FEB 18

Rankine cycle engines are far from cutting edge. Many gas fired electric plants are combined cycle, using both a Brayton cycle turbine and a Rankine cycle turbine.

It's interesting that they've gone to the effort of testing this in a car, because common wisdom would be that it isn't close to being cost effective. I wonder if there is actually something that they've done new that is getting it closer to being cost effective. The coverage I've seen doesn't really seem to indicate anything new.

Slow advances are being made in Rankine cycle engines. In the world of geothermal they use working fluids other than water with lower boiling points to make use of geothermal heat sources that are too cool for steam cycles. As they gradually bring down the cost of these binary Rankine cycle engines more and smaller geothermal resources become economically viable.

Just make an electric engine! What is the point of getting more and more complicated with the internal conundrum engine!

electric MOTOR, sorry!

Internal combustion engines create a power density and energy density that is unmatched by electric vehicle systems. Electric motors can generate better torque, but until you can combine an economical electric system that rivals the ICE in range and power, complaining about the ICE won't help.

Since computers waste a lot of energy in the form of heat as well, I've always wondered about the possibility of recapturing some of that energy.

Does anyone know of projects using this or other technology that aim to recapture wasted heat energy in computers?

Carl, Almost everything is a source of waste heat energy... a person dissipates about 100W all the time. The only problem is that Carnot long ago showed us that the efficiency of extracting useful energy from a heat source becomes much lower as the temperature difference between the heat source and the heat sink (ambient temperature) is lowered. This means that it becomes increasingly costly to recover energy as the temperature of the heat source goes down.

Engineers and scientists have been trying to invent ever cheaper, more efficient heat engines to utilize lower temperature heat for nearly 200 years... but don't expect the concept of "waste" heat to go away anytime soon.

all these electric cars shown in the videos here http://www.kickinggas.org would be helped by steam engines for highway driving.
steam engines can use any fuel and can recapture as much of the heat as you want to build expansion chambers for.

I heard about 6 months ago about a chaps idea to use waste heat to improve engine efficiency. It was either this site or wired perhaps. The idea was to inject water into the car engine which turns to steam driving the pistons. Petrol is used half the time and heats the eninge and drives the car. Water turing into steam is used the other half of the time cooling the engine and driving the car. Sounded pretty cool and probably more efficient that the exaust heat capture device.

RE: James Staunton

Sure.. electric motor.. where is it going to get its power from? Sorry, petrol is still the most effective energy source for cars.

BMW discussed this concept in 2005

Sure.. electric motor.. where is it going to get its power from?

Uh... from the power company? They're pretty good at it, or so I've heard.

I dont understand why the adiabatic engine (Hot vapor engine) never took off.

http://schou.dk/hvce/

Ive seen one first hand and had the pleasure of working for the yaunick family after his death and had it explained to me in Smokey's Garage.

I know they are not out yet but lookup nanowire batteries. If they are 10X the density of Li bat... The fuel argument is moot. Cleaning up the processing of Coal or fuel at an electric plant would be infinately easier than doing it to every car. Thankfully BUSH doesn't want clean coal either. Oh oops :)

@ AD

I think you made Thomas' point. The power companies get their power from petrol -- Generally speaking.

And many of the coal burning plants produce more (and worse) pollution than cars burning gasoline.

BMW http://www.gizmag.com/go/4936/

As an undergrad at Arizona State, a group of Chemical Engineering students are looking in to using a thermal differential to power a small motor for a competition. Using Peltier junctions to capture heat that a motor or breaks radiate seems like a much better use. Convert heat energy directly back to DC power. The costs are minimal and the junctions could also provide cooling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peltier_effect#Peltier_effect

1) The number and volume of uneducated and misguided green enthusiasts in the world is staggering. The comments above are further proof of that.

2) Honda is wasting money and time as are all car makers. On the surface it makes little or no sense. But once you dig and think it does... two reasons - One, big oil dominates, and Two, existing car companies are deeply invested in combustion engines and the civil infrastructure to support anything else doesn't exist.
3) Electric cars are NOT the answer!!! At least not if hydrocarbon fueled power plants are the source of the power. You are just shifting, not fixing the problem.

As an aside... if the folks saying it's simplier to clean up coal plants and the mini-eco disasters that feed them (mines) knew the truth they simply would STFU. In monetary terms alone it is a no-go... too dirty and the recapture tech long term is too costly (you still have to dispose and store/recycle the materials and infrastructure to clean the emissions of the plants, and that still doesnt' solve the huge ecological disasters that are coal mines in all forms).
4) Anyone saying that better emmissions controls coupled to flex or bio-fuel for internal combustion is the answer is an idiot. Proper bio-mass fuel sources are not going to be implimented in light of this nations catch 22 policy of proping up midwest and plain state farmers... never going to happen, and as anyone who can read and understand a few basic concepts knows, ethanol from corn and bean crops is a massive FAILURE... it costs more to produce the fuel than extracting and refining oil dos today (With a higher production carbon balance, if one wishes to use that terminology), the watershed damage for an increased demand for these crops will be devastating from Nebraska to the Yucatan and across the breadth of the carribean past Cuba.

Simply put, you need a better solution and a tiered plan that doesn't terribly disrupt the status quo while forcing change and conversion. That means steep investment in technology... solar, wind, tidal, thermal, and nuclear/fusion, removal of oil company subsidies and crusing short term laws to up fuel economy beyond what is possible in terms of affordability, investments and credits to companies who support short and long term green tech innovation, investment in power infrastructure (10% of generated power is currently lost due to inneficiencies!!!! And that doesn't even cover the fragility and growing lack of capacity of the system we have), investment in alt fuel delivery infrastructure (after settling on one or two power methods for vehicles), increase short term expansion of fission plants and commit heavily to both alt green power systems as well as long term fission deployment as augmentation and replacement for nuke plants long term.

Actually, about 25% of the power companies power is generated from hydroelectric dams. And who really cares where the power company gets it's power. It does so in whatever manner generates the greatest profit. Any technology that would make their existing infrastructure of no relevance isn't going to be real desirable. So they most likely aren't exploring that too much ;D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crower_six_stroke

1) Agreed

2) Not necessarily. Granted the Rankine engine has been around a while, and will likely have a much longer infancy than the internal combustion engine...but it is still a promising concept. With some key advances, it may prove to help the efficiency of larger engines in colder environments. I would think Trains or Semi's would support the technology best, but that's a whole separate conversation.

In addition, cynical attitudes towards new prototypes aren't helping anything get done.

3) You forgot to mention battery disposal.

4) 1st paragraph) mostly agree. Switchgrass sounds promising, both from yeild and minimal environmental impact...but as you mentioned, Government subsidies to corn farmers will be tough to dance around. Who knows maybe it can spawn a fledgling industry.

2nd paragraph) This is pretty far off topic from Rankine engines but I agree with you. Unfortunately, the only way to influence the status quo is to make the more efficient alternatives more financially appealing.

-Aaron

It never ceases to amaze me how clueless people are regarding electric cars. NOW its not really your fault. The information you have presented to you is manipulated and distorted and you have no logical reason to assume this information is wrong. SO I do not totally blame you guys.

Think about that for a while.....

Gasoline is one of the LEAST efficient means of propelling a car. Does not even come CLOSE to the efficiency of an electric motor and battery pack. Not even close.

EV is 6 times more efficient than gasoline right out of the gate and this ignores the ZERO power usage when coasting and stopped and ignores anything such as regenerative braking etc..

Second EV would do NO harm to the Grid and in fact done right would dramatically improve grid performance.

Third even if all power is coal its a minimum 6 times more efficient meaning 1/6th the amount of pollution ignores all other things that make this EVEN LOWER or even ZERO.

Once Nano Solar is selling to the public a $1600 grid Tie in and a $500 solar panel on your roof will generate and sell enough power back to the Utility company to MORE than 100% offset ALL the power you would use charging your Electric Car meaning it would cost you NOTHING to drive that car. Not one cent.

This would also make the car 100 pollution free no matter what your power source was sine your OFFSETTING more than 100% of it with solar produced power.

NEXT even if you SKIP the solar for a normal performance sedan style car it would cost you around $1 per 100 miles driven to power your electric car. Your Gasoline Powered car would need to get 300 miles to the gallon to equal this.

AND it would outperform any comparable gas powered car in all categories.

You complain that it would take you 8 hours to recharge your car at home. Well even if I gave you a LIFETIME you could not refuel your GAS CAR at home now could you ? Did not think so.

At the "pump" with an electric car the recharge time would be LESS than 10 minutes.

THE ONLY reason you do not have an electric car option RIGHT NOW is because GM sold you out. They owned Ovonics the michigan company that made the NIMH Large Format batteries that make EV's PRACTICAL and AFFORDABLE

They sold this to Texaco who was bought by Chevron. ECD and Ebasys now have this battery patent. Chevron owns 50% of ECD and 20% of Ebasys and they have VETO privilege on ANY licensing deal.

IE they REFUSE to license the batteries for EV use or any use where a retrofit EV usage is possible.

This patent does not expire till 2015 and its a CONTROLLING patent meaning it covers enough points that no one can make a similar battery without violating the patent.

Since they people have been trying to "work around" the patent with NEW battery tech but without the 0's of millions of R&D dollars that an auto maker has its SLOW tedious lack of progress work.

Tesla had to GLUDGE together together technology to make the Roadster. You want to know why that car costs 100 grand ? thats easy This number explains it. 6,831

6,831 THATS how many stinking batteries they had to shove inside that car to make it work IE they had to WORK WITH consumer available tech because the tech that WORKS in an EV ie the Chevron NIMH's can not LEGALLY be used.

99% of my driving EVERY YEAR entails less than 110 miles of driving PER DAY. an EV with a 70mile range would suit me JUST FINE. my commute is 54 miles each way and I can recharge at work.

Are you telling me that spending less than 10k for a "second" car that goes 100miles a day for $1 (if you don't put up the solar then its FREE) and would cover you for 90 % of your yearly driving and almost NEVER break down and it would OUTLAST YOU is a problem with you ? Are you kidding? I would save $3,000 a year MINIMUM instantly just by going with an electric car if it was not for that god damned patent. Probably MORE since with driving now costing me NOTHING I would drive a lot more.

3) You forgot to mention battery disposal.

Irrelevant. First the proper batteries for an EV OUTLAST the gas engine in most peoples cars. Some of the original Rav4 EV's that use these nimh batteries are now in excess of 150,000 miles with ZERO degradation so far in the batteries.

SO already even if we just THROW the batteries in a landfill when they die we are already polluting LESS than gas cars are now (all that oil tranny fluid power steering fluid anti freeze over the life of the car and then disposal of the engine etc..)

AN EV would be virtually everlasting and virtually maintenance free. This is precisely why GM killed the project with the EV1 since 54% of there profit which comes from AFTER sales parts and labor would go POOF overnight if they started cranking out EV's

Also Lead Acid batteries are a good example of what would happen with EV batteries. DO YOU KNOW what the recycle rate of Leads are ? its the single most successful recycling project EVER in the history of mankind. 98% are recycled.

So "3) You forgot to mention battery disposal. " does not concern me one little bit :-)

3) Electric cars are NOT the answer!!! At least not if hydrocarbon fueled power plants are the source of the power. You are just shifting, not fixing the problem.

This just shows how LITTLE you understand Electric Car Technology.

If 100% of our power plants were COAL plants switching 100% to electric cars would INSTANTLY reduce our pollution to 1/6th or LESS than what it is RIGHT NOW. It would also completely eliminate "smog" out cities would be immensely cleaner inside of 1 week (if it were possible to switch all at once that is)

NOW factor in the new affordable Solar Panels coming out and Grid Tie ins and Electric cars can not be 100% pollution free for $2100 a pop ($1600 for the grid tie in and $500 in solar panels which would produce more power each month than your electric car would use each month if you drive more adjust the size of the panel I personally would need an $1100 panel most people 80% would only need a $400-$500 panel.)

This increase in efficiency also IGNORES the fact that an EV uses NO power while not moving and NO power why decelerating and it ignores Regenerative Braking.

NOW how much ELECTRICITY do you think is used in the extraction refining processing piping trucking and pumping of each gallon of gasoline into your car? all that goes POOF. I would bet a months salary that the Electricity use to go 100 miles in an electric car is LESS THAN the electricity use to get 5 gallons of gasoline from the ground to your gas tank. (5 gallons average US MPG 20mpg so 5 gallons to go 100 miles)

Hell I would bet its even less than 3 gallons E usage if you has a 35mpg car. I even think there is 50/50 odds that its LESS E than is required to put 2 gallons into a Prius.

SO in the end switching to EV's would not only reduce pollution to 1/6th the amount instantly but would ALSO ON TOP OF THAT eliminate most of the pollution from E generation that goes into getting those gallons of fuel into your car.

And this is IGNORING the SOLAR offset I mentioned above!!!

Besides RANGE for smaller vehicles there is ABSOLUTELY no other downside to an EV !!! and the RANGE problem would be solved pretty damned fast once we started the switch to EV's and had 100's of millions of R&D pouring into it.!!!

For Larger vehicles range is a non issue. you just use MORE batteries!! Just like you have 10 15 20 and 35 gallon fuel tanks you would just use MORE BATTERY PACKS for whatever range you required.

Before you say well batteries are heavy. Well GASOLINE is heavier than ANY battery tech except LEAD acid which is nearly useless for EV's anyway.

Gasoline is what 6.2 pounds a gallon? so my 35 gallon tank in my van masses out at 217 pounds plus the mass of the tank. How heavy do you think NIMH and LITH batteries are? Plus your REMOVING a lot of mass. No more engine no more other stuff on the engine no more transmission for most vehicles (the EV motors are now good enough for direct drive to the drive shaft)

My jeep motor weighs at least 500 pounds. so by removing that I instantly remove over 700 pounds from the vehicle. The E motor weighs less than 100 pounds.

So I have 600 pounds capacity for batteries before I even EQUAL its current curb mass and this ignores the easily 150 pounds of the tranny so I have 700-800 pounds of capacity for batteries and MORE than enough space to install them WITHOUT intruding into the passenger compartment.

Electric Cars are DEFINATELY the answer. I also understand why GM Chevron and others want to ERASE electric cars. I mean if 54% of your profit as an automaker went POOF overnight and your $100 a barrel oil became nearly worthless overnight I guess I would also have a vested interest in CRUSHING the technology.

They produce the propaganda that caused YOU to think Electric is NOT the answer so that YOU (as in average joe) would not rightly DEMAND electric cars.

THATS why it was not enough for GM to stop making the EV1 They sent them to crushing yards with a GM rep in each truck to visually INSURE every single one of them was CRUSHED.

Something to think about is all.....

That's what I see in my mind when electrics rule the streets. No more black, grey, yellow, and so filthy slush and snow.. No more hydrocarbon paint on the beautiful white blanket. Remember when the snow wasn't poisonous if a kid tasted it? No? That's because we grew up in the Age of Gasoline.

The source of energy is still gasoline. It is just more efficient. That is fine as far as it goes.
I would think that a steam engine could be powered by pellets. The PLC/sensor controls available today would bring the safety concerns in line. Of course the actual power delivery to the wheels would be electric.

I agree man but I see a slightly different image. I see a new golden age in america. Exxon Mobile made 327 BILLION dollars last year. I see 327 billion dollars infused BACK into the economy instead of in a rich oil guys pocket and thats just ONE of the oil companies !! I easily see this recession GONE

I see a MASS creation of jobs as expenses across the board PLUMMET due to no more gasoline needing to be purchased.

I see a day deciding to drive somewhere has NO monetary cost associated with it and NO environmental cost associated.

Renewed freedom and prosperity in America. YES all that JUST from switching to Electric cars.

The elimination of smog and dirty snow and rain. There nice side benefits that one day we will go HEY look at that the air is clean the snow is white and the rain does not kill the plants anymore. Huh whoda thunk :-)

We can get better gas mileage out of our engines Look up the name Smokey Yunick find out how he did it 24 years ago!

Ev vehicles for the win to this brutal war. There are roughly 230 million vehicles in the U.S. and 6 million motorcycles. ALL OF THEM NEED OIL CHANGES 3X A YEAR just for the engine.

230 million autos X 3 = 690 MILLION OIL CHANGES A YEAR
6 million cycles x 3 = 18 million oil changes a year

what of the cost of trucking all that oil/gasoline????? Logistically, we can eliminate A LOT of the oil transport and container infrastructure.

Fluid changes are a valid argument. EV dont need Jiffy Lube changes every 6,000 miles.

and hey why stop there? put the EV's on electric rail and get rid of

1)traffic signals and signs
2)traffic courts and cops
3)auto insurance

LET EVOLUTION COME TO THE AUTOMOBILE!!!!!!!

"This just shows how LITTLE you understand Electric Car Technology."

No, I'm an electromechanical engineer...I'm pretty sure I have this one down. It shows we are missing something regarding coal power plants... please site something.

"If 100% of our power plants were COAL plants switching 100% to electric cars would INSTANTLY reduce our pollution to 1/6th or LESS than what it is RIGHT NOW. It would also completely eliminate "smog" out cities would be immensely cleaner inside of 1 week (if it were possible to switch all at once that is)"


Where are you pulling this 1/6 the pollution statistic from? I'll gladly take a "Pwned" label if coal power plants have managed something drastic, but even assuming perfect combustion... they still need to produce a significant percentage of the original power supplied by gasoline engines. This combustion is

Having seen the Vectrix scooter project -from inside a major partner company- nearly from inception to release, there are still some sizable hurdles to overcome before electric vehicles can replace internal combustion engines (such as battery cost and efficiency). The price alone will discourage many buyers.

"Electric Cars are DEFINATELY the answer. I also understand why GM Chevron and others want to ERASE electric cars. I mean if 54% of your profit as an automaker went POOF overnight and your $100 a barrel oil became nearly worthless overnight I guess I would also have a vested interest in CRUSHING the technology."

See also: Chevy Volt. I think GM would disagree.

-Aaron

It's almost 2010 and I haven't seen one damn hover car. What good is it to live in the future if you don't have a hover car. Hybrids suck. Electric vehicles suck. Steam engines suck. Where is my damn hover car? >:(

Nice Post but your wrong about High way speeds and hybrids. The Prius and a couple of other Japanese hybrids are ineffective at high way speeds. If you think about coasting along at 65 doesn't require much power, thus Porsche's and GMC's (for yukon and clones) hybrid systems include a high gear for the hybrid drive which allow these cars to cruise at 60 with the ICE off.

Hi, For more information on steam cars have a look at... www.steamcar.net Regards, Jeff.

This is very interesting. I wonder when they will be commercially available here in North America. 13% more efficiency is great. This I guess would be the precursor to an all electric motor.

http://www.wiinjamod.com

Sounds like more data is required to make the right decision. Hard to discern who is right with all of the "enthusiastic" positions being taken. We need tests, data and experts.

what civic model is that in the pic?

Go Honda Go! Is it not great to see that car companies are competing with each other to see who can make the better energy efficient car?! Toyota has even gotten in on making green movie trailers as I found out this weekend at the movies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bknyIKeGpHA

Hasn't the Stirling engine been proven time and time again to be more efficient in capturing heat energy than steam powered version?

I'm still surprised car companies aren't utilizing Stirling Engines.

Car companies are not in the buisness of solely selling a car.They are interested in selling you a means to buy gas.Gm,Ford,Chrysler and the others all hold percentage shares that pay dividens from the oil companys.We will never see major jumps in efficencey in fuel comsumption out of the auto industry until this changes.Corn based fuels are not the answer but sugar cane would be a huge advatage,example Brasil.The average U.S driver does not truely care about cause and effect on the enviroment from co2, zero emmissions,carbon nuetral etc. they only care about their wallet.Sugar cane would be a great means to help the U.S. fuel needs.Sugar can be grown I TX,LA,MS,AL,FL and all the Island.This no means the full substitute,just a better means than corn.

"You complain that it would take you 8 hours to recharge your car at home. Well even if I gave you a LIFETIME you could not refuel your GAS CAR at home now could you ? Did not think so. At the "pump" with an electric car the recharge time would be LESS than 10 minutes."

I am not going to jump into the electric car life cycle analysis--how much energy goes in, where does it come from, what happens after the batteries die...what I do want to present since above posters have not, is the following:

If battery technology progressed a bit, presenting a continuing progress towards lighter, stronger, smaller, quick charging though thousands of cycles before recycling (which must take place).... maybe battery packs powering electric vehicles could be QUICKLY REMOVABLE and replaced. Then, instead of waiting for your batteries to charge---you run to the gas station. Your gas station visit would be an exchange of "your" batteries for a charged set of batteries.

The advantages to this approach are obvious. The "gas station" could still sell gas during any transition to more electric vehicles. The "gas station", as a currently regulated location (large gas tanks underground means they are regulated), the storage, charging, and recycling of batteries on site could be regulated to ensure it is being done properly. The consumer would not have any different experience -- a quick pull in, batteries out, batteries in... on their way. The oil companies would still be involved since they would have control of the supply chain. [in fact, as with many other things, they might control a proprietary connector for charging so you would not be able to charge at home unless you spent a bunch of money on a charging system... Can you see Monty Burns rubbing his hands together yet?];) The power companies would be happy since they are still selling (more) power. The providers of alternative energy sources would be happy because all those batteries might be charged with solar or some other alternative. As a consumer, you would never bear the larger capital purchase of new batteries--because you are always getting a fresh set with every visit to a gas station.

Comments?

it would seem to me that the chemical reaction that takes place in a catalyc converter causes a significant rise in temp. this would provide a differential in temp and possible a source of steam that could turn a turbine and then generate current that could charge the batteries. the illustration showes the heat tap comming straight from the exhaust header. thank you comments????

Why don't you arrogant egotistical people put your effort into some useful technical advances which are congruent with your beliefs. This is a challenge. Before you criticize me, realize that I have. When you are an innovator, you realize how difficult creating true innovation really is. I have. Most of my life is and has been spent on innovation. IE. Landfill gas to electricity 1984,
Automated 5000 LB/day ice plants for Illinois horsemen, 1990-2000; Venus II Pat. No. 5,501,650
1983-1998; Fuselite birthday candles 2001-2004 with patents pending. AND I still live full time in an RV. Get a life.

I have had a Prius for more than two years;

This article is typical of the incorrect assertions about the performance of the Prius in the local and national media(s).

My actual results from a daily 30 minute highway commute to work and back each day at speeds of between 60-75 mph (65 average)- I get 48-52 mpg like CLOCKWORK. period. This is always directly measured by miles driven / filled gallons. The accuracy of the odometer has also been checked.

On longer trips: example Boston to Maryland we get 50-54 miles per gallon at HIGHWAY speed.

Get over it... The Prius' hybrid technology is outstanding and will only get better with the next generation.

There appears to be a campaign of deliberate down-playing of the amazing performance of these hybrid cars and we as a IDE society should be ashamed of it.

That my thoughts on the hybrid subject - In my mind - case closed.

Where does the electricity come from? A wind power system needs huge battery banks (our battery cars) to absorb the power when the wind blows,(when it wants to) and discharge, or provide it when humanity needs it! The following reputable research has been done and is a validatible source of such wind power - enough to run all cars in the U.S.A. forever, since, as uncomfortable to the capitalist mind as it is, there really is a "Free Ride" - The wind blows, the power flows - perpetually, or as we say in "Americanese" a renewable resource, like Solar, Wave, Tidal, and Geothermal power, those other Perpetual Powers we don't quite grasp, but have in abundance
!
"There is as much wind power potential (900,000 megawatts) off our coasts as the current capacity of all power plants in the United States combined, according to a new report entitled, A Framework for Offshore Wind Energy Development in the United States, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, and General Electric". http://www.capecodtoday.com/news246.htm01/01/09
Honda is doing a noble job, but China, not GM-American is hot on their heels.
"The astounding Chinese have epoched the great GM, of U.S.A. in producing an Electric/gas/plug-in car! They are driving them in the streets of China as we speak, they will be retailed in the U.S.A. by 2011, they will cost half the price of a "Volt" and they are "On Order" for Israel! GM take a deep breath, your naughty parts have just been cut off by a Chinese high-tech competitor, and the "Volt" is still "Vapor-ware"!" See:http://www.cleantech.com/news/3983/chinas-byd-sells-first-mass-produced-plug-cars
And as far as paying something for nothing,
If the U.S. had chosen to be a moral people, and leaving Iraqi oil alone, and following Al Gore, decided to develop the South Western deserts, with the technology of the times - solar/thermal-molten sodium - electricity installations, for the same amount of money as that war cost, ($650 Billion), today, we would be tapping into the largest, renewable, sustainable, energy source the world has ever known. It would have paid every energy bill in the U.S.A. for maintenance fees only - FOREVER! It would be equivalent to an oil field that can NEVER run dry! Low cost electric power, and storeable hydrogen gasoline replacement from the electricity, for all!
After the millions of murders, and $650 billions of dollars, borrowed from our children’s futures and pissed away, with thousands of our own and others maimed and disfigured for life, millions of families utterly destroyed, ours and theirs, we are no closer to Iraqi oil production than the Iraqis are!
The next time you hear a blithering idiot spoiled brat, drunken, drug addicted, sociopath, rich Arabic saber dancing daddie’s boy oilman, stand at a microphone and threaten YOUR safety with someone ELSE’S weapons, remember what you lost America, remember, and weep! (also see http://www.sciam.com/article.c...grand-plan)
The idae that a petrol company has bought up patent rights toa a better battery will not deter the Chinese - they simply do not recognize patent laws, and are a lot bigger than a bunch of Yankee Lawyers, and do as they please, including considerable industrial espionage - if such a battery exists, it will soon be manufactured in China regardless of petty American based "Rights"

Very soon now the public will have access to solar
cells,wind turbines, and maybe even home brew algae systems that all are capable of generating electricity, so yes the electric care is where its
at.