Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-12-2011, 05:17 AM
 
Location: Between Heaven And Hell.
13,536 posts, read 9,965,522 times
Reputation: 16924

Advertisements

If you had come up with an idea that could double the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, would you tell?

With all the money tied up in the fuel industry, and the losses that this could easily cause so many companies and shareholders, would you dare to tell?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-12-2011, 07:18 AM
 
77,905 posts, read 60,063,004 times
Reputation: 49253
Quote:
Originally Posted by BECLAZONE View Post
If you had come up with an idea that could double the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, would you tell?

With all the money tied up in the fuel industry, and the losses that this could easily cause so many companies and shareholders, would you dare to tell?
One companies loss is another companies gain.

The oil industry got annihilated back in the 80's and 90's resulting in massive consolidation. As a result the remaining oil companies are some of the largest companies in the world.

Such is the risk of investing.

What's really fun is having people upset that the largest companies in the world are making the largest dollar profits. It makes me want to cry for the state of education in certain sectors of this country.

Ironically, such an invention would seriously set back alternative fuel, electric etc. vehicles.....just like cheap gas killed those projects decades ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 09:55 AM
 
23,553 posts, read 70,058,150 times
Reputation: 49050
Beclazone, the question itself is impossible. Internal combustion engines are ALL limited by the Carnot cycle. An auto engine is already fairly close to the limits, and there simply is no room left for an improvement that would double mileage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 15,136,172 times
Reputation: 3614
Sounds like a set up post. double your mileage.

Those hydrogen kits don't work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 12:01 PM
 
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,307 posts, read 38,697,178 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by BECLAZONE View Post
If you had come up with an idea that could double the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, would you tell?

With all the money tied up in the fuel industry, and the losses that this could easily cause so many companies and shareholders, would you dare to tell?
Yes. That's the sort of secret that has the potential to make your grandkids rich.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 12:51 PM
 
Location: MO->MI->CA->TX->MA
7,022 posts, read 14,427,971 times
Reputation: 5569
If I were the oil industry, I'd use my record profits to buy up all the patents for hybrid and electric vehicles!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 01:07 PM
 
11,550 posts, read 52,994,881 times
Reputation: 16329
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
Beclazone, the question itself is impossible. Internal combustion engines are ALL limited by the Carnot cycle. An auto engine is already fairly close to the limits, and there simply is no room left for an improvement that would double mileage.
Depends, of course, upon what your base mileage is that you're trying to double.

Missing from the current develoment that's hitting the marketplace are some very interesting motors that major manufacturer's were pursuing in recent decades before politics and gov't programs weighed in.

For example, Ford had been developing a 3-cylinder two-stroke motor that was super- and turbo-charged with intercoolers. They built a number of them for testing, and they were reportedly achieving close to 100 mpg with comparable performance to the then current 3.0 V-6 motors in a Taurus, which was their test bed car. They had a fleet of them in Australia that were driven hard for over 100,000 miles.

IIRC, the articles reporting this technology mentioned some very exotic materials in the motor which operated at much higher temps than conventional motors ... ceramic pistons with some unusual shapes, plated linings on the cylinder walls that retained some lubrication properties, piston rings from an unmentioned exotic material, cylinder block again able to handle elevated temps ... and so forth.

Obviously, this technology wasn't inexpensive, but what killed the program was the gov't directions into other technologies ... alt fuels, electric cars, fuel-cell type cars, etc. Ford abandoned the program more because of political pressures/perceptions than engineering issues. There was a huge political movement at the time, also, to force the manufacturer's to issue extended warranties with complete replacement car coverage should a vehicle need anything beyond routine servicing ... NY State, for example, was pushing for this coverage and Ford had to re-focus their engineering efforts to anticipate these gov't mandates for the vehicle sales.

It's interesting watching how the various factors are at work from a manufacturer's standpoint ... they have limited resources to devote to addressing the marketplace needs but also must bear the burdens of any and all pie-in-the-sky politically mandated programs. Safety concerns and popular features to cars have dominated a lot of their work in addition to fuel economy. With the increased cost of fuel, that's now an issue that moves to the forefront of the engineering departments ....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 01:08 PM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,858,077 times
Reputation: 17863
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarkar View Post
If I were the oil industry, I'd use my record profits to buy up all the patents for hybrid and electric vehicles!
Patents only last for 20 years so if you bought them up you'd better be prepared to use them or you'll eventually lose your investment. Many of these large companies like Exxon are heavily involved in alternatives to petroleum...

Exxon Sinks $600M Into Algae-Based Biofuels in Major Strategy Shift - NYTimes.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 04:28 PM
 
4,918 posts, read 22,628,157 times
Reputation: 6303
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunsprit View Post
Obviously, this technology wasn't inexpensive, but what killed the program was the gov't directions into other technologies ... alt fuels, electric cars, fuel-cell type cars, etc. Ford abandoned the program more because of political pressures/perceptions than engineering issues. There was a huge political movement at the time, also, to force the manufacturer's to issue extended warranties with complete replacement car coverage should a vehicle need anything beyond routine servicing ... NY State, for example, was pushing for this coverage and Ford had to re-focus their engineering efforts to anticipate these gov't mandates for the vehicle sales.
the EcoBoost engine is not currently being planned for use in the USA for only two reasons and politics has NOTHING to do with it.

Ford determined that the maximum size of a car that would use the engine was too small for american consumers. Even with the high gas milage, it would be a novelty car that would never make it into mainstream and the cost to import them would be too high for anyone to want to buy. Americans want certain things in their cars and gas milage isn't always the main thing. This was purely and only a profit economic decission by FORD!

The second issue was the engine material made the engines only suitable in some areas. because the USA goes from dry arid deserts to icy cold snowed in winters, From low humidity to saunas, they would need 3 different engines to accomodate the wide range of enviromental conditions. An engine sold for a car in Tucson AZ would have problems if taken and driven in Minot ND. The areas where the engione is now being used do not have so many enviromental swings that any issues would be monior compared to the USA where people expect the engines to work the same no matter where they are.

The EcoBoost is in production and is approved for use in the USA, just that Ford decided its not going to be a money maker compared to what they already have and people are willing to buy and the potential problems with amaericans mobil population can cause too many consumer complaints. Ford and only Ford killed its use in the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2011, 09:05 PM
 
5,938 posts, read 4,678,573 times
Reputation: 4630
I think the OP makes an assumption that there is only one way to "double your mileage." If you double your mileage, in theory you may go twice as long without filling up. This is true... but what if you cut your use in half and go twice as long without filling up?

That's a tall order to cut it in half. Its not really possible to make a gas engine more efficient. As harry mentioned, ICE are near their limits right now. Drivers can choose to purchase more efficient vehicles than what they currently own.

Another change drivers can make is to simply drive less. How much this helps is dependent on the individual's circumstances. However, if drivers schedule all their errands around town on the same day, that cuts usage. If they shop at the nearest store instead of their preferred store, that also would help.

Also consider the possibility of working a 4-day work week instead of a 5-day work week. This would be a paradigm change that would require cooperation from various businesses and their employees. While not likely, even if a company did "rolling 4-day work weeks" where someone was always in the office Mon-Fri (or Sat/Sun as applicable) and some employees were off every day... that would cut down on many people's gas usage by a little under 20%.

There are things drivers can do to lower usage other than rely on the (somewhat impossible) efficiency increases to the ICE.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top