Successor to internal combustion engine created: Wave Disk Generator

[Sporkman]

...researchers at Michigan State University have built a prototype gasoline engine that requires no transmission, crankshaft, pistons, valves, fuel compression, cooling systems or fluids. Their so-called Wave Disk Generator could greatly improve the efficiency of gas-electric hybrid automobiles and potentially decrease auto emissions up to 90 percent when compared with conventional combustion engines...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42460541/ns/technology_and_science-innovation/

[SoFl W]

Here is (http://green.autoblog.com/2011/04/08/wave-disk-generator-engine-wave-of-future-video/) an article with a larger view of the graphic.

I wont get too excited yet.

[NCLI]

This still requires gasoline, still pollutes, and is still going to be useless once oil becomes very expensive over the next few years, and eventually unattainable.

[3Miro]

I want to see an animation or film on exactly how it works. I think I read somewhere about some design that looks like this, but it was before WWII and it was eventually abandoned.

Assuming we have enough oil for another 50 years, then if this is twice more efficient, we get to 100. If this is true, then it will be huge advantage.

[Minty_butt_Linux]

This still requires gasoline, still pollutes, and is still going to be useless once oil becomes very expensive over the next few years, and eventually unattainable.

I want a car that floats and creates its own fuel. When they find out how to reverse gravity then I'll get excited. The American Army has a laser which can be fired from a million miles away with 100% accuracy; make me a floating car and stop firing lasers at stuff.

[Dustin2128]

I figure the development of new power sources is a good 25-50 years behind the need. If it could buy us this time, it'd be great.

[NCLI]

I figure the development of new power sources is a good 25-50 years behind the need. If it could buy us this time, it'd be great.
That's true, but I'm just afraid of this being marketed as a good alternative to electric cars, extending our massive oil dependency even further into the future.

[handy]

We can produce oil in a variety of ways. From algae has been my favourite for a while now.

There is plenty on the web about it.

[NCLI]

We can produce oil in a variety of ways. From algae has been my favourite for a while now.

There is plenty on the web about it.
Certainly, but it would still be more intelligent and efficient to just use wind, solar, etc. Out energy needs will only keep growing, and replacing a dependency on oil deposits with a dependency on algea is, IMHO, not a good "solution".

[inobe]

Certainly, but it would still be more intelligent and efficient to just use wind, solar, etc. Out energy needs will only keep growing, and replacing a dependency on oil deposits with a dependency on algea is, IMHO, not a good "solution".

i agree with you, i truly do...


lets find more efficient ways to produce hydrogen!

all this energy wasted just to get more oil from algae could be put to better use.

use solar and wind to produce hydrogen, then move forward in efficient ways of extracting it using far less energy.

water is everywhere for gosh shakes.

GE will power 80,000 homes with solar energy, very soon.

[uRock]

We can produce oil in a variety of ways. From algae has been my favourite for a while now.

There is plenty on the web about it.

What impact would that have on the environment? How many chemicals would find their way into the water during this process.

If I had my way, I'd be bicycling it everywhere I go. Use the car only in bad weather and long trips.

[3rdalbum]

...researchers at Michigan State University have built a prototype engine that requires no transmission, crankshaft, pistons, valves, fuel compression, cooling systems or fluids. Their so-called Wave Disk Generator could greatly improve the efficiency of automobiles and potentially decrease auto emissions up to 90 percent when compared with conventional combustion engines...

Sounds like Michigan State University just invented the Electric Motor.

[disabledaccount]

From what I can see this is "just" derivative from conventional jet engine... - small enough to fit car scale.

[mips]

If I had my way, I'd be bicycling it everywhere I go. Use the car only in bad weather and long trips.

That would be nice if:
Everything is close to you.
It's not hilly terrain.
It's not hot. Imagine cycling to work or a meeting and you end up all sweaty.

[NightwishFan]

Someone mentioned some cool laser.. Where can I get one of those... On topic: I think pushing for any small gain in efficiency is good, but probably wont happen if it is not marketable.

[Paqman]

This still requires gasoline, still pollutes, and is still going to be useless once oil becomes very expensive over the next few years, and eventually unattainable.

Improving efficiency is an important part of improving the sustainability of our energy systems. A more efficient ICE would be an extremely positive step, as we can't just magic our reliance on oil away overnight. Oil is an extremely practical energy source, the alternatives are going to need a lot of development before they can compete.

In short: don't be such a grump.

However, i'll believe it when I see it. There have been a lot of alternative heat engines proposed over the years, but few have made it into production.

[SuperFreak]

That would be nice if:
Everything is close to you.
It's not hilly terrain.
It's not hot. Imagine cycling to work or a meeting and you end up all sweaty.

Shudder to think that you might get to your destination healthy, creating literally 0 emissions and unstressed but somewhat dishevelled.

[SoFl W]

Shudder to think that you might get to your destination healthy, creating literally 0 emissions and unstressed but somewhat dishevelled.

Some people live and work in the real world.

[NCLI]

Some people live and work in the real world.
...your point being? Most people in Copenhagen and Tokyo take the bike and trains to get to work, and it's certainly quite hilly here in Japan.

[uRock]

That would be nice if:
Everything is close to you.
It's not hilly terrain.
It's not hot. Imagine cycling to work or a meeting and you end up all sweaty.

I live in the desert and I have cycled in temps above 115F. Drink water and be ready to take breaks. My city has lots of parks and I used them to plan stops on the way home.

I used to ride 15 miles each way to work. It is always windy here and I have rode into winds that slowed me considerably and doubled my travel time. My ride into work was a slow downhill grade and I travel at average 25mph. The trek home was up hill and took a bit longer at speeds of 18-22mph. Due to the timing of the red lights I could actually get to and from work faster than driving on surface streets.

You get to work early enough to clean up and you wear a deodorant that works.

While people are paying $4 a gallon for gas and keeping their spare tires, I am paying myself by staying in decent shape.

BTW, I worked a real job. Don't make excuses to be lazy.



Shudder to think that you might get to your destination healthy, creating literally 0 emissions and unstressed but somewhat dishevelled.
Yup. While coworkers were stressing out I was relaxed and smiling.

[uRock]

Some people live and work in the real world.

Imagine when the real world runs out of petroleum or the supply gets so low that only military and supply chains are able to get it. Are you going to sit at home screaming this isn't real or do what is necessary to support your family?

[Artemis3]

That would be nice if:
Everything is close to you.
It's not hilly terrain.
It's not hot. Imagine cycling to work or a meeting and you end up all sweaty.

You know, if this started becoming common, I'm sure most workplaces would have bicycle parking and shower facilities. Many countries cope with it just fine.

You can have mass transit to cover long distances, ideally the train should either let you carry your bicycle or there is a rental/permanent parking at the destination, this way you only bicycle from home to the train, and then from the train to work.

People would exercise more and improve their health, while not pollute, use less space in roads and cause less damage to them. The benefits are tremendous. Electric/Hybrids are nice but their are very expensive in comparison.

If anything, peaking means less and less oil/gas supply with even higher and higher prices; so sooner than later countries still used to waste energy would have to become more conscious by force, and eventually the market won't cope with it, there will be rationing and or public outcry.

This engine is good because it helps slow down consumption a little, also hybrids, or chemical batteries using gasoline as source, but slowing down the fall won't stop it, there is just no way around the fact the world demands more and supplies slow down and run low, also the remaining becoming harder to extract and process (needing more energy to do so...).

Please note that all alternative energy sources combined can not cope with the energy consumption style of countries such as the USA, people must learn to consume less energy.

[darrenn]

A engine you can hold in your hand now that's progress! Too bad it only works with hybrid or electric vehicles. Takes 453kg of weight from the car. Hope they can get this working in a semi because fuel prices affect the cost of transporting food.

[SoFl W]

Imagine when the real world runs out of petroleum or the supply gets so low that only military and supply chains are able to get it. Are you going to sit at home screaming this isn't real or do what is necessary to support your family?
First you tell me to imagine, then you tell me I will be screaming it isn't real. If I have to imagine it, it isn't real. I don't want to argue with you, you have mod privs. I am glad you think of yourself as so noble and good, you seem to be proud of what you do. The thing is not everyone can do what you do.

[SuperFreak]

Unfortunately the world is really running out of oil. The question to consider is what of the dwindling energy supply are you leaving your children or grandchildren to survive on for heat , food (which indirectly requires lots of energy inputs), electricity

[sdowney717]

ok, even if the oil is getting more difficult to get, the sun energy that hits the earth is what we should be thinking of using. Growing algae and other fast growth plants we can turn directly into fuels with heat, pressure, a catalyst and no oxygen.

http://www.anellotech.com/press16.html

Truly we need to stop with the corn ethanol fueling our cars which ultimately makes food too expensive for all of us. HIGH OIL pushes up FOOD PRICES and everything else. We are being manipulated in the oil futures markets by robber barons taking advantage of the oil fears. SO we need REAL meaningful competition to oil to convince oil speculators and cool off the oil markets.

IMO we will always be burning something to move cars.
And will never run out of energy. Energy is all around us. I dont think the vested oil industry can keep the lid on these alternative ideas.
It is very good to educate as many as possible.
And it would help to write your government leaders to educate them.

[inobe]

First you tell me to imagine, then you tell me I will be screaming it isn't real. If I have to imagine it, it isn't real. I don't want to argue with you, you have mod privs. I am glad you think of yourself as so noble and good, you seem to be proud of what you do. The thing is not everyone can do what you do.

not all of us think alike either.

it's not an abundance like water, it's not limitless, their isn't an endless supply.

the more you find, the less it becomes easier to locate, the easy stuff is gone, the stuff that costs a fortune to find will eat away at us.

to assume it will last and be cheap is absurd!

it's time to find alternatives, in fact, it's been long overdue.

to stay in the stone age is unacceptable as the future of petro is bleak.

to not prepare ahead of time is foolish at best.

[uRock]

First you tell me to imagine, then you tell me I will be screaming it isn't real. If I have to imagine it, it isn't real. I don't want to argue with you, you have mod privs. I am glad you think of yourself as so noble and good, you seem to be proud of what you do. The thing is not everyone can do what you do.

I don't think of myself as noble, though I do try to do the right thing when I can. I do what I do, because it is what I want to do. Drive your car and enjoy it while it lasts. The price of gasoline will never go back down and the day will come when civilians will not be able to purchase fuel.

[Dustin2128]

I don't think of myself as noble, though I do try to do the right thing when I can. I do what I do, because it is what I want to do. Drive your car and enjoy it while it lasts. The price of gasoline will never go back down and the day will come when civilians will not be able to purchase fuel.
Fuel? Certainly not. Gasoline most likely, but there'll always be some sort of fuel, wood gas, charcoal, biofuels, whatever. To my knowledge, wood gas might actually be a viable alternative to gasoline, short term at least.

[inobe]

Fuel? Certainly not. Gasoline most likely, but there'll always be some sort of fuel, wood gas, charcoal, biofuels, whatever. To my knowledge, wood gas might actually be a viable alternative to gasoline, short term at least.

that'll be great, but it's a complete waste of time, money, and effort, in the end solves absolutely nothing :)

[uRock]

Fuel? Certainly not. Gasoline most likely, but there'll always be some sort of fuel, wood gas, charcoal, biofuels, whatever. To my knowledge, wood gas might actually be a viable alternative to gasoline, short term at least.
Bio fuels will be short lived. The chemicals needed to mass produce them will definitely kill the local ecology.

Coal? Not very environmentally friendly, but we have seen that most people wouldn't care if the sky turned black from pollution.

Wood? i haven't read anything on this, so I can't comment on it.

In the quoted post, I was speaking of petroleum fuel.

[MasterNetra]

nice. Side note shared the link on facebook and this is the preview text:


Researchers at Michigan State University have built a prototype gasoline engine that requires no transmission, crankshaft, pistons, valves, fuel compression, cooling systems or fluids. Their so-called Wave Disk Generator could greatly improve the efficiency of gas-electric hybrid automobiles and pot

I kid you not that's where it cut off. lol

[sdowney717]

But corn prices have jumped 73 per cent, driven higher not just by demand for the crop as a food, but also for the production of biofuels.

http://www.theage.com.au/world/global-poverty-at-dangerous-levels-20110216-1awjr.html

Food security, and energy security (think of oil wars), is why I think we must develop better, cheaper ways of producing fuel for our cars. The Anellotech process aims to produce at an equivalence of $60 per barrel of oil.

http://www.anellotech.com/press12.html

"We're targeting to compete with oil priced at $60 a barrel, assuming no tax credits or subsidies," he says

http://www.anellotech.com/press9.html

"As much as half the gasoline sold in the US could come not from distant Middle Eastern oil fields, but from homegrown, renewable crops,'' Motavalli said. "Unlike . . . ethanol, this plant-based fuel will be chemically identical to the gasoline we use today and could be used immediately in our current network of more than 160,000 gas stations.''

Combine new engine designs and new ways of making fuel. If these engineers have something truly good, then I think the government ought to greenlight this. If we took even a small part of the military industrial complex and put it into this could have a big impact.

DARPA already has gotten involved in algae oil. And claims some interesting news on production at $2 per gallon.

http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2010/02/22/darpa-cracks-the-oil-out-of-algae/

[inobe]

i see a huge problem in transitioning over to 100% ethanol.

first, flex fuel vehicles have a better gasoline mileage over ethanol.

second, e85 prices are up there with gasoline.


flex fuel vehicles share the same compression ratios, ethanol in higher compression engines are very efficient, a serious example that automotive companies are wasting time. "i would like to know what happened here"?

in europe, they have vehicles that are far more efficient with 100% ethanol than gasoline engines.

e85 should be killed instantly, flex fuel vehicles should disappear, convert all fuelling stations to 100% ethanol, and those responsible for the huge mishaps should lose their jobs.

to think that the public are stupid, is an insult.

[wewantutopia]

e85 should be killed instantly, flex fuel vehicles should disappear, convert all fuelling stations to 100% ethanol, and those responsible for the huge mishaps should lose their jobs.

Only if they were to stop producing ethanol from corn and switch to a feedstock, such as switch grass, with MUCH higher yields and doesn't compete with food. Not to mention, that can grow in marginal land.


There's a good table on this page: http://thereferencefiles.com/category/ethanol/

[sdowney717]

Only if they were to stop producing ethanol from corn and switch to a feedstock, such as switch grass, with MUCH higher yields and doesn't compete with food. Not to mention, that can grow in marginal land.


Which is exactly the kind of feedstock Anellotech thermal breakdown process can use.
Plants grow fast like algae and grasses and can grow in areas where people dont grow crops and algae can grow in seawater. Switch grass is a very fast growth perrenial, grow it shear it off and it grows back.
Annellotech processs many advantages over ethanol, no fermentation, uses heat and pressure and the fuel it produces has a higher energy content than ethanol.
fermenting of grass using a biological process is not efficient, First you need to find a way to make it grow on that grass, then you got to keep it from posoning itself which all mashes do as the alcohol goes to 10%. Then you got to heat and distill it.

[SuperFreak]

Conservation is and always has been a superior solution to shortages. Look what the English accomplished during WW2 with Victory gardens and scrap recycling. It is time we all start saving and stop wasting what we have been given.

[inobe]

Annellotech processs many advantages over ethanol, no fermentation, uses heat and pressure and the fuel it produces has a higher energy content than ethanol.

the amount of energy it produces is irrelevant, the engine can be designed to accommodate the fuel efficiency and performance.


the same could be said for any fuel, take the slower burning diesel engine for example :D

[sdowney717]

High oil prices have a human cost as in famines, wars, other hardships.
Conservation wont help, we need more oil and need it cheaply or we need fewer people.
In a way, I think of conservation as energy rationing. Imagine on your street if you could only get electricity every third day for a few hours.



Rising subsidy bill

At a small factory in the outskirts of Delhi, workers pack bags of fertilizer to be sent out to the shops.

Fertiliser supply is not keeping up with demand

The owner says the supply is tight because while the demand has gone up considerably this year, production has not followed pace.

India consumes millions of tonnes of fertiliser each year.

Production costs have risen on the back of soaring crude oil prices.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7475321.stm

[wewantutopia]

Imagine on your street if you could only get electricity every third day for a few hours.

Not quite the same since in most countries petroleum is not used to produce electricity.

Conservation (conserving) doesn't necessarily equate to rationing. Efficiency is a big part of conservation.

Does one really need a 300hp car to take the kids to school and go to the grocery store??
Or what if we could get big-rigs up to 10-15 mpg?

[Sylos]

High oil prices have a human cost as in famines, wars, other hardships.
Conservation wont help, we need more oil and need it cheaply or we need fewer people.


Too true.

We have a real problem in the world with excessive population that is going to put increasing strain on a number of key resource areas - fuel is one of these. We can make every effort to find more efficient means of powering our vehicles, homes and industry but the fact is the industrialisation and economic development of countries such as India can easily dwarf the savings made with the losses they make. I fear the technological developments will be too late to find places in these societies before massive damage is done.....

..still.....no need to stop trying...

My vote is with electric motors and hydrogen reactors built into the car - very eco friendly (on the face at least) and a real incentive to drive safer! :D

[sdowney717]

conservation helps a little, but in the end, does nothing to increase supply.
What we need is more supply. Even though the oil producers claim there is more than enough supply to meet demand what happens is more people pushed into poverty because oil in the future is believed to be peaking and so the price just goes higher. So we need to change the rules of the game the producers and buyers create.

[wewantutopia]

What we need is more supply. Even though the oil producers claim there is more than enough supply to meet demand what happens is more people pushed into poverty because oil in the future is believed to be peaking and so the price just goes higher. So we need to change the rules of the game the producers and buyers create.

We are just about at peak oil now. Exxon recently (albeit quietly) admitted they are having trouble finding new reserves. For every 100 barrels they pump only 95 replace it.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704409004576146362117313094-lMyQjAxMTAxMDEwNjExNDYyWj.html


Shell about the same thing:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/15/shell-report-predicts-peak-oil-now-or-soon-ponders-depression-2-0/

[SuperFreak]

People can bury the heads in the sand for a while but eventually reality will force people to see that this world is one of nonrenewable scarcity not endless supply. There will not be enough resources to go around; the sooner we start to conserve what we have, the longer it will last and the longer the period to investigate alternatives. Alternatives include different fuels and vehicles but more importantly new organization of the way people live and work. The North American model of living in the suburbs, driving to the city for work, and flying to other parts of the world for recreation and work is about to collapse.

[NCLI]

"Zeitgeist: Moving Forward" is a pretty good movie on this subject btw. It's free to download.

[uRock]

The North American model of living in the suburbs, driving to the city for work, and flying to other parts of the world for recreation and work is about to collapse.
Yup. North America is going to be full of war and rioting when the petroleum stops flowing. We really need working public transportation.

[SuperFreak]

At one time trains were a dominant form of travel in North America and many people commuted to work on a tram or train systems. GM, Goodyear and a few other companies have a lot to answer for , as they ripped out many of the commuter lines in the 1940s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_streetcar_scandal)

[sdowney717]

At one time trains were a dominant form of travel in North America and many people commuted to work on a tram or train systems. GM, Goodyear and a few other companies have a lot to answer for , as they ripped out many of the commuter lines in the 1940s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_A...eetcar_scandal)

rubber tires and the freedom of driving not being forced to follow the tracks is attractive and still attractive to people, the trains dont go everywhere the roads go, never will and never can.

Yes, they pulled out all the street cars which ran more efficiently.
but it is progressive and liberating to be free of the train tracks.
Car breaks down on the tracks, the whole track is incapacitated.
Car breaks down on the road, I can drive around the broken car.
I can also go down a dry dusty road into the wilderness.

[wewantutopia]

True, which is why we should have both!

[Grenage]

I honestly think that the world* needs to re-evaluate it's general infrastructure now, rather than trying to replace one problem with another. People living 50+ miles from work, total dependence on a home vehicle, et cetera - it's never going to be viable in the long run.

Some decent public transport coupled with people getting off their fat lazy arses would go a long way, and solve several problems.

*I say world, I only live in the UK.

[uRock]

rubber tires and the freedom of driving not being forced to follow the tracks is attractive and still attractive to people, the trains dont go everywhere the roads go, never will and never can.

Yes, they pulled out all the street cars which ran more efficiently.
but it is progressive and liberating to be free of the train tracks.
Car breaks down on the tracks, the whole track is incapacitated.
Car breaks down on the road, I can drive around the broken car.
I can also go down a dry dusty road into the wilderness.
It'll be a shame when the day comes that people have to walk or use some other self propelled transportation. On a good note, America's obesity epidemic will disappear.

Hopefully innovative people will create something that works before that time gets here.

[sdowney717]

It'll be a shame when the day comes that people have to walk or use some other self propelled transportation. On a good note, America's obesity epidemic will disappear.

Hopefully innovative people will create something that works before that time gets here.

sure it is the electric car and nuclear power but differently implemented. No more standard boiling water reactors.
Read up on the thorium reactor much safer and the fuel is everywhere more abundant. Thorium fuel cycle is what India is developing
Also read on pebble bed reactors, they are much safer, by their nature they cant overheat and burn.

the car and truck move goods and people. It will never go back to the horse and wagon. If we cant figure out a better way then life as we know it wont exist in the future. The truly good ideas I hope will be implemented. And that will involve things similar to the way they are now.
Cambodia and Pol-pot emptied the cities to force a new way of life on those folks of his idea of utopia and population control and look what happened.

So we will keep on keeping on.

no way solar and wind power can do it alone.

[SuperFreak]

rubber tires and the freedom of driving not being forced to follow the tracks is attractive and still attractive to people, the trains dont go everywhere the roads go, never will and never can.


If and when the oil runs out cars won't be going anywhere though

[pookiebear]

Does one really need a 300hp car to take the kids to school and go to the grocery store??

BINGO!
back in the late 80s honda hada civic that did over 50mpg and had 58hp and weighed in at 1800 lbs (very light for a car). The civic HF. read this article on it:
http://money.cnn.com/2007/12/17/autos/honda_civic_hf/index.htm

it will get you thinking. It was sold in the USA for 3 o 4 years too. How quickly we forget.

MY civic that I have now is much larger than the accords of the late 90s were. Seems kind of ridiculous to me.

[wewantutopia]

BINGO!
back in the late 80s honda hada civic that did over 50mpg and had 58hp and weighed in at 1800 lbs (very light for a car). The civic HF. read this article on it:
http://money.cnn.com/2007/12/17/autos/honda_civic_hf/index.htm

it will get you thinking. It was sold in the USA for 3 o 4 years too. How quickly we forget.


I still drive an `86 VW Jetta with a 1.6 diesel: generates 52 hp 68 lb/ft torque (runs on vegetable oil of course).

While it does accelerate a little slow, it's not too bad considering the hp, and works just fine to transport people and our things. Does 95mph on the highway too.

Gotta love 45 mpg!

[sdowney717]

those European TURBO diesel cars get upto 80mpg.
and typically getting 60 to 70 mpg.
what they have is a small engine which is turbocharged to give it power to accelerate. When you drive at cruise you just need little HP.

It is shocking to me that they dont sell those cars here. And try to impress people with new US cars getting mid 30's mpg.
I think it is very disingenuous of them, both the car makers, the oil industry and the government.

[sdowney717]

http://www.insideline.com/ford/focus/67-mpg-ford-focus-econetic-debuts.html

a quick search brought up this 67mpg ford which will only be sold in europe.
http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/ford/focus/ns/ford_focus_f34_ns_40711_717.jpg

[uRock]

those European TURBO diesel cars get upto 80mpg.
and typically getting 60 to 70 mpg.
what they have is a small engine which is turbocharged to give it power to accelerate. When you drive at cruise you just need little HP.

It is shocking to me that they dont sell those cars here. And try to impress people with new US cars getting mid 30's mpg.
I think it is very disingenuous of them, both the car makers, the oil industry and the government.

Big oil companies do not want us buying efficient cars. Sales will drop and their quick cash will come to an end. They want to milk those cows until the bitter end.

[sdowney717]

Big oil companies do not want us buying efficient cars. Sales will drop and their quick cash will come to an end. They want to milk those cows until the bitter end.

and think government taxes on fuel sales. They already are complaining that fuel sales are down. I heard some have proposed a mileage fee where your car would be tracked for the miles driven on the highway and the feds will send you a bill.

[Paulgirardin]

Bio fuels will be short lived. The chemicals needed to mass produce them will definitely kill the local ecology.

Coal? Not very environmentally friendly, but we have seen that most people wouldn't care if the sky turned black from pollution.

Wood? i haven't read anything on this, so I can't comment on it.

In the quoted post, I was speaking of petroleum fuel.

Oil from algae processes involve nothing more than squeezing the oil

from the algae and filtering it.Same process as used to make olive oil.

The algae is solar powered,absorbs CO2 and the remaining biomass has many uses.

[uRock]

Oil from algae processes involve nothing more than squeezing the oil

from the algae and filtering it.Same process as used to make olive oil.

The algae is solar powered,absorbs CO2 and the remaining biomass has many uses.

What happens when they start covering thousands of acres with these algae farms? I am sure they will need pest control.

[Paqman]

Big oil companies do not want us buying efficient cars.

It's not really up to them. The car companies will make whatever is selling in the market.



Sales will drop and their quick cash will come to an end. They want to milk those cows until the bitter end.

I don't think they're too worried. Declining oil production and steady demand will mean the price of oil continues to climb. Even with more efficient cars their cashflow from oil looks pretty secure for a couple of decades yet.

[uRock]

It's not really up to them. The car companies will make whatever is selling in the market.Then why are those high efficiency diesels not available in the US? I was just looking at my local Ford dealer's site and the only diesels they have are in heavy duty trucks.

[Sporkman]

Then why are those high efficiency diesels not available in the US? I was just looking at my local Ford dealer's site and the only diesels they have are in heavy duty trucks.

There might be issues regarding emissions regulations, which may be stricter for diesels here compared to those of Europe for example.

[Sporkman]

It's not really up to them. The car companies will make whatever is selling in the market.


They (oil companies) can influence the cars available on the market indirectly, by for example lobbying for regulations, or lack of regulations, which encourage higher oil consumption in various ways.

[uRock]

There might be issues regarding emissions regulations, which may be stricter for diesels here compared to those of Europe for example.


They (oil companies) can influence the cars available on the market indirectly, by for example lobbying for regulations, or lack of regulations, which encourage higher oil consumption in various ways.

These two work well together and is why, IMHO, we do not see diesel cars on American car lots, unless the diesel is in a heavy duty truck.

[Dustin2128]

In my opinion, we need to invest much more into 4th gen reactor technology, using safer power sources in more... unstable areas, such as tidal, solar, geothermal, whatever. As for the hydrogen fuel cell people, here's some info: hydrogen is an energy carrier, not a "source". You've go to have electricity to convert water to hydrogen/oxygen. Not that it isn't an excellent way to cope with the shortcomings of batteries- at least in areas where water is abundant.

[wewantutopia]

You've go to have electricity to convert water to hydrogen/oxygen.

Right now most industrial production of H2 come from natural gas: CH4 with the C "knocked off". More efficient to just use natural gas without "conversion" losses.

[uRock]

The cars of the future if we don't change our ways.
http://uploads.neatorama.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Fred-Flintstone-Barney-Rubble-Car.jpg

[Minty_butt_Linux]

that'll be great, but it's a complete waste of time, money, and effort, in the end solves absolutely nothing :)
Natural Gas is always available. Here in the UK cars can run off it. I'm not too sure which manufacturer has opted for a trial but I saw a Honda Accord filling up on Natural Gas.

[pookiebear]

and think government taxes on fuel sales. They already are complaining that fuel sales are down. I heard some have proposed a mileage fee where your car would be tracked for the miles driven on the highway and the feds will send you a bill.
If I get taxed by the mile I will ride a bicycle or walk. I already ride the bicycle and motorcycles more than my 10 year old mini truck. I only put 4k miles on it in the last 2 years.

[clgy15]

I think many people here forget, but need fuels innovation. And not only that, but society changes its ways when the next best thing arrives. Trains, horses etc were incredibly popular but while people can afford the gas theyll use it.

And to be perfectly honest, the "emissions" from oil and gas may have some bad effects but I dont believe that the effects are a direct correlation to terrible consequences. We havent choked on unhealthy air yet!

The new change will come, in the mean time you can use whatever method you feel like fits you the best! And when you get lung cancer or something from pure emissions from gasoline cars then you can really complain.

[Paqman]

Then why are those high efficiency diesels not available in the US? I was just looking at my local Ford dealer's site and the only diesels they have are in heavy duty trucks.

Because the US car market is a bit peculiar. Diesels aren't popular, and big inefficient cars still are. It may be a cliche, but it seems like there really is a perception of "bigger is better" when it comes to cars in the US.

The cars exist, if US consumers were willing to buy them they'd be available.


There might be issues regarding emissions regulations, which may be stricter for diesels here compared to those of Europe for example.

Nope, European emissions standards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_emission_standards) are extremely strict.



And to be perfectly honest, the "emissions" from oil and gas may have some bad effects but I dont believe that the effects are a direct correlation to terrible consequences. We havent choked on unhealthy air yet!


Even if you're not worried about emissions, you should be worried about how much oil we burn. Oil makes up a huge percentage of our energy supply, and reserves are going to run out fairly soon. It's a real problem, which is why governments and industry are starting to get worried.

[mips]

Then why are those high efficiency diesels not available in the US? I was just looking at my local Ford dealer's site and the only diesels they have are in heavy duty trucks.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-european-diesel-cars


Why European Diesel Cars Are Not Available in the U.S.
European cars are more efficient and better for the environment, so how can you get these cars in the states?
May 11, 2009

Dear EarthTalk: I don’t understand why there are many European diesel cars with very high mileage ratings that are not available in the U.S. Can you enlighten?
-- John Healy, Fairfield, CT

Different countries do have differing standards in regard to how much pollution gasoline and diesel automobile engines are allowed to emit, but the reason you see so fewer diesel cars in the U.S. is more of a choice by automakers than the product of a decree by regulators on either side of the Atlantic.

Since the advent of the automobile age in the U.S., gasoline has been king of the road; today upwards of 95 percent of passenger cars and light trucks on American roads are gas-powered. And the federal government has done its part to keep it that way, taxing diesel at a rate about 25 percent higher than gasoline. A recent assessment by the American Petroleum Institute, an oil industry trade group, found that federal taxes accounted for 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel but only 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline.

In Europe, where in many regions about half of the cars on the road run on diesel, these tax incentives are flip-flopped, with diesel drivers reaping the economic benefits accordingly.

But according to Jonathan Welsh, who writes the “Me and My Car” Q&A column for The Wall Street Journal, interest in diesels—which typically offer better fuel efficiency than gas-powered cars—has gained significant momentum in the U.S. in recent years given the uptick in gasoline prices. The popularity of diesels also surged, albeit briefly, in the mid-1970s after the U.S. suffered its first “oil shock” that sent gas prices through the roof. But gas prices settled down and so did American fervor for diesels at that point.

Today, though, with so much emphasis on going green, diesel cars—some of which boast similar fuel efficiency numbers as hybrids—are on the comeback trail in the U.S. Recently passed regulations require diesel fuel sold in the U.S. today to have ultra low emissions, which appeals to those concerned about their carbon footprints and other environmental impacts. Also, the increased availability of carbon-neutral biodiesel—a form of diesel fuel made from agricultural wastes that can be used in place of regular diesel fuel without any engine modifications—is convincing a whole new generation of American drivers to consider diesel-powered cars. Right now only Volkswagen, Mercedes and Jeep sell diesel-powered cars in the U.S., but Ford, Nissan and others plan to launch American versions of diesel models already successful in Europe within the next year.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Coalition for Advanced Diesel Cars, a trade group that represents several automakers as well as parts and fuel suppliers, would like to see the U.S. government increase incentives for American drivers to choose diesel-powered engines by leveling the fuel taxation field—so gasoline and diesel could be competing fairly at the pump—and by boosting tax breaks on the purchase of new, more fuel efficient diesel vehicles. One hurdle is the relative lack of filling stations across the U.S. with diesel pumps, but as such vehicles become more popular, filling stations that don’t already offer them can relatively easily add a diesel pump or two.

It's mostly a money/tax issue.


Not so many years ago diesel was way cheaper over here than petrol. Diesel was used mostly by the transport (trucks, buses etc) & farming industries. Very few people had diesel cars and those that had were mostly farmers with their diesel Mercedes cars and pick-up trucks.

Then the local car industry started to introduce more euro diesel models here and people were eager to buy seeing the price of diesel was cheaper and you got better mileage even though the initial cost of the cars were higher. Government caught on and raised the taxes and duties etc (The fuel industry in SA is heavy regulated by the government and they essentially set the prices for fuel) and now the price of diesel is more than petrol. It's also cheaper to manufacture diesel than petrol.

So one has to ask whether governments really have the best interests of our environment/resources in mind as we could all be driving diesel cars with way better mileage figures.

There is a downside to diesel cars though in that the purchase price is higher than petrol cars and the maintenance fees are also higher for engine related work. An injector service/replacement is not cheap.

From a drive-ability point of view diesel engines generate way more torque than a petrol engine at low rpm and are thus easier to drive. They used to be slouches in acceleration but this has also changed with new technology and you get some feisty models out there.

These are my observations & interpretations and not to be taken as fact.

[Swagman]

If I get taxed by the mile I will ride a bicycle or walk. I already ride the bicycle and motorcycles more than my 10 year old mini truck. I only put 4k miles on it in the last 2 years.

Technology is already being implemented on our road networks here in UK to charge pay by mile/kilometre.

I'm a truck driver here and have noticed how our "overhead bridges" etc are now bristling with sensors. Some of those sensors are just "traffic Master" route sensors, but there are a new breed being installed everywhere. These look like "War of the World" heatray heads with twin eye infra red lights. I assume these are some kind of ANPR.

Think about it, These only need to be placed at key junctions and maybe the odd one along the road (Exactly what they are doing) and your journey can be taxed accordingly.

Galileo Satellite network is also for this purpose Europe wide. GPS speed tracking ensures auto speed fines !!

Welcome to 2011

[edit]

ANPR is now being installed at key junctions in our city (http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/local/drivers_beware_anpr_cameras_being_installed_across _peterborough_1_2590044)

My brother in law is a copper and tells me they completely ignore ANPR pings (unless there is a specific operation on for that day) so... Just who are these cameras meant to benefit?

[Artemis3]

Reduce distances, produce closer and consume closer. There are projects for buildings dedicated solely for food production within cities; towns and rural areas should simply go back to farm most of their own food. This of course means restart local economies, and screw the large chains which import everything.

See those congested roads? replace them with mass transit, trains or similar. People should drive/ride only to the line, then hop aboard in a station; not do the whole trip in their personal vehicle, only to move slower than walking in some places...

The US has a big problem with their low density sub-urbanism, which is also the model that wastes the most energy. In that model, most need to travel distances (in car) to get to work or buy food, go to school etc; also the sparse homes need more energy for heating, and energy is lost in power line lengths. As opposed to living in a town or city where everything is within walking distance.

The power crisis in Japan is interesting to observe, because its a preview of what is to come. And THEY live densely populated AND have decent public transport...

Umm I'm sorry but natural gas is not that plentiful. Half the production of Canada is eaten by the US alone, and thats like 15% their consumption... Sure is viable for a while, but not too long. The demand is high enough in power generation and heating, not to mention hydrogen production, AND the whole chemical derivatives which include polymers... And do observe where the major reserves are.

People will have to change their habits, those who are used to waste the most will suffer the most unless they change NOW. Otherwise one day, you will find that paying your bill, however high, won't do.

[SuperFreak]

I think many people here forget, but need fuels innovation. And not only that, but society changes its ways when the next best thing arrives. Trains, horses etc were incredibly popular but while people can afford the gas theyll use it.

And to be perfectly honest, the "emissions" from oil and gas may have some bad effects but I dont believe that the effects are a direct correlation to terrible consequences. We havent choked on unhealthy air yet!

Horses have been domesticated for about 6000 years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse) whereas the gas combustion automobile dates back less than 150 years( Karl Benz generally is acknowledged as the inventor of the modern automobile). Are human beings so arrogant that they think a limited and dwindling resource(oil,gas,natural gas,diesel) that is about 50% exhausted already will last as long as a natural system 1000's of years old. The efficiency of the car is not the whole story anyway; there are huge resources that go into supporting the car : factories of production, infrastructure (last I looked roads are made from oil products), governmental regulatory agencies, insurance companies,showrooms, repair shops, education system to supply the engineers, designers and mechanics to make all this possible.... A grand misallocation of resources

[uRock]

Lol, horses. Who will clean up all of the horse pooh and who will pay them to do it?

[pookiebear]

Lol, horses. Who will clean up all of the horse pooh and who will pay them to do it?

Burn it for electricity or process it for the methane and burn that for electricity. I would be down to get back to the horse game.

[wewantutopia]

Burn it for electricity or process it for the methane and burn that for electricity. I would be down to get back to the horse game.

Horse food would then compete with human food.

[pi3.1415926535...]

The number of horses available in the short term would be a problem though. Cows in many areas are far more plentiful. They also produce far more methane, which if most of that were to be used, it would not only reduce emissions, but also generate large amounts of power. This is already being done to an extent on some farms.

Edit: One problem with cows, is that they are not particularly fast.

[sdowney717]

Horse = large maintenance costs.
My parents own 3 horses
Feed is close on $400 per month hay oats etc...
Feed price has gone up dramatically with rising food due to rising fuel cost.
Modern farming means greater land efficiency means increased productivity.
Cant produce as much food per acre without modern equipment.
Got to buy sawdust for the stalls.
His land is about 27 acres. Horse needs pasturage.
Horse needs constant human interaction.
When it is cold need to heat the barn.
When it rains they need shelter.
Ever clean out the poop in multiple stalls?

VET can run bills up.
Horse can get hoof problems.
Horse gets tired, needs to rest.

also dead horse means a big problem.
who do you pay to haul it away?
Or do you dig a big hole.

[Paqman]

The main reason horses were replaced as soon as we were able was that they required huge amounts of arable land devoted to their upkeep. When petrol powered buses, trucks and trams became available it allowed that land to be put to better use (ie: housing). Any substantial return to horses would involve clearing huge areas of housing and buildings, which would (ironically) force people further out into new suburbs and increase commuting.

The solution to our energy problems is not to turn back the clock. There's a good reason we abandoned the energy systems of the past. They're generally inefficient and ineffective. We have to move forward and find sustainable energy systems for a modern world.

[SuperFreak]

The solution to our energy problems is not to turn back the clock. There's a good reason we abandoned the energy systems of the past. They're generally inefficient and ineffective. We have to move forward and find sustainable energy systems for a modern world.

Inefficient and ineffective in a modern world of close to 7 Billion people perhaps. But it is highly unlikely that the earth can sustain this large a population for very long. There is a reason that old ways lasted for 1000s of years (low population pressure, low consumption rates and respect for the natural world). Old ways were not abandoned without a bit of a fight from farmers, Luddites , the Arts and Crafts movement, many religious sects and others. Time will tell who was right.

[forrestcupp]

That's true, but I'm just afraid of this being marketed as a good alternative to electric cars, extending our massive oil dependency even further into the future.

People seem to forget how much pollution is caused in the production of electricity. We also forget about how many coal miners end up with black lung so we can charge our electric vehicles.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Certainly, but it would still be more intelligent and efficient to just use wind, solar, etc. Out energy needs will only keep growing, and replacing a dependency on oil deposits with a dependency on algea is, IMHO, not a good "solution".

Indeed! It completely makes sense to offload the generation of power from cars to the far more sophisticated (and efficiency-centric) power grid. However, it's really important to realise that batteries are made from all sorts of fancy metals. Producing a really big battery for every car on the planet, with today's technology, is simply unsustainable. There is a lot of work to be done in that space.

A similar argument is made against biofuel, which has led to some incredible ecosystems being replaced by miles and miles of “natural” oil plantations.

At the end of the day, with what we have now, we should be looking at the more attainable solutions; the stuff that'll get me labelled a hippy (and I'm proud of it!). Public transit, passenger rail lines, living closer to work…

[uRock]

Indeed! It completely makes sense to offload the generation of power from cars to the far more sophisticated (and efficiency-centric) power grid. However, it's really important to realise that batteries are made from all sorts of fancy metals. Producing a really big battery for every car on the planet, with today's technology, is simply unsustainable. There is a lot of work to be done in that space.

A similar argument is made against biofuel, which has led to some incredible ecosystems being replaced by miles and miles of “natural” oil plantations.

At the end of the day, with what we have now, we should be looking at the more attainable solutions; the stuff that'll get me labelled a hippy (and I'm proud of it!). Public transit, passenger rail lines, living closer to work…
I am called a hippie or tree hugger quite often. I am amazed at the fact that our governments don't place restriction on the purchase of large SUVs and other gas/diesel guzzlers.

I'd like to see F250s and their GMC/Dodge equivalents require a CDL and some kind of proof of purpose. People cry that this is against their freedom to waste their money, but they are wasting resources that the rest of the world needs.

[Roasted]

Sweet. Another project with high potential the government will undoubtedly ruin.

[Paqman]

Inefficient and ineffective in a modern world of close to 7 Billion people perhaps.

No, they were inefficient with any level of population. Lighting your house with town gas made from coal is crap, whether there's one person doing it or a million. In fact larger populations create intense pressure to drive efficiency improvements. Small populations can and do get away with being wasteful.

[SuperFreak]

The technological man of 1970 in the U.S. consumed approximately 230,000 Kcal of energy per day (~115 times that of primitive man) with about 26% of that amount being electrical energy. Of that electrical energy only about 10% resulted in useful work while the remaining 16% was wasted by inefficiencies in electrical generation and transmission.

http://www.wou.edu/las/physci/GS361/electricity%20generation/HistoricalPerspectives.htm

[Paqman]

The technological man of 1970 in the U.S. consumed approximately 230,000 Kcal of energy per day (~115 times that of primitive man) with about 26% of that amount being electrical energy. Of that electrical energy only about 10% resulted in useful work while the remaining 16% was wasted by inefficiencies in electrical generation and transmission.

http://www.wou.edu/las/physci/GS361/electricity%20generation/HistoricalPerspectives.htm

That's apples and oranges though, isn't it? We do much more than prehistoric people did. Energy use per capita today is about what it was a hundred years ago, because we were using very inefficient coal-based systems back then.

US energy use isn't a good example of efficiency either. The US uses twice as much energy per capita that European nations do, and twenty times as much as countries like India. The US also doesn't covert energy into useful activity very efficiently, it takes about 11MJ to output $1 of GDP, most other western nations use about 8-9MJ.

Some countries like Denmark have shown that you can stabilise or even reduce energy use in a modern society without any impact on standards of living. Denmark's energy use has barely changed since the early 80's, despite population and GDP rising. If we can stabilise our energy demands and bring more sustainable energy sources online there's no reason to think we might have to go back to living in puddles and eating sticks.

[SuperFreak]

Energy use per capita today is about what it was a hundred years ago, because we were using very inefficient coal-based systems back then.

I am very skeptical of this statement. Is there any documentation to back this up. I would think that transportation consumption alone would be an order of magnitude(or 2 or 3) higher now than a hundred years ago not to mention gross consumption of just about every other product including products such as electronics which were non existent 100 years ago. I guess you could say that food consumption is nearly the same but I would suspect that presently people eat far more meat than they did 100 years ago and this uses far more energy inputs than equivalent plant based food.

[inobe]

I am called a hippie or tree hugger quite often. I am amazed at the fact that our governments don't place restriction on the purchase of large SUVs and other gas/diesel guzzlers.

I'd like to see F250s and their GMC/Dodge equivalents require a CDL and some kind of proof of purpose. People cry that this is against their freedom to waste their money, but they are wasting resources that the rest of the world needs.

i thought driving was a privilege anyway!

imagining how well that'll solve many of our problems, thanks for sharing your thoughts:)

[Paqman]

I am very skeptical of this statement. Is there any documentation to back this up.

I've not got the books with me that I got the data from, but you could probably dig it out from the IEA stats site.



I would think that transportation consumption alone would be an order of magnitude(or 2 or 3) higher now than a hundred years ago


Definitely, transport has been a massive growth area. But other sectors have fallen. Modern space heating and lighting in homes is much more efficient than in 1900, and industry uses much less energy (due to it shrinking and general dematerialisaiton of the economy).



not to mention gross consumption of just about every other product including products such as electronics which were non existent 100 years ago.

For sure, no arguments there. Consumer electronics account for a pretty miniscule percentage of energy use though. Heating and light account for the vast majority of energy consumption in homes, and domestic use only accounts for about a quarter of all energy use.

[uRock]

i thought driving was a privilege anyway!

imagining how well that'll solve many of our problems, thanks for sharing your thoughts:)

It wouldn't solve the problems, but it would help in buying time for better technology to be engineered.

[FMAnimus]

I personally worry about the cost of such things. The way I look at it, if an industry or government can't make money one way, they'll make it another way. Say our oil dependency and usage drops by 50% if these engines become available, and a large amount of people purchase automobiles with said engines. That's 50% less demand on oil companies and importers, not to mention fuel dealers. So, what happens when unemployment and downsizing across the oil industry starts, and governments start missing out on that money that they were getting a piece of before? How do they make up for that loss?

Regardless, I'm glad that stuff like this is making progress in the scientific research communities. Thanks for the link.

[Paqman]

I personally worry about the cost of such things. The way I look at it, if an industry or government can't make money one way, they'll make it another way. Say our oil dependency and usage drops by 50% if these engines become available, and a large amount of people purchase automobiles with said engines. That's 50% less demand on oil companies and importers, not to mention fuel dealers. So, what happens when unemployment and downsizing across the oil industry starts, and governments start missing out on that money that they were getting a piece of before? How do they make up for that loss?

Regardless, I'm glad that stuff like this is making progress in the scientific research communities. Thanks for the link.

Even if demand for oil dropped substantially, the drop in production and the added cost of alternative oil sources will mean prices stay high enough for them to still make plenty of money. I wouldn't worry about the oil companies going bust any time soon.

[SuperFreak]

An example of technological progress

Fossil Fuels and Industrial Farming
Conventional food production and distribution requires a tremendous amount of energy—one study conducted in 2000 estimated that ten percent of the energy used annually in the United States was consumed by the food industry.ix Yet for all the energy we put into our food system, we don’t get very much out. A 2002 study from the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health estimated that, using our current system, three calories of energy were needed to create one calorie of edible food. And that was on average. Some foods take far more, for instance grain-fed beef, which requires thirty-five calories for every calorie of beef produced. x What’s more, the John Hopkins study didn’t include the energy used in processing and transporting food. Studies that do estimate that it takes an average of seven to ten calories of input energy to produce one calorie of food.xi

Accounting for most of this wasteful equation are the industrial practices upon which our food system is built. These include inefficient growing practices, food processing, and storage, as well as our system of transporting foodstuffs thousands of miles between the field and the end consumer.
http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/energy/


"A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem." A.Einstein

[PhillyPhil]

...requires no transmission, crankshaft, pistons, valves, fuel compression, cooling systems or fluids.

Don't electric motors do without all these, already? ;)

[MisterGaribaldi]

When I first read about this supposed successor, I'm sorry, I had to laugh... but the only thing that came into my mind was this:

http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/yamato_wave_motion_gun.jpg

YouTube: Wave Motion Gun (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty-1zWsXFNs)