum to the tires.

Certainly a lot of frictional energy is lost in all those various methods of transfer.

Wow, cool. I was wondering if the govt should lead the changes through mandates like side load washers, or higher MPG standards or should the various industries (it isnt just cars) do it out of a moral choice or should the market respond to the publics desires. Certainly higher energy prices accross the board would naturally move industries to increase efficiencies. It is an interesting topic.