You are SO not fooling anyone
- From: "G. R. L. Cowan" <gcowan@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 16:00:59 -0400
What is with these scripturally named posters,
or poster. Do they imagine anyone with two clues to rub
together even opens their messages?
Without any elaboration, I'm told in another forum
that I need to dumb the following down.
Make so a ten-year-old can understand it.
Can anyone suggest which parts specifically
aren't yet dumb enough?
> ... That leaves providing the electricity.
> How do you stuff enough electrons into a car
> to travel 400 miles without recharging?
Oxygen is always involved. The electrons
start out far, in atomic terms, from the nearest O atom.
It pulls our load by hauling them in.
So after the 400 miles are done, there is somewhere
going to be several hundred kg of oxygen that
has tightened its grip on the electrons.
Maybe in the air downwind of the road travelled,
maybe dispersed on a high-surface-area electrode array,
maybe concentrated in an ash bin.
This last possibility is the interesting one,
as http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/boron_blast.html#AV ,
where I assemble (theoretical minimum) ash volumes,
should help to show.
Comparing these volumes to that of a Li-ion battery pack,
which is among other things an ash bin/fuel bin all in one,
shows that an ash bin's volume is not intrinsically
a show-stopper. The volume of the battery pack in the
Li-ion T-zero ... don't have that, but have its mass:
350 kg for 50 kilowatt-hours*.
Guessing that its bulk density is 2 kg/L yields
a 175-litre volume estimate. Now, if the Li2O
that is in the cells when they are done were not
intercalated with some kind of, IIRC, cobalt oxide,
but packed as theoretically dense crystals,
of a space-tiling shape, in a Li2O tank,
and a 20-percent-efficient lithium *burner*
heat engine had made 50 kWh in the process of
putting them there, what's the least volume
that bin could have?
I'm expecting a number a whole lot less than 175 L ...
yes: my table says 26.41 litres per GJ, we've had 250 kWh,
i.e. 0.9 GJ, so 23.77 L.
That sort of volume reduction for spent oxygen,
along with whatever held the electrons loosely
that it now holds tightly, is possible
if the ash can be herded away from the reaction site,
and concentrated.
This is a benefit that, to my way of thinking, comes naturally
when internal combustion is done with pure oxygen.
The ash is always easily separable from leftover oxygen.
I don't see this being easily done with electrode processes.
> When you must recharge, or refill your electron tank,
> how can that be done relatively quickly?
Blow the lumps of oxide out of the oxide lump bin
with an air flow, similarly blow in new solid fuel pellets
to their bin. Lacking special blowers, somewhat slower
recharge is possible by gravity transfer.
(Ash bin has bottom gate, fuel pellet bin has lid,
manually refill with a scoop.)
Everything is dry and compact.
Where do you get the pure oxygen?
>>From a device that extracts it from air.
This part is hard, but without one or more hard parts,
this discussion would have been concluded long ago.
Graham Cowan says you have to pick the right hard parts.
This one's not *too* hard. It's not like selling a pure EV
to someone who has only on-street or apartment-basement parking,
or selling a hydrogen car for more than a tenth
of what it costs to make.
--- Graham Cowan, former hydrogen fan
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/Paper_for_11th_CHC.html
boron as energy carrier: real-car range, nuclear cachet
* http://www.acpropulsion.com/EAASV_101803.pdf , p. 17 of 42 ...
.
- Prev by Date: Assume A Solution
- Next by Date: Re: Why don't we use Lenses to heat up stuff??
- Previous by thread: Assume A Solution
- Next by thread: Re: Why hydrogen should not be used
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
