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.
I'm still chuckling from the assertion on the first page that we could just add a bottle of water into the tank and go zipping along for 25k miles.
The only current fuel source that would be small enough to produce enough heat to create steam from a small amount of water for a passenger vehicle and to be able to do it over and over again to be efficient, would be nuclear fission of some kind, and frankly, I don't want the average Joe bombing around (Get it? See what I did there?) in a mobile nuclear device when most people can't even be bothered to keep the air in their tires at the proper level.
The most efficient form of personal car transportation is electric. Like, over 90,99% efficient. And can come from renewable resources.
So can fool cells, but they end up being like 30% efficient.
Well, it's certainly not 90.99% efficient if you consider the losses in generating electricity, transmitting it to the charging point, and charging the vehicle.
Imagine how much rambling we could have avoided at least if we didn't have petrol-powered cars today and would have found a way to get hi tech steam cars
Is a win win, no electricity or petrol required
Today all you would need is to pour in a bottle of water into the tank/engine every 25,000 miles
I mean this is all hypothetical so try not to get all fuzzy over it, but just think how much tree huggers and environmentalists could have been satisfied
Of course there will still be complaints from other sectors, but at least our cars could have been safe.
No need to worry about emissions and no need to worry mining for those batteries
Doncha think we ought to talk about some way to heat the water?
I mean, basically you have described a nuclear power plant.
Imagine how much rambling we could have avoided at least if we didn't have petrol-powered cars today and would have found a way to get hi tech steam cars
Is a win win, no electricity or petrol required
Today all you would need is to pour in a bottle of water into the tank/engine every 25,000 miles
I mean this is all hypothetical so try not to get all fuzzy over it, but just think how much tree huggers and environmentalists could have been satisfied
Of course there will still be complaints from other sectors, but at least our cars could have been safe.
No need to worry about emissions and no need to worry mining for those batteries
even today there are a lot of issues with steam power. for instance, you cant just jump into your steam powered car start it up and drive off in 30 seconds. you need at least 5 minutes to get steam up to pressure and temperature.
and while you can use anything that burns to heat up the boiler, the fuel efficiency of a steam engine is far less than that of the average internal combustion engine, of the 50s and 60s.
the range of a steam engine isnt that great either, you will be filling up with water about every 25-30 miles, even with steam engines that recycle the water since there is still a loss of water over time.
and then you still have the issues of the boilers overheating and doing silly little things like blowing up.
now if you could get a steam powered car to have a 250 mile range, you would have something here, even with the five minute warm up time.
Tree huggers are control freaks. They're just a subset of the many control freaks out there. Cure one complaint and they'll find something else to complain about.
That aside, how do you plan to heat the water to get it to turn into steam? And since the steam is turned into some type of motion, it needs to be replenished much more frequently than every 25,000 miles. People a whole lot smarter than you have figured out that steam power is not viable for personal or commercial vehicles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo
Conservative = When in doubt, blame liberals
It's all about money,
nobody is going to build a car that doesn't use gasoline = $$$ unless they find a way to make the same amount of money with any other option.
I just stated the obvious. Whatever label you want to hang on treehuggers, the bottom line is they are intolerant of anyone that doesn't agree with them. If they want to drive a Prius, I'm fine with that. But if I want to drive a pickup, they become enraged. If they want to eat veggie or vegan, I'm fine with that. But if I eat meat, they become enraged. If they want to use reusable bags when they go shopping, I'm fine with that. But if I want to use one-time use plastic bags, they become enraged. As a conservative, I live my life and let others live theirs how they want to. Liberals have become utterly intolerant and want to control every aspect of my life. This isn't a blame game, it's a control game.
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.
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.
