they're already running the Prius engine with an Atkinson cycle by messing with intake valve timing. there's no need to have a free piston engine.
also I doubt that a battery has high enough efficiency to beat a crank.
Yeah, the crank is one of the most efficient parts of the engine, however, the fact that the piston is connected to a crankshaft is what creates large side forces that create drag on the piston as well as much of the wear.
The ICE is a very complex and crude device that has been optimized piecewise for over 100 years. It has only been over the last 20 years or so that they are tamed enough that we barely need to think about them. But all ICE have one thing in common, they burn fuel, traditionally hydrocarbon based. So they stink and spew noxious gases and threaten the global climate, even if you improve them incrementally. The time has come to rid ourselves of these things. This will become very apparent over the next 10 years as we transition and the air in our cities becomes as clear as it was from 9/11 or the initial phase of COVID-19.
It will be nice.
Exactly. Where most of it comes from now.
as soon as you burn stuff to make mechanical energy you are throwing away at least half the energy, in most case more like two thirds
batteries and electric motors are more like 80-90% efficient
Not much point in that for reducing carbon footprint. Probably better to burn the CH4 directly except then you have the NOx vs. CH emissions tradeoff. Or maybe not. I don't know how cleanly CH4 burns. Gasoline is mostly long chain CH compounds so CH4 may inherently burn more cleanly. Don't know. Still, lots of CO2.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. The end to end efficiency is what's important and hard to get exact figures for. However, the end user cost is a pretty good estimate. In the US gas runs around $0.80 per liter or around $0.10 per mile. EVs get around 4-5 mi/kWh or between $0.02 to $0.05 per mile depending on your location. In Puerto Rico it comes to about $0.05 per mile for EVs because electricity is $0.25 per kWh average. I'd hate to be in the parts where it's more.
If the EV power chain was not more efficient end to end it would be hard to have a lower fuel cost.
The idea is to capture the CO2 from the steam-gas reforming process, leaving H2 which burns cleanly and produces no CO2 at the point of use.
It's certainly not practical to capture the CO2 when it's produced at the point of use.
I did an audit in the 80's for a factory in the North of the Netherlands, burning CH4, producing energy, using the waste heat, and using the CO2 in producing stuff (IIRMC sodium bicarbonate).
So, it depends.
Groetjes Albert
No one is talking about capturing CO2 at the point of use. Currently it is not captured at the point of H2 production. We can talk about a possible future, but without data to support any financial matters. Hydrogen propulsion in cars has many issues. EVs are essentially practical now and will be even more so in the near future based on the many improvements in battery technology.
By using the existing infrastructure on the slack hours EVs can be fueled without spending any more than the cost of the home charging unit, around $1-2k installed. In fact, over the long run gas stations will be replaced with pretty much anything else since large amounts of charging facilities are not needed, at least not on the huge scale of ICE fueling facilities anyway. As EVs become mainstream every home parking spot will have them, not just garages.
How many miles per mole?
Sure, if it's a large-scale installation. But not for a car, aircraft or home.
That depends on whether it's burrowing, walking, or skateboarding.
The TV news showed the new hydrogen fueled double decker buses in London.
Dan
This isn't hydrogen combustion technology, unless you regard an electrochemical process as "combustion". It doesn't take place at any kind of high temperature. so you shouldn't.
As usual, Dan made a mess of the formatting as well.
Bill you need to practice reading. I said the new buses were hydrogen fueled. I did not say they were hydrogen combustion technology buses.
Still higher IQ along with more money and better college.
Dan
That you keep repeating this shows a much lower emotional IQ. It makes you look rather pathetic, in fact.
But the thread was about hydrogen combustion technology. If your IQ was a high as you claim, you would have noticed that.
He doesn't know how much money I've got, so he's parading something that he imagines to be true. He may have scored well on some IQ test or other when he was much younger, but he certainly comes across as pretty dim now. The "better college" may be more reliable, but merely demonstrates that educational establishments with even the highest prestige still can't make a silk purse out of sow's ear. You'd imagine that they'd pay him to deny the connection.
That you keep repeating this shows a much lower emotional IQ. It makes you look rather pathetic, in fact.
What ever. I will quit when Bill stops denigrating me.
Dan
>
Dan denigrates himself, but lacks the sense to realise what he is doing.
iew hydrogen fuel cell double decker buses".
I noticed , but thought the thread ought to include uses of hydrogen in mobile applicataions.
And you do not know how much money I have and you say you will not say how much you do have? So I am assuming that you have maybe a couple of million dollars and I have more than that.
Dan
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.