Zero to Rutabaga in 6 Seconds 158
DarkenWood writes: "I found an interesting article over at BBC SciTech about a sports car that runs on rotting organic waste. 0-60 in under 6 sec. Very cool."
"If it's not loud, it doesn't work!" -- Blank Reg, from "Max Headroom"
Cost INeffective (Score:1)
Promoting hemp is just a tactic to get pot legalized. I know hemp != pot, but continuing enforcement after hemp legalization would be kind of tough, and the hippies know it.
Don't buy the hype.
Re:hmm... (Score:1)
Re:practical applications? (Score:1)
Well, one important difference between bio fuels and fossil fuels has to do with the carbon cycle [usgs.gov]. When you burn fossil fuels, you are essentialy taking carbon that has been burried for millions of years and releasing it into the atmosphere in the form of CO2. Now, about the only way to get that carbon back out of the air is for some photosynthetic organism to use it to make more complicated carbon-containing compounds such as sugars, starches, proteins, cellulose, etc.
When you burn a bio fuel, on the other hand, you are releasing carbon into the atmosphere in the form of CO2, but it is carbon which was just recently removed from the atmosphere by the photosynthetic plant you used to make your fuel. For example, when you burn enough ethanol derived from corn to release 1kg of carbon into the atmosphere in the form of CO2, you can be sure that at least that much CO2 was removed by your corn plants when they were growing.
This is why, even though the 6000000000 people on the planet exhale a lot of CO2 everyday, one is not contributing to global warming simply by breathing: all the carbon you are exhaling was just recently removed from the atmosphere by whatever plants you ate, or by the plants the animalls you just ate ate (sic).
Of course, there is more to worry about than just CO2, but it is a huge concern.
Biogas in a real world example (Score:1)
The biogas is produced from waste and wastewater from the local slaugherhouses and manure. The factory processes 24000 ton of slaugher refuse, 50000 tons of slaughterhouse process-water and 25000 ton of manure per year (the manure is apparently used to "slow down the digestion process"). The process-water from the slaughterhouse was previously directed to the sewage plant. The resulting methane gas is cleaned from carbon dioxide, vapor and small levels of hydrogen sulphide before it's used.
These 'carcass-gas' buses have worked pretty well and even if there's been some minor problems with overheating probably because these are converted diesel buses.
The NO emissions are 25% to 50% lower than diesel buses (depending on what grade of diesel is used) and the CO2 emissions are somewhere between 5-15% compared with diesel.
Re:Hydroden fuel cells (Score:1)
no (Score:4)
Re:We need it (Score:1)
What is really needed is a realistic appraisal of the costs and benefits of various forms of energy, and taxation/subsidies so the price reflects the true cost of each form. But this is a massively political thing, and if we didn't get it with eight years of Clinton, there's no hope with Bush in the Oval Office.
Re:Another good, alternative-fuel car. However... (Score:1)
Re:Another good, alternative-fuel car. However... (Score:3)
Re:Another good, alternative-fuel car. However... (Score:1)
Think about this: Lots of companies are spending time developing stuff that lets you browse the web, check your email, or do whatever you want, while you're driving. This is ridiculous. To drive safely, you need to pay attention to the road. Lots of people try to do other stuff during their commute, because it's so long that it would be a huge waste of time otherwise. If they weren't so stubborn about using cars, they could just take public transportation, and do all that stuff they want to get done, and leave the driving to someone who will do a good job. Obviously, a bus crowded to standing-room-only capacity is not great for getting work done with your laptop, but if people designed public transportation so that useful work could be done while travelling, things would be a whole lot better.
I'm a big fan of bicycles myself, BTW. You can't exactly do a lot of work while on a bike, but it's fun and it keeps me in shape
#define X(x,y) x##y
Ouch (Score:1)
But, the future may improve things...
--
Dave Brooks (db@amorphous.org)
http://www.amorphous.org
This is great (Score:1)
Car Specs (Score:2)
Apparently they are using Kompogas [kompogas.ch] for their bio fuel.
Re:Hmmm... In other words... (Score:1)
Or gas from a shitload....
Re:Another good, alternative-fuel car. However... (Score:2)
There is, however, this little issue of all those steep hills in San Francisco. I'm not sure if those messenger bicyclists are willing to go up and down Nob and Russian Hills.
Whoopee--yawn. (Score:5)
A much better solution is diesel fuel derived from plant sources (biodiesel). Already, BMW is selling the BMW 330d turbodiesel coupe/sedan, which has a top speed of 143 mph and does 0-60 in six seconds--with vastly superior driver comfort. And the 330d could probably be made to run on biodiesel with only some minor engine modifications with no loss in performance.
Rotting organic waste? (Score:4)
Sure this thing runs off rotting organic waste but a tank full of a certain ex-girlfriend's hash brown casserole would kill it like sugar in the tank of a gas powered car.
Yes Susan, I only said I liked it to get you in the sack :)
Gord
The cockpit (Score:1)
The 500k pound price tag is probably half due to that.
hmm... (Score:2)
---
Re:What are some real posts here? (Score:2)
Because that's what you bought, thereby keeping the market for gas guzzlers nice 'n' healthy.
---
Re:Whoopee--yawn. (Score:1)
You can also run a modern diesel (like mine @ http://www.geocities.com/abtgolftdi ) on used cooking oil with minimal fuel cleansing.
Refer to the "VeggieVan".
Biodiesel is readily available and usable. I can even buy it from a local distributor.
At least I know that when the Ford Excursions finish drinking up all the world's oil, my VW will still be able run on a number of renewable energy sources.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Just another reason... (Score:1)
Dang, in my house that would have been enough to get my brother to eat _all_ our vegies
(Hoping the old bat doesn't take up slashdot).
--Gfunk
Re:Just another reason... (Score:1)
Oh wait, never mind.
--Gfunk
Re:Car Specs (Score:1)
More info about the car and fuel (Score:2)
The car: http://www.rinspeed.com/pages/press/pre-r_one.htm [rinspeed.com]
The Fuel: http://www.kompogas.ch/e/index.html [kompogas.ch]
copy and paste the link text for the goatsex-wary...
Re:Whoopee--yawn. (Score:1)
And from what I understand it's 98% efficient (compared to trad. diesel).
Actually (Score:1)
Most cities WERENT designed for cars. Hence the traffic problem.
Just the thing... (Score:1)
Re:Hempcar (Score:2)
Re:Whoopee--yawn. (Score:1)
And where you done, please explain how this does not impact the rainforests.
Uh oh... (Score:1)
Re:Given the fuel source, they should have... (Score:1)
--
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Mr Fusion anyone? (Score:2)
Sounds like a ripoff... (Score:2)
Ok, say lettuce is roughly $0.89/lb and according to the article the car will travel roughly 62 miles on 220lbs of garbage. From what I can tell you would have to spend $195.80.
My car gets about 22mpg (the way I drive) and it costs (even at the broom stick up your ass price of $2.00 per gallon) about 30 bucks to fill it up. And with a full tank I get about 300 miles.
IANAM but from what I can tell it would cost you about $979 bucks worth of lettuce to go 300 miles, that is about $3.26 per mile or (using my car's fuel economy) roughly $71 a gallon! Even with our completely fucked up gas prices (thats Bill, and Gray, and OPEC, George is in there too, the finger to you all!!!) it's still a better deal to get raped at the pump.
Although this does give a new meaning to dumpster diving
BTW Offtopic, but oh well, my plan against the gas companies is to get my self a box of hotel card keys, a shitload of super glue, and one night were I insert superglued cards into all of the pumps at several local gas stations.
What about emissions? (Score:2)
------
I'm a C++ guru
Re:Actually (Score:2)
LA WAS designed as an automobile city. From what I hear, it's not any better off in regards to traffic.
The automobile is become more of a problem than a solution. Sure, it's still good for long trips, especially the long trips to visit grandma in her town with a population of 1500 people, but as far as commuting, living in a bigger city, or trips between big cities, it's doing pretty poorly.
All I can hope is that someone designs a nice mass transportation system that works really well, finds a way to fight past the incredible greed and the amazing stranglehold of the automobile/oil industries, and gets it successfully put into a city.
Doubt it'll happen though, at least not until commutes start reaching the 4 hour mark for a sizable amount of people. (Obviously 1-2 hr commutes aren't that bad, since people do them, and I think they'd even put up with 3 hr, but I think spending 8 hrs a day driving to and from work will make some people realize how incredibly ridiculous and stupid it is)
---
Re:Actually (Score:2)
Well, they've turned any imaginative and artistic types away from urban planning with the standard ways they do it... put big subdivision here, put big apartment complex here, a couple major roads here, and put all the commercial development along this other big road. Think about it - just about every city of decent size, and the suburbs of the bigger ones, are set up like this. You can't walk from most residential areas to the commercial areas in any decent amount of time - and they often don't even bother with sidewalks because they know that nobody walks.
It's all designed for the automobile, and it's got this feeling like any SimCity designed for maximum efficiency - sure, it works, but it has no personality, no variety - and in real life, forgets about entire groups of people.
Sure, I don't want that three-story Woodfield Mall within walking distance of my apartment. But I would like the opportunity to walk, rollerblade, or bicycle around to places without ending up trying to hurry across roads with 6-8 lanes of traffic while walking on that tiny patch of grass right next to cars doing 60 mph.
America itself is becoming as diverse as the stores we shop at. (ie not very diverse at all, since we've already pretty much got the same stores all over the place)
---
Um, ok, fermenting waste makes methane... (Score:1)
There currently being a problem with an excess of liquid hog manure [fayettevillenc.com] in parts of the United States and the pollution it causes, why not adapt the vehicle to this obvious source of organic fuel, and address this issue as well as fuel shortages? Kill two turds with one stone, so to speak.
The article was unclear as to whether the fermentation took place on the car itself, but obviously the equipment used in gasoline stations could be adapted to store and pump (what would no doubt be) the newly valuable fluid. People would eventually get used to the smell, for the privilege of pulling up to the self-serve pump and topping off their tank with a few gallons of good old #2.
Re:Cost effective (Score:3)
I'll stick to good old Cannabis Sativa Hollandica, or nederwiet. (no points for that quote)
//rdj
Given the fuel source, they should have... (Score:1)
In a sense, this car is reminiscent of a title from the Dead Kennedys, "Fresh Fruit for Rotting Vegetables" (where the provision of power to a vehicle is the fresh fruit... but I guess "for" should be "from"... ah, whatever).
Chicken Crap (Score:3)
He said sometimes when going up a big hill he'd have to pull over and let the methane collect a bit to have enough power to make it up the hill. Now this was back in the early 80s when the environment wasn't a big issue and he was mostly trying to save a buck. The car was an old little import like maybe a 75ish Opal. He had a coil of copper tubing mounted on top of the washtub which piped the gas to the carb. It looked like a still on wheels. He was also a radical Jehova's Witness who didn't believe in deoderant but that's another story. Anyone going to my high school in the 80s will recognize this story.
That is all.
Cost effective (Score:1)
I'd take that over the hemp powered car [hempcar.org]. Not only would I save money, but I could turn over any hemp to friends since I don't smoke
Is Blogger secure? [antioffline.com]
Garbage trucks (Score:2)
The ssviour of school-children (Score:1)
Also, school bus drivers will not have to spend a cent on fuel ever again!
And this is news? (Score:1)
This is news?
This is almost as exciting as sticking a small industrial diesel in a Harley frame and running it on vegetable oil...
Re:Stephen King, author, dead at 58 (Score:2)
Re:Whoopee--yawn. (Score:1)
Yes that sounds like a much better solution. There's acres and acres of rainforest we can cut down for fuel.
Great for Families! (Score:3)
So what? (Score:1)
bash-2.04$
Re:how do you get rid of the.. umm waste? (Score:1)
I found this pretty funny, BTW.
Re:Hempcar (Score:1)
Read the details.. (Score:4)
Re:Cost effective (Score:1)
Re:Back to the future....... (Score:1)
Can't be bothered looking at the web site? I quote 'The rear-mounted bivalent 1.8-liter four-cylinder engine (16V) produces 120 hp at 5,500 rpm and delivers its maximum torque of 165 Nm at 3,000 rpm.
We're going to be on top again! (Score:1)
homer (Score:1)
Re:Cost INeffective (Score:1)
The reason pot was made illegal in the first place was because the fibre was a lot better than the new synthetics coming on the market.
Having pot illegal is just another reason for the gestapo to read your email and search you before you fly from one state to another.
If rotting vegetables catch on as a fuel, the oil companies will lobby to have it banned. They can make up some reason. Laetrile was banned as a cancer cure because the doktors said it didn't do anything!
- James - [IMAGE]
Hmmm... In other words... (Score:4)
This car uses a shitload of gas.
Great! (Score:1)
Re:But the exhaust.... (Score:2)
The experiment ended when the new busses were delivered, and the fleet could be held under Federal pollution limits with cheaper diesel.
Re:Cost INeffective (Score:2)
Petroleum is cheaper than veg oils as long as we don't consider replacement costs.
Hemp and other biomass crops actually look better in electric generation than in automotive applications, as there's no need for inefficient conversionto a liquid fuel.
car runin on rotten organic waste ... (Score:1)
Thank goodness (Score:1)
Re:Thank goodness (Score:1)
its a concept (Score:1)
Re:practical applications? (Score:1)
This is an interesting technology but it seems unlikely this could be the solution to all our fuel problems. It takes 100kg of organic waste to generate enough gas to go 62 miles. Personally I don't think I generate anywhere near that much waste over the 2 days it takes me to drive 60 miles to and from work. So this could be a good way to power some cars, but it couldn't replace all the gas in all the cars. Also the article says nothing about the emissions from burning this gas. Are they any better than the emissions that come from fossil fuels? Maybe kompagas is suitable for usage in fuel cells though. Then I could power my laptop with it -- say sometime around 2005 if we're lucky!
Re:Stephen King, author, dead at 58 (Score:1)
Although, in a sick but desperate attempt to bring this post back on topic, I guess if he was he could power the car...
sorry. If I hadn't checked for a lack of confirmation on news sites I wouldn't have said that.
How truly bizarre! (Score:2)
Re:Actually (Score:2)
The point is well made. I'm native to the LA area, and back before the new train systems came in you were royally screwed without a car. I don't know how well the new trains work since I no longer live in the area. One of the big reasons I moved out was the fact that to get anywhere, you had drive at least an hour. There was very little in way of community as well. And, this in an area that came of age with the automobile. If you go into the older parts of LA, like Silverlace, Hollywood, and Century City, the place has a fairly back east feel to it, and there is a sense of neighborhood. However, that's a very, very small part of the region. One of the bigger problems for young people is that in many neighborhoods there's literally nothing to do, and nowhere to go until they get old enough to drive. The other big problem is that the sprawl tends to isolate poorer people, denying them access to good jobs outside of their neighborhoods. And, from a racial point of view the automobile based city can be very segregated. So, yeah, I'm the camp that agitates for a fundamental redesign of the US City around dense development and public transit. Mainly, I just feel that time spent driving is a little bit of my life wasted, and when the commute gets up in the hour + range, it's a lot of my life wasted.
Slashdot is doing a bit better (Score:2)
This is only 60 year old tech.
Running cars on gas produced by rotting organic waste was fairly common in Europe during WWII.
If you find a copy of the Bosch book of the Motor Car in it you will find an illustration of a common rig, a complete gas producing 'still' in a trailer towed behind the car burning the methane gas.
KFG
heavy tag (Score:3)
i hate it when they bundle cars with 250-ton price tags. its really annoying. why can't they just make the material lighter?
Popular Mechanics?? (Score:2)
Web Page Link with specs, photos, etc (Score:4)
The Concept car page is here [rinspeed.com] (broken out of the frame).
Photos too. very much worth checking out.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Just another reason... (Score:3)
"But mommy, if I eat my limabeans we can't drive to see grandma!"
Big fuel tank... (Score:2)
When this thing hits 88 miles per hour... (Score:2)
how do you get rid of the.. umm waste? (Score:3)
Does the car have to take a shit every few miles?
Would you have to pull over to a rest stop, because your car couldn't hold it?
Re:But the exhaust.... (Score:2)
The Sydney Morning Herald posted a very good story about Biodiesel [smh.com.au] last week.
turbine cars (Score:2)
Not only did they build them, they started handing out the prototypes to random families. People liked driving them. The acceleration was poor, but they were working on that. The exhaust wasn't even hot. And of course, with almost no moving parts, they had no good reason to break down.
The kicker is that they would run on *any* flammable liquid. They had video of the president of south africa incredulously pouring cognac into the gas tank.
I saw this on tv three years ago, and my jaw was on the floor for the duration of the program.
Why didn't they go into mass production? Good question. From what I remember, the car companies simply lost interest in the project.
Another good, alternative-fuel car. However... (Score:4)
However, is it really what is best for society?
The automobile, while a blessing for many, has also become a curse, especially when our cities are designed around its use. In some cities in America, for example, people sit around in traffic jams for hours because of the fact that they, along with most others in the metro area, need to travel across the freeways or highways to get to work. If, say, a million people need to get to work in the space of an hour, and they all drive their own cars across the roadway, there are bound to be traffic problems. Millions of man-hours are lost that could've been spent doing other things rather than commuting.
Furthermore, the millions of people commuting using automobiles takes up lots of space. Automobile-oriented cities eventually wind up sprawling across the countryside, replacing lots of important open space near the city with highways, strip malls, and tract housing. Among other effects of widespread automobile dominance are the death of a lot of social aspects of the city (people need the automobile to get anywhere, and thus it becomes expensive and troublesome, not to mention time-consuming, to travel between cities), smog (a la Los Angeles or Houston, though this may not be as much of a problem with an alternative-energy car), unnecessary expense on the individual (if everyone needs a car to get around, they need to pay for the car, gas, insurance, etc) and as a result is discriminatory (not to mention age discrimination, as people younger than driving age or too old to drive are effectively confined to the home without means to go anywhere). The list can go further, but I ramble, and the basic point is that the automobile-oriented city is inefficient. The low-density development provided thus is incongruous with a city (which is what the majority of the people still function in). Perhaps mass transit and 'walkable' cities are better.
At any rate...the point of this whole argument is, when viewed in the grand scheme of things, is this really better? The problem of needing lots of gasoline is solved, but this is only a surface problem - lots of energy is still required to operate these things, and the automobiles still affect their surroundings negatively when there are too many. The only thing that's changed is the fact that a different type of energy runs the car. So, in the long run, would it perhaps be better that it were more expensive to operate a car? The eventual result would be that fewer people would use them (they are more difficult to afford, and thus less widely used), and the structure of the city would change accordingly to one more beneficial to human interaction and transport. We'd also have less energy needed to power our cars, and more energy could then go to preventing rolling blackouts and other fun things. ;-)
OTOH, would IT be a good fix as well? With more telecommuters, this means fewer commuters, and thus less of a need for massive highways and traffic jams and the like, and also preserves more energy for more important things.
Of course, this is a neat technology...I wouldn't mind powering things off of my garbage :-)
Re:Cost effective (Score:2)
Did YOU look it up?
Eugenicists should be shot.
You know the saying... (Score:3)
The ... Uh ... Office Fridge (Score:2)
--
Reaction... (Score:3)
---
Re:Back to the future....... (Score:5)
Biogas has long been a popular fuel, but it's better suited to stationary applications. Methane is effectively 120 octane, you can replace the injectors in a big diesel with spark plugs and use a simple mixing valve for a carburator. Many sewage tratment plants are powered this way.
Re:We need it (Score:2)
A hybrid version of the Dodge Durango is only a $3000 tax credit away from costing the same as a normal-fuel Durango (see here [covacvag.org])
Unfortunately I don't think that's the kind of thing Cheney (who is the one actually controlling things), with is interest in the oil industry, would let slip.
Re:We need it (Score:3)
Of course... (Score:2)
about a sports car that runs on rotting organic waste. 0-60 in under 6 sec.
Of course, because it's so slippy.
Wait a minute, you meant runs on gas given off by fermenting organic household waste, as one of its fuel supplies?
oops.
Re:hmm... (Score:2)
I agree. I mean, right now it can go only 62 miles on a 220lb load of organic waste. Think about it. That's a pile of shit bigger than the average man (though still not a pile of shit as big as me...err...that's not quite how I meant it). I can't imagine that refueling is much fun either. Still, it's a good start.
Hempcar (Score:4)
I bet it will take a long time. They'll have to stop to get potato chips and Oreos every couple of blocks.
"Hey, man, can we, like, stop for some munchies again?"
Cool! (Score:5)
Back to the Dancin Santa
Re:Slashdot is doing a bit better (Score:2)
Incidentally, I think those WWII tow-behind gas generators were not producing methane by fermentation, but either wood alcohol (methanol) by distillation of organic refuse, or hydrogen/carbon monoxide mix by a process of partial burning of coal and reaction with steam (C + H20 + heat = CO + H2). Fermentation (bacterial action) is too slow for a mobile process.
Re:turbine cars (Score:2)
"with almost no moving parts, they had no good reason to break down." Jet aircraft engines are high-maintenance, and they are just a turbine which leaves part of the energy in the exhaust. I don't know if auto companies could re-engineer them for low maintenance costs.
Methane fueled (Score:2)
The bulk of the compost winds up as fertilizer. Methane is sort of a byproduct. It's certainly better than filling up landfills and letting the methane burp into the atmosphere. However, Kompogas's web site is so perky and technical specification-free that it pretty much qualifies as fertilizer to begin with...
How about a veggie-powered linux box? (Score:3)
We need it (Score:2)
Companies have to have some sort of contingency plans, don't they?
Hydroden fuel cells (Score:2)
I still think that hydrogen fuel cells are the way to go. This thing requires 220 pounds of stuff so that it can travel 62 miles? That just doesn't cut it.
You can produce hydrogen from water and sun light. Hydogen fuel cells have vastly greater power per pound yeilds than this lame power system, and the exhaust is pure water vapor.
Here's an article [autoweb.com.au] about the Mercedes-Benz NEBUS.