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

This is such great news! Particularly because at the bottom of that page South Africa is listed as one of it's target markets! I wonder if they're silent too, just imagine a city crowded with vehicles moving along to the soundtrack of a faint hiss...

Originally posted by greatlakes
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]

Hey man cheers for the vid,

I think this is a good video demonstrating what the air-car is capable off, its also good to see the cylinders are made out of carbon fibre! This revolutionary design could easily whipe out most of our air pollution problems if incorperated into the mainstream car market! be good to see these cars up and running on the road soon!


flag this thread!!!!


[edit on 31-5-2007 by gtirlad2]

I found out about this air powered car earlier today. It was developed in 1983 I believe. It will probably dissapear again unless people do something about it.

Originally posted by LoneGunMan

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.

when i was on a WMD team we used Scott packs for our level A hazmat...to make sure they were safe for what we did, the Ltc let us take one out and shoot it with a 7.62 to see what would happen if we happened to come under fire ona mission....it decompresses rapidly but it didnt explode by any means...so i have to go with lonegunman on this one, they shouldnt "explode"

the risk is definatly worth the reward IMHO

[edit on 31-5-2007 by Damocles]

I think we're seeing the future here.I believe markets like N.A or Western Europe will prefer the hybrid version but sooner or later i guess everybody will have a 100% air compressed car.

It still need some support from whoever can/wanna support(tv chans,newspapers etc...)because oil companies will not necessarily appreciate it

forgive me folks for my inaccurate post. What i actually read was Aussie Joe Cell Experimeter Runs 1983 Car on Water.

awesome!i would so drive one. i always loved the jetsons!

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?

Sure.
Oil and Auto-makers.

Apparently India's Tata wasn't getting the pay-offs from the oil corps like GMC, Ford, Chevy and all the American auto-makers are getting from the oil tycoons in Texas.

I actually thought this thread was about a car that flies through air! I've been mislead and would like a full refund please. BTW, I have been waiting for my licensed jetpack that was promised to me since the 60s. Where IS MY jetpack?!

This air powered engine (the Di Pietro Engine) has been available for a couple of years now. It was developed in Melbourne Australia. It is by far the best engine of this type I have come across. Why the Australian government hasn’t thrown a swag of cash at this guy for further R & D has got me.

And lets think about this – a car run on compressed air – anyone with an air compressor (you can buy one for about AUD$200 from any hardware store) can fill their own car – then lets say we hook up said air compressor to solar panels or wind turbine?

Now we have a zero emissions vehicle, using renewable energy to keep it running.

This is not wishful thinking – not science fiction – this is possible now!

As the air leaves the tailpipe will it sound like a perpetual fart?
I guess we'll know when one of these cars is driving by won't we.
Of course there will have to be some type of spare tank in the
trunk and a patch kit in case one of the connectors, or the tank
itself leaks.

The big question in my mind while browsing this thread is, What
happens to the car's power as the compressed air is used? Less
compressed air in the tank equals less and less horsepower,
doesn't it? Climbing a steep gradient could be nervewrecking.
I drove through Canada last year and saw little electric cars
attempting to cross a big bridge with a steep incline on either
side during rush hour. They stayed in the right hand lane, but
the way maniacs would zoom up behind them and then suddenly
change lanes to avoid a rear-end collision was very disconcerting.

.

i wil be calling around to see if the FEDS will allow me to import this vehicle if I sign a waiver agreeing to understand the dangers of a vehicle collision in such a lightly constructed vehicle. I have a safe driving record, but as a pre-caution I don't beleive I would be driving my son around in it.

Please remember that the US economy is oil based. The world trades in oil dollars and thus keeps the US economy propped up. This is why the US is not interested in any global warming solutions and why you won't see people with domestic energy solutions. All governments need their oil taxes and the US needs the world to keep trading in oil.

These cars will not be commercially produced. They are token gestures to make you think the government is trying to find solutions to GW.

That said if some mysterious as yet undiscovered method of producing energy can be found that can be taxed then they will go for it, hence the UK's new pro nuclear stance! The US on the other hand needs to get its dollars back (especially from China!) with collapsing its economy and find an alternate exportable product.

Originally posted by realyweely
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.

This air car is cool, and it can also be used in the future for who ever wants it, but I have to agree with you on that, the hidrogen car is the real solution, it also packs a punch as in what power it can output when it burns, it has a very high combustion level.



[edit on 1-6-2007 by pepsi78]

Everyone here comparing a hydrogen based vehicle system (please remember that when you talk about these "cars" its not just you driving behind the wheel, its an entire system of delivery of energy and emissions that fit within a larger environment.) to the air car, you are comparing a teenager or possibly 20 year-old (the hydrogen car) to a toddler or even an infant (the air car.)

If the oil-based economy decides to quash it before it can even make it to middle-school, so to speak, then it has no chance at all of learning how to "pack a punch when it really starts to burn" or will it ever get a chance to become stronger so that it can go up hills with little air left in its tanks.

Man, the people weighing in on this technology, some of them anyhow, are as bad as Mobil or Exxon or Sunoco: they'd rather strike it down and keep the status quo than risk far greater benefits by supporting further development.

Brave.

Eloquently said. The plans are to have 6,000 of these vehicles on the street by 2008. That by itself is pretty huge. With that many viable air cars on the street, there is no way they won't get alot of attention. Now maybe the oil companies, and their compatriots can sabotage the cars making them look like they're a danger to drive, or maybe even sabotage the plant that is to produce them so they never get manufactured but I believe that since this snowball is about to start rolling that it will get alot of momentum very quickly.

Originally posted by tyranny22


Sure.
Oil and Auto-makers.

Apparently India's Tata wasn't getting the pay-offs from the oil corps like GMC, Ford, Chevy and all the American auto-makers are getting from the oil tycoons in Texas.

Hog wash Auto makers my butt. In the video the guy narrating said most people did not like it because of its distance limitations. He further blew it out of proportion when he stated the average motorist only drives 30 Miles a day. Note he said miles not KM which is what the estimates are based on Hello I can name probably twenty in our subdivision alone that drive 45 miles (72.4 KM) each way for a total of 90 Miles a day or (72.4 KM) . Trust me in CA most people drive far more then an average of 30 Miles a day. Oh and what about idling time on the freeways or lets put it differently driving very very slow in traffic which surely has to reduce the estimated distance somewhat just like cold weather.


Would it be nice to use an Electric Car? Sure it will, the same with Compressed air but it is going to take time to develop batteries that can go great distances and I myself am leery of the compressed air cylinder might blow up. Yeah Yeah I know they say they think it is impossible but they claim a hydrogen cylinder cannot blow up either. Well if they can't blow up Hydrogen tanks that is, why do they take all of the safety precautions???? Now I realize the chances are a lot less then a gas tank but certainly given the right conditions one could blow up which is my point.



[edit on 6/1/2007 by shots]

This is all just mucking about. The electric is the way to go. Especially the the breakthroughs in the past few years, nevermind those we are on the verge of in energy storage.
In-wheel motors and advancing battery technology say to me electric is the greenest and most efficient way to go.

I remember when studying chemistry that water vapour has a worse greenhouse effect than CO2. Did you know this?

Originally posted by cwheathcote
I remember when studying chemistry that water vapour has a worse greenhouse effect than CO2. Did you know this?

I did not know that! Thanks ever so much. In fact, I did a little searching and found a link to a place with some more solid information on the very subject:

Water Vapor - A Greenhouse Gas

Now, if you go a little way into the page, you will also find this interesting tidbit of information:

"The contribution of water vapor to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect (i.e., that portion of greenhouse warming caused exclusively by humans) is still controversial. At numerous environmental conferences, greenhouse gases, such as CO2 and methane (CH4), are discussed primarily while many times the role of water vapor in both its natural and anthropogenic aspects remains unmentioned. Yet water vapor not only holds the pole position concerning the natural greenhouse effect, but also participates in the additional absorption of heat in the atmosphere which is exclusively caused by human activities.

We're not speculating that we would blow enormous amounts of water vapor into the air and enhance the greenhouse effect. On the contrary, the concerns are for so-called "secondary effects". That is: if the average temperature of atmospheric layers near to the ground, as a consequence of anthropogenic CO2 and methane emissions, is rising, then the evaporation of water is increased. Henceforth more water vapor will get into the air, and this additional abundance of water vapor will also absorb more heat."

Much more complex an issue than just tossing in a fact here or there. Did you know that?