Air-Car Ready For Mass Production - Yes It Runs On Compressed Air!

Air-Car Ready For Mass Production - Yes It Runs On Compressed Air!

green.yahoo.com

The world's first commercial compressed air-powered vehicle is rolling towards the production line. The Air Car, developed by ex-Formula One engineer Guy Nègre, will be built by India's largest automaker, Tata Motors.

The Air Car uses compressed air to push its engine's pistons. It is anticipated that approximately 6000 Air Cars will be cruising the streets of India by 2008. If the manufacturers have no surprises up their exhaust pipes the car will be practical and reasonably priced...

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 31-5-2007 by UM_Gazz]

A car that runs on compressed air! What a great idea. The article states that it will probably never make it to America, because it wouldn't hold up to the US crash test standards. But if this could evolve, it would be fantastic!
Think big oil will let it happen?

green.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Seems quite dangerous to me, dont think it would pass UK safety guidelines. Would be like driving around in a pressured bomb. I also see insurance problems. I believe better technologies will become available soon. it is foolish to jump on the bandwagon of the first idea that hits the market. Pressured air as we know can be extremely dangerous.

Your link is not working..

Here's a video on the Air Car:


Fowl Play: Guess you're not a scuba diver eh? Scuba compressed air cylinders are compressed to 3000 pounds per sq in. If these split open on your back, its gonna be a bad day for you.

The air car cylinders are 300 bar=4351 psi, so not much more than a 3000 psi tank that you carry exposed on a divers back! Also the cylinders are carbon fiber, whereas scuba tanks are either steel or aluminum.


[edit on 31-5-2007 by greatlakes]

Pressured air as we know can be extremely dangerous.

What about L.P.G.? People have been driving cars around for decades with a compressed, flammable gas powering them. What are the dangers of compressed air cars that people always claim?

I think this would be a great idea for a place like India and lots of other places. Some suburbs in Paris used to have a system around the start of the 20th century that ran taxis and such off compressed air.

Scuba divers donk get drunk and hit each other at 80mph.
I am not denouncing the idea as we need alternate fuel mobiles, but this i doubt is the safest method.
regards

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Scuba divers donk get drunk and hit each other at 80mph.
I am not denouncing the idea as we need alternate fuel mobiles, but this i doubt is the safest method.
regards

Watch the video I posted, it addresses car accidents impacting the scuba tanks. Carbon composite spun tanks are much safer than any metallic in catastrophic failure. I'm sure there were fears when gasoline automobiles were 1st presented as exploding rolling bombs as well decades ago

[edit on 31-5-2007 by greatlakes]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Seems quite dangerous to me, dont think it would pass UK safety guidelines. Would be like driving around in a pressured bomb. I also see insurance problems. I believe better technologies will become available soon. it is foolish to jump on the bandwagon of the first idea that hits the market. Pressured air as we know can be extremely dangerous.

emissions from combustion engines at present is highly dangerous to the enivorment and the weather. I would take a water car over any of the other options but the air car is pretty cool.
I guess the danger of smog in the atmosphere is just as dangerous to chronic lung suffers too.
I hope one day the world realizes that no process with toxic waste is worth the process
oh when will we learn>?

Originally posted by junglelord
I guess the danger of smog in the atmosphere is just as dangerous to chronic lung suffers too.
I hope one day the world realizes that no process with toxic waste is worth the process
oh when will we learn>?

I'm afraid that the worlds people won't learn until it truly is too late. There's another thread floating around today talking about NASA's prediction that we better wake up in less than 10 years or we're all in for big trouble. I like this air car idea. I guess the only way to get even less emissions is to start producing those cars that Fred Flintstone cruises around in.

How much energy is used to compress the air?

Is the energy used to compress the air similar to what a normal car would use to travel a comparable distance?.

I suspect Hydrogen cars are the way to go.

If its only two minutes to fill the tank then I would say its very green even if it takes some coal to create the electricity (which of course is control and submission, certainly not technology!)
coal in the 21 century is really lame

Originally posted by junglelord
If its only two minutes to fill the tank then I would say its very green even if it takes some coal to create the electricity (which of course is control and submission, certainly not technology!)
coal in the 21 century is really lame

But what mileage and at what speeds are being envisaged for one charge?
I still think Hydrogen is the way forwards. .

OK, I have a question. Does anybody here have one of those flashlight/radios that don't need batteries. It's really cool technology. It has a little generator in it. You crank the handle for a couple minutes and it charges itself up for a couple of hours usage. Why couldn't this same type of technology be used for something like this, just on a larger scale. Then it would be completely green.
Can someone riddle me this?

Its all to do with power requirements. A modern solid state radio needs little in Voltage but try building a wind up say TV and the energy needed is quite a lot. It can be done but the human input needed is quite massive

How about using the hydrogen to power the air filling stations?

And while you're at it, create the hydrogen by using solar powered gas diffusion units.

There are no closed minds allowed here. When I first read about this car almost 2 years ago, I almost reached into the computer to try to shake somebody and show them that it was not impossible to come up with alternative engines.

Is anyone here going to convince me that a company the size of Dodge or GM couldn't develop this engine and system to an acceptable level of efficiency or to the point where it would be just as suitable a substitute as hydrogen?

I am thinking when the general public is offered the option to deal with either a) hydrogen as a potentially volatile gas or b) compressed air, they'll more often than not choose the stuff we currently use to fill our tires.

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Scuba divers donk get drunk and hit each other at 80mph.
I am not denouncing the idea as we need alternate fuel mobiles, but this i doubt is the safest method.
regards

These tanks are very similar to the ones used in the fire service for our air-packs. Sometimes the temperature at floor lever exceeds 300 degrees F. We houses collapse on firefighters, falling through floors, off building rooftops with the air-packs getting hot from the super heated structure fire.

I have never heard of one exploding. Just doesn't happen.

Originally posted by lombozo
OK, I have a question. Does anybody here have one of those flashlight/radios that don't need batteries. It's really cool technology. It has a little generator in it. You crank the handle for a couple minutes and it charges itself up for a couple of hours usage. Why couldn't this same type of technology be used for something like this, just on a larger scale. Then it would be completely green.
Can someone riddle me this?

I'll answer this one, lombozo.

Your hand and your arm, while seemingly very large giant creatures to your little flashlight or radio, are pipsqueaks next to your car.

How much grain would you have to grow each year to feed the horses that would be needed to crank the mama-pajama crank on the theoretical car you are talking about? How many horsepower on that side of the equation would be necessary.

Now that I'm typing this, I understand that the same is true with compressed air vehicle. However, the idea behind displacing WHERE the energy is expended and how it is distributed before it makes it to your engine is the heart of the air compressed vehicle design. You're not talking about buying the potential energy stored in gasoline. You are talking about buying electricity to fill a pressurized tank in your home or buying the use of an air compressor at a station. In either of those last two scenarios, the cost of energy is more easily tracked (at least now it is) than trying to guess what the oil companies are pricing their "product" at.

Additionally, if I live in a windy spot, I can put up my own wind generator to run my compressor. Almost free energy for my car, minus the investment for the generator and maintenance.

Solar, same deal. And the price of solar generated electricity is set to come down very soon. New technology there is going to make it very accessible for Joe Consumer within the next year or so, I believe.

It stated I believe in the video that a compressed air charge lasts around 200km. To refill the tanks for another go costs around $2.00 in electricity. That translates to around (in the USA, where gas is $3.50/gal) 214 MPG. And this is only a prototype.

Originally posted by junglelord
If its only two minutes to fill the tank then I would say its very green even if it takes some coal to create the electricity (which of course is control and submission, certainly not technology!)
coal in the 21 century is really lame

Coal is not really lame. Actually, of all the fossil fuels, it is the most controllable of fuels. Perhaps what you may not be aware of, Junglelord, is that coal is now so incredibly regulated, at least in the US, and the technology to clean its byproducts (even technology to re-cycle its byproduct for further combustion!) is incredibly advanced.

Tell me that with all the coal we have (and we have something like the 3rd or 4th highest amounts of coal deposits globally), we shouldn't use it to make electricity for other use....electric cars, air cars, electric uses, etc. Compared to oil, its wicked cheap. They have even considered liquifying coal to use as fuel in cars. That process would take a while to come online and the implementation would be 'spensive, but the source would be cheap.

Is that lame?

Cheap means you can do other stuff on other fronts to fight the problem, right?

Originally posted by greatlakes
It stated I believe in the video that a compressed air charge lasts around 200km. To refill the tanks for another go costs around $2.00 in electricity. That translates to around (in the USA, where gas is $3.50/gal) 214 MPG. And this is only a prototype.

Gimme my air car NOW!!!!!!