Future transport discussion

Discussion in 'General Questions' started by impression, Apr 13, 2009.

  1. impression

    impression Member

    i'm very tired, this is just the thought process in my head at the moment, please forgive any spelling/grammar mistakes. I'll edit them after i get some sleep.

    So, most U.S and other nations believe hydrogen is the magic bullet to kill off our energy and pollution problems to just 'plug into' our existing combustion designed machines...
    ...
    ...
    just a few problems with that...
    hydrogen is the lightest and one of the smallest elements we know of, don't you think that since it is so small the tiny particles of hydrogen will seep through any 'gas tank' we make....


    we need a liquid energy source of which particles are larger and less dense (preferable) than that of the storage tank's wall and the machine that uses it to run...


    sounds pretty logical, too bad the public are too blinded by the stupid omg hydrogen... campaigns that will promise that cheap clean hydrogen is just around the corner in a few years... except those few years turn into a few more years once we reach the initial target year...

    kind of like a child ( fossil fuel companies) not wanting to go to sleep (move forward, adapt/change) as they are having too much fun playing playstation ( or stealing from our wallets )


    Electricity is the way of the future, transport will be like aussie jester's trike. Simple, clean and elegant with great function.

    the problem we face is range, we have become so dependant on 'readily accessable' liquid fuel that it has become a necessity for the economy to survive. The general population can survive on electric cars whereas the transport industry will need to move to bio-diesel.

    there are a few problems we face

    Fuel storage ( as stated above for hydrogen )

    range/distance
    liquid fuels provide easy and quick'er' refills to extend the rank of a vehicle

    pollution let's face it, majority of our combustion engines are dirty and not 100% meeting environmental standards... every car is tuned differently and some run terribly without being checked...

    power generation so, to generate our power be it electricity or a chemical storage we need to decide what to go for and make sure it's viable before making promises and throwing away money


    infrastructure
    battery recharge stations or liquid fuel stations ect: solar recharge car parks...

    safety safety features add weight, weight requires more energy to move...

    weight requires more power/energy to move about

    power what do we use to propell ourselves around, whatever it is there will be power demands to be met...

    speed we all like to go faster, at the moment only the combustion type of engine has the ability to do this on a cheap scale.

    so does anyone have any thoughts upon this ?
     

  2. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member

    Well, either way no matter what fuel, looking at peak hour traffic sometimes, day in day out, congestion is a issue to.

    For example;
    I know a family with now 5 grown ups, all in driving ages. All have a car each in their respective right. 3 have jobs, 1 has part-time job and the other is jobless, but drives in a older car.

    They all have bikes, rotting away in their shed. The father who is a friend has been recently asking about the MB and "kicking tyres" about the idea,still.

    Point is, where there once was 1 family car, there is now 6 cars, dad's and the 5 legal driving age grown ups.
    Multiply that on a average per household, and you end up with "congested roads".

    So the way I "see" it in "crystal ball" mode, they can have the most logical fuel alternative there is out there, and if all converted ( hypothetically ), the congested roads may make it impossible to enjoy a drive to and from work etc every day, 5-6 days per week and each day another car is added on, more than what has come off the road due to old age etc etc.
     
Loading...