PDA

View Full Version : Clean transportation,




Blinky
10-15-2002, 01:51 AM
Does anyone ever look beyond the Segway-HT? It is probably premature to suggest, but will Segway be the company to start the trend of other companies going the 'non-pollutant' way.

I am not suggesting that the same technology that is used in the Segway-HT should be used in everything. Shouldn't the same approach that Dean Kamen took into building this thing as well as his other inventions be utilized for all future ideas?




JohnM
10-15-2002, 07:20 AM
quote:Originally posted by Blinky

Does anyone ever look beyond the Segway-HT? It is probably premature to suggest, but will Segway be the company to start the trend of other companies going the 'non-pollutant' way.

I am not suggesting that the same technology that is used in the Segway-HT should be used in everything. Shouldn't the same approach that Dean Kamen took into building this thing as well as his other inventions be utilized for all future ideas?


Please explain what 'approach' you are talking about? Kamen is hardly the first person to produce clean , non-pollutant transportation.

Blinky
10-15-2002, 08:58 AM
Thanks JohnM, your right. Dean Kamen is not the first person to produce clean transportation. Sorry for inferring that.

The approach I mean is to take a problem and to solve it from scratch. He didn't really use much of anybody else's idea's to make the Segway-HT.

Are car makers going to take an old design and try to improve it. For example automobiles are forever changing year to year, but why must they evolve into a cleaner product. Who is to say that future of transportation has to be a by product of an evolution of an automobile.

We need more fresh thinkers like Dean Kamen. He didn't make the Segway-HT(as far as we know) originally running gasoline. He solved his problem ignoring past ideas.

Sorry to be so general, but am in a rush to write this,

JohnM
10-15-2002, 09:53 AM
quote:Originally posted by Blinky

The approach I mean is to take a problem and to solve it from scratch. He didn't really use much of anybody else's idea's to make the Segway-HT.



Hardly from scratch. Kamen already had the core technology from his IBOT. The problem he was approaching was how to make a bundle of money with a really neat piece of engineering developed for a limited market product. He just applied that technology to a device for the mass market. Kamen hardly ignored past ideas. Nothing wrong with building off your earlier successes.

n/a
10-15-2002, 03:12 PM
quote:Does anyone ever look beyond the Segway-HT? It is probably premature to suggest, but will Segway be the company to start the trend of other companies going the 'non-pollutant' way.

When the stirling comes out, it may have a bigger impact on the "non-pollutant" trend then Segay. I assume that the stirling will be usefull to charge up anything using batteries. For example, electric cars might do with fewer batteries if charged by stirlings and go a lot further.

JohnM
10-15-2002, 03:34 PM
quote:Originally posted by Lawrence

When the stirling comes out, it may have a bigger impact on the "non-pollutant" trend then Segay. I assume that the stirling will be usefull to charge up anything using batteries. For example, electric cars might do with fewer batteries if charged by stirlings and go a lot further.


Doesn't it all depend on what you're using to power it?

I love the smell of burning dung in the morning. It smells like ... progress!

n/a
10-15-2002, 05:57 PM
quote:Doesn't it all depend on what you're using to power it?

[quote]I love the smell of burning dung in the morning. It smells like ... progress!

It also depends on how much energy u get out of your fuel source and how much u pollute.

Blinky
10-15-2002, 08:06 PM
JohnM writes..
quote:Hardly from scratch. Kamen already had the core technology from his IBOT.

Your right, but its still his own. I'm not saying he doesn't apply his new ideas to old ones to make them better. I've never seen anything like the Segway-HT before.

Jnadke
10-22-2002, 03:39 AM
There is no current such thing as this "Clean Transportation" you speak of...

We are merely shifting the pollution load elsewhere. Where to? Segways consume electricity. Where is electricity generated? Nuclear waste-creating power plants. Fossil fuel-burning power plants. Natural power (solar, wind, hydroelectric) only consists of a small percentage of the American power consumption.

What needs to be done is clean up current methods of transportation. Automobiles can be made more efficient. Burn cleaner. Then we should be working on alternate energy development.

Casey
10-22-2002, 07:26 AM
While there is a shifting of pollution as you describe, it also results in a decrease in pollution per given unit of power generated. It is easier to control particulate and gaseous discharges in a central location than in small individual locations. The main problem with centralized power generation is the huge losses in power lines on the way to the consumer.

Further cleaning up fossil fuel burning automobile exhaust has gone about as far as it can go. Under some situations now, cars expel cleaner air than than take in.

Alternative "clean" energy sources are going to have to replace fossil fuel if they are going to gain further in eliminating air pollution.

JohnM
10-22-2002, 07:58 AM
quote:Originally posted by Casey

While there is a shifting of pollution as you describe, it also results in a decrease in pollution per given unit of power generated. It is easier to control particulate and gaseous discharges in a central location than in small individual locations. The main problem with centralized power generation is the huge losses in power lines on the way to the consumer.

Further cleaning up fossil fuel burning automobile exhaust has gone about as far as it can go. Under some situations now, cars expel cleaner air than than take in.

Alternative "clean" energy sources are going to have to replace fossil fuel if they are going to gain further in eliminating air pollution.


Yet everyone is clamoring for the day when each Segway will have it's own stirling engine. Your centralized pollution control will go right out the window.

Casey
10-22-2002, 09:18 AM
quote: Your centralized pollution control will go right out the window.

I hope we get away from centralized power generation because of the huge waste in delivering the electricity.

That depends on the fuel. All a stirling needs is a heat differential, and sunlight is pretty clean "burning" (at least from 93000000miles) as are geothermal and some others that can be used in home generation systems.

Solar power currently requires very large cells, but just as batteries are tiny compared to the original wet cells, I have a feeling solar cells will be downsized to the point of being practical for small transportation devices. Of course that is speculative, but I have yet to see new technology that didn't improve a lot over a short period of time. Calculators, computers and battery development are good examples of that.

My point was more that we have seen about as much improvement as we are going to in cleaning up fossil fuel power generaation (including running cars).

JohnM
10-22-2002, 10:41 AM
quote:Originally posted by Casey

quote: Your centralized pollution control will go right out the window.

I hope we get away from centralized power generation because of the huge waste in delivering the electricity.

That depends on the fuel. All a stirling needs is a heat differential, and sunlight is pretty clean "burning" (at least from 93000000miles) as are geothermal and some others that can be used in home generation systems.

Solar power currently requires very large cells, but just as batteries are tiny compared to the original wet cells, I have a feeling solar cells will be downsized to the point of being practical for small transportation devices. Of course that is speculative, but I have yet to see new technology that didn't improve a lot over a short period of time. Calculators, computers and battery development are good examples of that.

My point was more that we have seen about as much improvement as we are going to in cleaning up fossil fuel power generaation (including running cars).



We really are changing the world here, aren't we?
I did a junior high science fair project on solar energy in 1963. I was pretty excited by it because it looked like practical uses of solar energy were right around the corner.
Now, please excuse me while I go back to sleep for another 40 years. Wake me when the world changes.

Casey
10-22-2002, 11:26 AM
Well now lets see.

Today--------2002
Univac-------1943
Lapsed Time--59 years

I didn't say "overnight". I said "improve a lot over a short period of time. Calculators, computers and battery development are good examples of that."

Relax, there's still a remote chance something might replace fossil fuels.

don c.
10-22-2002, 11:46 AM
quote:Originally posted by Casey

Well now lets see.

Today--------2002
Univac-------1943
Lapsed Time--59 years

I didn't say "overnight". I said "improve a lot over a short period of time. Calculators, computers and battery development are good examples of that."

Relax, there's still a remote chance something might replace fossil fuels.



http://www.uidaho.edu/bae/biodiesel/main/information.html

Jnadke
10-22-2002, 01:20 PM
quote:Originally posted by JohnM

quote:Originally posted by Casey

While there is a shifting of pollution as you describe, it also results in a decrease in pollution per given unit of power generated. It is easier to control particulate and gaseous discharges in a central location than in small individual locations. The main problem with centralized power generation is the huge losses in power lines on the way to the consumer.

Further cleaning up fossil fuel burning automobile exhaust has gone about as far as it can go. Under some situations now, cars expel cleaner air than than take in.

Alternative "clean" energy sources are going to have to replace fossil fuel if they are going to gain further in eliminating air pollution.


Yet everyone is clamoring for the day when each Segway will have it's own stirling engine. Your centralized pollution control will go right out the window.


You overestimate the usefulness of the Segway and the Stirling engine. You still need a heat source to generate the temperature differential required to power the Stirling engine. This requires electricity or fuel cells. Fuel cells require hydrogen or methane. Hydrogen must be generated using electricity or extreme heat. This leads back to my example of a centralized pollution source. Stirling engines still are not very efficient. They are more efficient than motors and combustion engines, but heat (energy) is still lost from the system to the surroundings.

As for automobiles being efficient... I've never heard anything far from the truth. The internal combustion engine is far from efficient. If you calculate the energy released from the combustion of gasoline, with the actual energy used to propel your automobile and used by the alternator, you have extreme amounts of energy wasted as heat. The current gasoline engine is, at best 50% efficient. Current small engines are 15% efficient, with automobile engines being 30% efficient. Less than 15% actually makes it to driving the wheeels.

There exists 43 MegaJoules of energy per every kilogram of gasoline. There is approximately 3 kg of gas in every gallon. Do the math.

Casey
10-22-2002, 01:49 PM
quote:This requires electricity or fuel cells.

A heat differential engine does not require a fuel as you describe. Any method of introducing a large enough temperature difference to the engine will act as "fuel", including concentrated sunlight, geothermal effects and excess heat in such things as the smokestack of a factory.

A Stirling only requires a "heat differential" not a physical fuel.

With the help of catalysts automobile engines do indeed emit cleaner air under some circumstances than they take in.

I am not debating fuel efficiency. The subject is cleanliness, ie pollution.