No.
Printable View
No.
No vehicle. I'm a terrible driver & don't even have a license.
Depends how long you're driving rather than how far. I suspect you could do 300 miles a lot more quickly on North America's sense making roads than on the twisted European ex donkey cart tracks. Plus driving with an automatic is obviously less fatiguing (and less awesome) than driving with a manual.
I was mostly thinking that when it comes to driving Sharky isn't a normal human.
Anywho, I never actually answered the threads question. I do have a car, a Chevy Malibu, that replaced my deceased Hyundai Accent. Enough problems have cropped up with it since I bought it though that I'm going to get rid of it. It's due for an inspection this month that I know it won't pass without some work so I'd rather get something new than dump a lot of money into it.
Going out tonight with the intention of financing a new Mitsubishi Mirage. My sister has one and they're a nice little car. Inexpensive to buy and the fuel mileage is exceptional, especially compared to my Malibu. We figured out I'll probably save half the monthly payment in gas alone.
No, but it'd be neat to own one. The financial part is what puts me off. I certainly have no pressing need, I'd just use it for driving around the less urban places of Scotland on a sunny day.
Sure, but I was talking about in one sitting, not in one day. With a 30-45 minute food+toilet break, you'd be able to charge back enough to drive that far (assuming we're 5 years into the future).
Maybe I'm just lazy but I probably take up to an hour of breaks even when I drive 300 miles.
I should have elaborated. I'm aware of all of the challenges hydrogen faces, and they probably won't be overcome. I just hope they will. Science is an unstoppable force, so it's always possible.
What I mean by that is the examples you gave regarding how they produce hydrogen with fossil fuels vs. electrolysis because of the energy needed. I hope they find a way to make it much more efficient. I hope technology evolves to make the efficiency better. You get the idea.
While the drive-line of hydrogen cars is more complex than an electric vehicle (in some ways), its not much more complex than current cars. Compared to the dominant car tech we have now, it's pretty similar.
I know EV cars are better in a lot of ways (simplified drive-lines), but the tech has always intrigued me. I always hoped with enough time and research, the barriers you mentioned could be overcome and I could see them produced in a real effective application. It's just a personal interest of mine, even before I knew Mazda was messing with them.
As for long trips, I don't know with a car.
I rode around 1,500 miles in day on my bike at least once. Obviously I stopped to fuel and pee, but it doesn't take long to gas up an 18 liter/5 gallon tank. I'd eat some oatmeal bars while fueling, and then back to the mountain runs.
I like that car. Plus the sales might help poor Mitsubishi. They've been struggling like Mazda. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivi22
Should specify that by bike he means motorcycle (I hope) because I got a bit confused there ^^;
I think they'd basically need a practically loss-less energy conversion of electricity into hydrogen for it to compete with direct electricity into cars. There is a roughly 10% loss when charging a battery, so for hydrogen conversion to compete with that, it would need to be improved from a 30%-ish efficiency to 95%+, because it would also take energy to move the hydrogen around afterwards. On top of that, the fuel cell efficiency is only at most 45% efficient as well. Both these would have to be improved immensely before it reaches the level of efficiency all electric cars already have today, and it's not like that tech will stand still for the next years either.
A hydrogen car isn't more complex than all electric in some ways, it is more complex in every way. The driveline of a hydrogen car is basically exactly the same as an electric car. It has a cache battery (to make up for the fact that a fuel cell can't generate enough power to give a car even 100 hp, so it needs help during acceleration), then it has electric motors, and a solution for harvesting brake energy back into the battery. So far, it has the same complexity as an all electric.
However, now you also add a hydrogen tank, a fuel cell, and a unit to safely decompress hydrogen from 200 bars to an usable pressure, which consumes a lot of heat, effectively freezing the components, which makes them weaker unless you immediately supply more heat to make up for it. Then the fuel cell also gets clogged up with junk over time, which lowers its efficiency and requires you to service the car more often.
It can never be less complex than an EV because it is basically an EV with 50 extra things attached. Many people go for electric vehicles despite their higher cost because they expect this extra cost to be made back through fewer fuel and service expenses. Hydrogen is never going to get as cheap to tank up with as electricity from your house will be, and I definitely imagine a hydrogen car requiring a lot more servicing than an EV.
I have a '14 ford focus and I kind of hate it. I mean, it's not the worst car but it feels like it has a transmission/engine issue, but I read that that's common for that car. And it's a lease so I don't actually own it. Hopefully I can move somewhere by the time the lease is up where I don't need a car anymore.
make one guess at what sort of car we are getting if you come here, starlet
sharky is secretly a world class cyclist
i understand his need for secrecy. his miata club might excommunicate him if they found out