DISQUS

Ricorun · 8 months ago

Juat curious, Jazz, but what do the folks there think about Amory Lovins' ideas about integrated engineering and lightweight carbon fiber body parts? Also, is AFS Trinity there?

Jazz · 8 months ago

Ricorun, didn't see Trinity, but we're going to be doing a radio interview with some of the principals on Thursday and I'll bring up the Amory Lovin concept and get back to you. Thanks for the link.

GreenDreams · 8 months ago

Good post Jazz and congrats on TMV being invited to blog the show.

I'm very curious if anyone there is looking at developing the fascinating hydrogen from starch technology developed at Virginia Tech. The fuel, a starch and water slurry, is easy to pump with existing technology and is non flammable and not held under pressure, overcoming all the pitfalls of a national hydrogen fuel system and produces cars with nothing to leak and burn in the event the fuel tank is ruptured. Enzymes, which are not used up in the process, convert the starch to hydrogen in the vehicle at ambient temperature and pressure, and a typical auto fuel tank could power the car 300 miles. The starch used need not be from edible plants (Kudzu power?). Is anyone exploring this?
http://greendreams.wordpress.com/2007/07/07/hyd...

Jazz · 8 months ago

Wow! I hadn't even heard about that one. I'll bring it up on Thursday. Thanks, Green.

Ricorun · 8 months ago

I hadn't heard of that one either, Greendreams. However, after reading the article I am given to wonder how practical "re-fueling" is -- i.e., how long does it take for the reaction to produce hydrogen? The way the article is worded, that appears to be the achilles heel of the whole process. They correctly identify four concerns that need to be effectively tackled for hydrogen (actually, anything) to become a viable alternative: (1) production, (2) storage (let me call that "warehousing" to distinguish it from "on-vehicle" storage), (3) distribution, and (4) fuel cells. I can see where they've addressed the first three. It's the last one I question. And frankly, I think it is more appropriate to break that down into (4a) on-board storage, and; (4b) re-fueling of the on-board storage. And specifically, I question (4b) more than anything else.

However, if it is just a time constraint, then perhaps it might be possible to compartmentalize the process into a "swappable" battery cartridge, ala what Project Better Place envisions for more traditional chemical batteries.

GreenDreams · 8 months ago

Not all the details are in the PLOS article, a bit more in the patent, which I read when it was first issued. Since pressurized hydrogen would never be stored in the vehicle, the starch would be fed to a reaction chamber as needed by the fuel cell. The fuel cell charges the battery, which drives the car. Refueling is faster than with gaseous hydrogen, as the article notes. You're just putting more starch in the tank, not starting the reaction from scratch. It appears that it takes about 2 hours to reach peak production when first started, but theoretically this need only be done once (assuming the car recharges itself when not in use, keeping the reaction going). The key is the battery. The starch and enzymes make hydrogen as needed to keep it charged. As the motor depletes the battery, more starch would be fed to the reaction chamber to recharge it. Battery reserves would have to be sufficient to account for the reaction time to make hydrogen and supply charge to the battery. The authors project that it will take 6-8 years from discovery to application. By the way, the research completely ignores the other source of energy. Solid starch yielding hydrogen and CO2 gas provides pressure too, which could be used.

Ricorun · 8 months ago

A few things, Greendreams...

(1) You say, "Not all the details are in the PLOS article, a bit more in the patent, which I read when it was first issued."

Can you direct me to the patent? I'd say that would go a long way to ameliorating my skepiticism. Or not.

I dunno how to most effectively answer your post. Should I be detailed in my skepticism, or should I be more pithy? Before anything, I think I should point out that I'm a big fan of alternative energy sources. I've read extensively about them. I want them to happen. More importantly, I truly believe they have to happen. The only question remaining in my mind is... what are the best alternatives?

I am ready, willing, and able to invest, at least to some degree, in technologies that I think are worth while. But I am nowhere near super-rich or anything, which is to say I cannot leverage any alternative. Thus, I am unable to do anything other than address their intrinsic qualities -- and hope that some super-rich someone (or some collection of super-rich someones) doesn't alter the playing field too much and quash their potential in the mean time. I guess you could say that nothing more focuses the mind on economic issues (and makes you less partisan) than plunking your money down. And that, I think (even if you don't actually have the money to spend) -- is the best way to focus one's mind on such matters.

That being said, I wish I had a nickel for every time some company claimed they were "2-4 years from being economically viable". That to me is the very outside of the envelope -- specifically, that is the area where an idea which has proven itself in the lab may or may not be able to cross the last first few hurdles from being, in Jazz's words, "technically possible" to "economically feasible". The fact is, the two concepts are often miles apart. Not always, but often (typically, only 2 out of every 10 make it past that point). Consequently, I view your comment, "The authors project that it will take 6-8 years from discovery to application," as not exactly comforting.

GreenDreams · 8 months ago

I agree Ricorun. I want these technologies to help us solve some big problems, but frankly, it's not where I'd invest either. No one has licensed the technology and research continues, so I don't expecting to be driving a starch car anytime soon. I am very interested in how different technologies are progressing, including Lovins' carbon fiber lightweights. I'll see if I saved a link to the patent, and guess we'll both stay tuned to see what works and what doesn't in making our transportation systems work more sustainably.

anita1 · 3 months ago

Cheap new cars - We can now find you the best deals for the new car you are looking for by searching across our panel of manufacturer dealers across the whole of the UK.