EVcast #17: BigAutoCorp's Speech on Future Cars

The "Template Speech" bit was very well done.  It put a smile on my face.

quote comment

Hey Guys! My passion is Electric Cars, but I have to disagree with you on water cars. I was skeptic as well, until my friend installed that system under $150(it helps him to save a little - about 15-30% on gas). I want to install this too, until I buy my first electric.

I found video where Japanese Company already created 100% water car. Still looks unreal...... Check this link>

http://waterfuel101.com/faq.htm

quote comment

Is the savings 15% or 30%? How was that 100% difference in savings determined? Under controlled conditions? A 30% fuel savings would be world-changing. Not bad for $150! What kept you from rushing right out and installing it on your car? Seems like a slam dunk.

A similar system was available 30 years ago when I was in high school. I DID install it on my own car. Best I can say is that at least it didn't hurt my mileage much, and it only cost me about $75. If all the claims of the devices I installed on that first car were true, it should have gotten about 250 mpg, I figure.  I've gotten a bit wiser since then.

And as for Japan having already invented a 100% water car... well, I've seen pictures and videos of over-unity machines as well. Is GM keeping this from us? Big oil?! Probably it is Bo. I want to know!

/snotty mode

quote comment

Ely and Darell,

I guess my "skepticism" is somewhere in the middle.  As for the $150 conversion, no disrespect to your friend, but I would guess that if anything, it is closer to the lower end of the estimate -- which still would not be bad considering the price of gas.  However, reason enters and one would think that auto makers would have installed such a system in cars by default long ago rather than being sold via spam and "how to" ebooks.  And, if they actually do boost gas 5-10%, at what cost?  Damage done to engine?  Before you get such a system installed, do investigate the possible short or long term harm to your engine.

As for the Genepax's system, I am more open to the possibility.  How can anyone blindly doubt the POSSIBILITY of such a technology?  We can argue the practicality by citing today's known chemistry and scientific principles, but we have to admit there are advances that are not announced  every day.  In the meantime, I am still working on finding myself the ideal battery-powered EV for my needs. :)

quote comment

Yes, I'm working on my electric car as well and keep my eyes on hydrogen technologies.

I noticed, that site http://waterfuel101.com has video interview of VP of Hydrogen Hybrid Technologies Inc. - very interesting. Company already doing business worldwide. It's public company, most likely good for investment :)

But I think nobody knows how future going to look like.

quote comment

I *knew* it! It is Bo keeping this discovery from us!

I'd be far less skeptical if I didn't hold the laws of thermodynamics so near and dear. We're talking about getting energy from WATER here. A material that has no energy content. None. It won't run humans, and it won't run cars. If you break it up, and make energy from the resulting components, that's WONDERFUL. But breaking it up is always going to consume more energy than you get back out. If not, it is a perpetual motion device. And yes I understand that this is some revolutionary chemical reaction that is somehow magical. But since the beginning of time, we've not been able to figure out how to get something for nothing. And that is exactly what this process promises.

And that is where I draw the line. Every time. A "water car" would be getting energy for nothing.

Come on now... where's the healthy skepticism when it is most needed?

Now squirting a little bit of water into the combustion process actually has some merit. It won't create more energy, but it can change the combustion process, in some cases, to your advantage. I'm ignoring that for now. Just talking about running a car on no other "energy input" except for water. Benefit of the doubt is one thing. Getting energy from nothing is another. Maybe I just misunderstand what they mean when they say there is no other energy input than water... but that seems pretty clear to me!

quote comment

Darell,
   The water car is too much to believe I know.  It seems like BS.
    But it is difficult to prove these things to be BS.  There is always that chance.
    It seems strange that adding a battery to a hybrid car (non-plugin) improves the efficiency of the vehicle over a straight ICE engine.  After all, there is no energy from the battery, zero.  All the energy still comes from the gasoline, so what is the point of the battery?

   The same could be true for the hydrogen widget.  It doesn't add any energy to the system, but could improve efficiency.  I doubt it, but it could be true.  This looks more like "cold fusion" than a break-through, but who knows.

Thanks

John C. Briggs

quote comment

Good points, John. Though it would be quite easy to prove the BS (if, in fact, it IS BS)  if the device were studied by some objective observer. Anybody who makes a *genuine* breakthrough of such epic proportions would have it verified and reverified...and then would market it, and make a billion dollars. The person who makes a water car work could be the supreme ruler of all! Showing a demo car running around and claiming it runs on nothing more than water just doesn't do it for me for some odd reason.

What amazes me is that battery cars DO work. Have worked for years. Yet I know plenty of people who think that Fuel Cell cars ARE better today than battery cars. I know people who just KNOW that the water car is for real, and the only reason we can't buy one is because of big oil. These same people are skeptical of the practicality of EVs... cars that have been proven over hundreds of millions of miles. It does boggle my mind.

Adding a battery in the case of a gasoline hybrid has all kinds of logic going for it. A gas engine has a narrow, peak efficiency spot - and in most cars the ICEs rarely runs AT that spot. The Prius works dilligently to keep the ICE at the most efficient range by filling a battery with the "excess" energy that would otherwise be mostly wasted in inneffiiciency anyway - and then reusing that recaptured energy to help push the car through a 90% efficient system (battery to wheels) as compared to using more gas in a 15% efficient system (gas tank to wheels). And of course the battery allows the engine to shut off during idle - so the savings there are obvious. But you know all this, I'm sure. I can see how this may seem like a bit of magic to somebody who is not familiar with the efficiencies of both systems - but to me, I'm still surprised that we're only managing 50 mpg on this system. It could be so much better!

Anyway, I've learned to be a skeptic the hard way. I WANT to believe. I really do. But there has to be some tiny little shread of proof. And the water car has none.

quote comment

Darell,
    Right so the water-car will have to wait until some reputable organization does some testing (I will not hold my breath).
   Thanks for the details on the hybrid technology.  I do own a Prius so I have some familiarity.  But I must admit, that prior to looking into the details, the hybrid approach to efficiency seemed strange.  Of course, in the case of the Prius, many people owned them so it was easy to see that the improvements were real.
    As far as "doing better" goes, I am lately interested in drag coeffecient (Cd) as a key player in fuel efficiency.

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

    Cd    Vehicle
    0.57 Hummer
    0.29 Honda accord
    0.26 Toyota Prius
    0.19 EV1
    0.11 Aptera

My understanding is that the energy used is linearly proportional to Cd and projected frontal area.  This suggests that the Prius could be almost 3X more efficient if it was shaped like the Aptera.  Or if the Aptera is too ugly, the Prius could be almost 2X more efficient if shaped like the EV1.  It is a shame that the EV1's are not around to be used as test mules for the new Li-Ion batteries.
   It is amazing to me that the shape of the vehicle can make such a dramatic impact on efficiency.  This seems like something we could have done long ago.

Thanks

John C. Briggs

quote comment

I heard this on the radio. The speech about EVs were really good. What makes it more interesting is when they said that EVs have low emmission and very quiet to run plus its oxygen sensor will last for many years.

quote comment