I guess that's why most serious physics students are not getting their degrees from Wesleyan University

Can anyone cite the relative efficiencies of battery->electric motor->rotational motion vs battery->boiler->piston->crank->rotational motion? Pretty sure a steam engine loses...

Wierd article. Starts touting steam cars, ends touting electric cars...

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

boiler 88%. triple expansion steam engine 12%, maybe a bit better these days.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_o...

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

No is the answer from the article itself!

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

Well, I was puzzled by this article in more ways than one...

Then I went to check this "Wesleyan University" and in their website they present themselves as:
"Wesleyan University, founded in 1831, is a diverse, energetic liberal arts community where critical thinking and practical idealism go hand in hand".

I'm not fully acquainted with the US higher education nomenclature, but does Liberal Arts include Physics, Maths and Science in general?

https://www.snhu.edu/about-us/newsroom/liberal-art...

A degree in liberal arts prepares you to teach liberal arts to others.

Isn't it to become qualified to be a public or high school teacher?

I recall the stanley steemer used gasolene, or kerosene. So no it would not reduce CO2.
The other problem is the water pump was attached to the rear axle, so to pump fresh water into it, one would need to jack up the rear of the car and run the drive to pump the water.
See video's with J Leno racing his steemer.

That said, at one time, coal plants used fireless steam engines to ferry around coal cars. They got there steam from the power plant it self. Just fill it up every few hours.

In public education stateside there was a big push several decades ago to focus on STEM curriculum (science, technology, engineering, and math) specifically to help push kids toward fields which they could earn a decent living (and away from less useful liberal arts). Then liberal arts teachers got involved, so now the politically correct acronym is STEAM and focusing on in-demand careers with real paychecks is verboten.

I enjoy steam cars but no, I don’t see work being gained except by the media and shills.

And how is the steam produced?.....hint: by burning SOMETHING, uh-oh...back to burning wood, gas, or whatever.

The same argument is true for electric vehicles. Where does the energy come from to charge the batteries? The power grid (assuming the grid can handle to additional demand).
Where does the energy from the power grid come from? Nuclear, coal, natural gas, solar?

The EV folks promote battery powered cars like a magical, environmentally friendly replacement for gas powered cars.
Granted, it may be cleaner depending on the energy source used to charge the batteries.
But the energy has to come from somewhere. Thats the dirty little secret that is not talked about.
Just because you don't see pollution coming out of the tailpipe, doesn't mean that pollution is not being produced to power cars.
Its just produced earlier in the supply chain.

Quote (MotorCity)

And how is the steam produced?.....hint: by burning SOMETHING, uh-oh...back to burning wood, gas, or whatever.

The author of the article acknowledges this. The combustion is a constant process, so burning can be more efficient. There is still CO₂ pollution. I recall being told in college that very large steam turbines, i.e., ones that don't fit in cars, are very efficient. I wonder how efficient automobile sized turbines are.

--
JHG

There maybe some niches for steam, i have wondered about applications that would otherwise end up using bio-fuel. Tractors being one example, particularity as they are often at the end of a long thin supply chain. The economics start looking better if you can just use local feedstock for fuel.

Maybe for generating electricity and then using heat for greenhouses or similar but for things that move on land they are just too heavy and don't like all that water slopping around.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

I guess that steam engines could have a higher efficiency than an ICE, (from above around 10%) but modern ICE has a better efficiency than that. If it was a turbine i guess you would max out around 50% (combined turbine and biler)? Thats better than modern day ICE i think?

--- Best regards, Morten Andersen

Just because you are burning something does not necessarily need to produce CO2. Example, the burning of NH4 in oxygen would not produce CO2.
To get NH4, one would likely need to produce CO2, but that is a different issue.

A solar car could, in theory, use solar panels to charge it. Not likely to happen.

We could burn hydrogen to create steam, but most H2 comes from electric production, or fossil fuels.

We can run a car/truck on wood using a otto cycle engine. But that would involve gasifying some of the wood to produce the fuel for the otto cycle engine.
EPRI had a paper years ago on whole tree burning to produce electricity. Still not been tried.

I've seen FEMA's emergency guide for farmers to build a DIY wood gas generator to run tractors in case of a shortage of fossil fuels. Pretty neat. Doesn't solve general pollution concerns or carbon emissions, though..

Where can I find that FEMA guide?

Construction of a Simplified Wood Gas Generator for Fueling Internal Combustion Engines in a Petroleum Emergency

@phamENG: This type of system was used in Denmark (for normal cars) during 2. world war where petrol (gasoline) was diffucult to get.

https://portals.clio.me/dk/historie/7-9/emner/tids...

--- Best regards, Morten Andersen

Quote (MotorCity)

The EV folks promote battery powered cars like a magical, environmentally friendly replacement for gas powered cars.
Granted, it may be cleaner depending on the energy source used to charge the batteries.
But the energy has to come from somewhere. Thats the dirty little secret that is not talked about.
Just because you don't see pollution coming out of the tailpipe, doesn't mean that pollution is not being produced to power cars.
Its just produced earlier in the supply chain.

All true ... BUT ... figure out the "well to wheels" efficiency. Or the "well to wheels" CO2 emissions, if you wish.

Even if the grid source is 100% natural gas, that can be a modern combined-cycle plant with a gas-to-electricity efficiency in the 50% - 60% range, and the efficiency of getting that electricity to your house is very high, and the charge-discharge efficiency of good modern batteries is also high (85% - 90%) and the powertrain efficiency is high. And the vehicle can have regenerative braking; no can do with a conventional pure combustion-engine vehicle.

Compare that to a petrol engine installed in the vehicle that has at best 30%-ish thermal efficiency and which spends most of its time operating "off design" at conditions having lower efficiency and sometimes zero (idling), and which is using a fuel that inherently has higher CO2 emissions relative to its energy content compared to natural gas, and which involves a refining process that is certainly not 100% efficient just as the grid-distribution of electricity from the central plant to the vehicle is not 100% efficient.

The situation is worse if coal is the grid-source ... there is a push to reduce the use of coal for electricity generation (and the province that I live in has stopped completely).

But the situation is better of the grid power is renewable.

If we, collectively, reduce the CO2 intensity of grid power generation by getting away from coal and towards renewables then the "wheel to wells" CO2 emissions of the EVs fed by that grid automatically shifts with it. The combustion-engine vehicle is stuck with using petrol or diesel for its lifetime ... Yes biofuels, but there's not much hope for that at this point.

And NO, nobody claims that switching all transportation to EVs is a magic solution to all of our problems. Doesn't address traffic congestion, for example. Taking steps forward is better than standing still or moving backwards.

The energy-consumption meter in my Chevrolet Bolt is hovering around 12-and-change kWh per 100 km, and it's functionally equivalent to a combustion-engine vehicle that uses probably 6 - 7 or at best 5 - 6 litres per 100 km, and the local grid CO2 intensity is roughly 25 grams per kWh (no coal, mostly nuclear, some hydro and renewables, rest is natural gas).

Maybe there is an externality question that needs to be asked. Like, can you find a mechanic to work on an electric car? Are parts available? Are they as safe? What happens when you run out of fuel? What is the life cycle cost?
Can I get them in custom colors? Can I jack up the rear end? Can I tow a trailer? What If I need extra lift?
Do they come as contervatables? Can I get a moonroof?