Any comments about this new technology.

It seems to have some merit.

http://www.designnews.com/article/CA6451735.html

It is not new. This has been discussed for at least 15 years. It does have merit for applications that have frequent stop/start cycles. When you compress a gas (in the energy accumulator), the temperature rises rapidly (P*V is proportional to T). If you store this energy for a period of time any heat loss causes significant inefficiency. Insulation helps, but its best to use the accumulated energy quickly. This is NOT a viable technology as a Prius replacement.

Another interesting temporary energy storage system is the use of a flywheel. It has been discussed for more than 30 years.

JeffD - Engineering Professor

Better than both of them is an emerging technology -- the Ultracapacitor.

http://www.ultracapacitors.org/ultra...tor-works.html

Becasue UCs are electrical devices, they offer the potential to work with the battery system by acting as a surge buffer. This benefits the battery system by providing slower changes and lower currents (read lower temps) and also benefits the drive train side by offering short, large bursts of energy for acceleration and absorbing same for deceleration and braking.

IMHO, the next major step in hybrids will be a(n) UC in series between the electrical interface to the drive system and the battery bank.

It is the ignorant among us that will eventually destroy us all.

For the electrically driven hybrids, I agree. I would also point out that Prius efficiency continues even after the original 6.5 Ahr battery pack has decreased to 2.5 Ahr.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

Errr.....riiiight. So lets just shelve that one for now. No need to cause a fuss.

That's what I like about this forum....it attracts all the big thinkers....me not included.

Thanks Prof....Bob and Bob.

I'll just go back to enjoing my Prius shall I?

power is power is power.

Lets say in 50 years we have an ...."engine"..... that is 98% efficient. 98% of the "fuel" goes into transportion.

Transporting 1 person at a time will always be inefficient.
Transporting 1 ( or 2 or 4 ) person with a 200 Horsepower power plant will always be inefficient.

This is not a knock down of the "hydraulic hybrid", this is just an editorial.

We NEED low powered personal transportation... whether that is electric, ethanol, hydrogen, gasoline, or plutonium powered... does not really matter.

I just bought a 4 passenger vehicle for $5000 that goes 0 to 40 miles per hour in 15 seconds on the flat and level... and will go up to 50 or 55 miles per hour eventually. This car weighs 900 pounds and has a five (5) horsepower, 1 cylinder, gasoline engine. It has a CVT (belt drive). It does NOT have a CD player or air bags or automatic anything. It was built in 1941.
(from a pre-WWII design) Does it meet SULEV standards? Heck no. But it comes with a 3 gallon gas tank, good for 150 miles or more.

In the "old" days... you generally had 1 horsepower per person. *( you rode the horse )
A stagecoach with 4 to 6 people inside might have 4 to 6 horses out in front. This worked well, but was rather slow.

Today we have a ratio of 200 HP per person, sometimes more than that. But we are not going 200 times faster. 200 times the power gets us to go about 8 times faster.

My 1941 motorcar if I put 4 people in it, is close to a 1:1 ratio again... yet it will go 5 times faster than a live horse would.

I say I have a vehicle... better than the horse!!!
This just demos how little power we actually need.
At 5 HP and under, Solar Cars become viable.
-John

Agreed, I have always said that no passenger car in America really needs anything larger than a 1600cc engine. In school, I used to have a little 1600cc Carolla that would hit 70 with four people in it -- good enough for any speed limit in the country.

It we, as a nation, were really serious about energy conservation, Congresss would come up with a plan that would permit low tax "basic" personnel transportation and then an agressively escalated tax on excess HP, or perhaps displacement. Until that time they (we) are simply not committed to it.

Doing this would be fair. It's the American way -- you can have it if you want it, but you will have to pay through the nose.

It is the ignorant among us that will eventually destroy us all.