[geeks] [rescue] Computerfests (was: first real server hardware) -OT

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

Wed, 28 Apr 2004 @ 00:42 +0000, wa2egp at att.net said:

> True.  Too bad we can't get something to go hydrogen to electricity
> and the vehicle will be "minimal" emissions.  At present, electric
> vehicles would make the pollution from a diffuse source to a point 
> source which might be better since it could be handled more efficiently
> at the plant than on a tail pipe. 

Here's a (probably dumb) question I have always had about this.

They say the output of some hydrogen fuel cells would be water.

Won't that make the roads soaking wet?

> That would never fly.  Can't make enough money.  Need to s-can the whole
> vehicle and buy a new one ;->

Car companies definitely don't like the idea of a car that lasts a long
time.

Have you seen GM's vision of the future?  A completely sealed chassis
that encloses engine and everything.  Zero maintenance for 10-15 years,
and then you throw it away.

On paper, its being promoted as a great idea.

However, it didn't look at all repairable...

But a similar idea does interest me: the modular car.  You get a basic
chassis made by Ford or Chevy, but it can take parts, even major
assemblies, from other cars or third parties.

A lot of car parts are already made by the same company anyway, so it
seems inevitable.

> I'm surprised external combustion engines were not more intensely
> investigated.  Burn clean with plenty of oxygen, no pressure so
> minimal nitrogen-oxygen compounds.  Darn efficiency no better than
> internal but more potential to reduce pollution.

What's an example of that?

I'm surprised more effort was not put into turbines.  They *were* making
progress, and then just dropped it in the mid-60s.

Turbine->electric would seem reasonable for certain vehicles.

-- 
shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- ["The object of war is not to die for your
country but to make the other bastard die for his." -- General George S.
Patton]