really stupid

Hey, this could generate a big jolt of electrity when the next earthquake rolls around.

If these devices survive more than a few millisecond and the transmission l ines are still intact.

He represents your district. You need to speak up.

------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Mike Gatto:

We are group of responsible scientists who opposites your road energy propo sal. It's a simple matter of conservations of energy: nothing wasted and n othing gained. The drag created by such device would increase auto fuel co nsumptions and create more smog. It would cost motorists more money than a simple road tax. Please save the 2M dollars from the tax payer.

lines are still intact.

Sorry, he does not represent sacramento, but northern LA. If he insists on wasting 2M dollars, perhaps we need to get rid of him.

posal. It's a simple matter of conservations of energy: nothing wasted and nothing gained. The drag created by such device would increase auto fuel consumptions and create more smog. It would cost motorists more money than a simple road tax. Please save the 2M dollars from the tax payer.

I'm not suggesting this is a practical idea at all, but I will point out that your conclusion of increasing the drag felt by cars could easily be fallacious. Vehicles are going to distort the roadway whether or not it has piezoelectric transducers are embedded. It may turn out that the energy is wasted if not harnessed, much like the exhaust heat spewing from the tailpipes of cars. That heat could produce power through Peltier devices attached to the muffler or the exhaust pipe.

I'm not saying either of these ideas are practical or a good idea. I'm just saying the laws of thermodynamics do not prevent their use without sapping automobiles fuel mileage.

ml

ion lines are still intact.

s on wasting 2M dollars, perhaps we need to get rid of him.

proposal. It's a simple matter of conservations of energy: nothing wasted and nothing gained. The drag created by such device would increase auto fu el consumptions and create more smog. It would cost motorists more money t han a simple road tax. Please save the 2M dollars from the tax payer.

stick a generator on a turbo charger, that's what the current F1 cars use. Porsche uses a similar system with an exhaust driving turbine in their LMP1 endurance cars

compound engine goes back to steam engines and aircrafts around WWII

-Lasse

If the roads are gridlocked and the traffic isn't moving, then where does the energy come from?

"Similar projects in other parts of the world have been discontinued."

Hmmm. I'd say I'm glad I don't live in Californica, but God only knows what energy rainbows Oregon is up to.

Some people should learn basic physics

Energy = Force * Distance

Some force, not much distance in vibration !

A friend told me about an aircraft engine (likely during the war) which had a turbo on each cylinder. After they built it they calculated the power generated by the turbos and it was more than the output of the engine!

What's your point? I don't think this would be useful for powering the city, but they use exactly this sort of thing for powering remote sensors like strain gauges on bridges. The vibration of cars and trucks passing by on the bridge create energy to power the device.

I don't for a minute think this is practical to tie into the grid. But that is more an issue of cost than it is the lack of power that can be generated.

Not sure about Oregon but California has more debt than Russia.

Not so surprising, they operate like turbine engines in that case.

Now to use that power efficiently is quite an engineering challenge.

It would give a better ROI to just burn the dollars and make steam.

Well, engines are running, or people are talking or running their radios, and maybe dogs are scratching themselves.

Thermal pile on the driver's foreheads.

Now if there was someway to harness Road Rage our energy problems would be solved.

ml

ion lines are still intact.

s on wasting 2M dollars, perhaps we need to get rid of him.

proposal. It's a simple matter of conservations of energy: nothing wasted and nothing gained. The drag created by such device would increase auto fu el consumptions and create more smog. It would cost motorists more money t han a simple road tax. Please save the 2M dollars from the tax payer.

Same as regenerative braking or shock absorbers. They works but expensive. If it's cost effective, then auto makers will put them in without governm ent intervention.

If it's a good idea, let private investors try it first. Don't spend $2M p ublic money to figure out if it works.

The Wright R3350 was the best developed of the turbo-compound aero engines:

There have been many experimental engines using the technique (including diesel and some racing engines) but none yet achieved significant production volume.

GE had a similar bank of turbines running on a test bench where they needed a LOT of hot air.

All they needed to do then was lose the cylinders, and they would have had a pure jet, but they seem to have never thought of it that way. Jet engines came from a totally different effort.