I'm starting this thread in hopes of attracting fellow car buffs. It is prompted by a side discussion between Zoar and myself that sprang out of a gun-control related thread in the US News portion of the forum.
Although Zoar and I are frequent political opponents, we found common ground in our admiration for certain pre-WWII concept cars such as the Phantom and Y-job that contained advanced features, some unseen in production cars until 30 or more years after the concept cars displayed them.
This led to a discussion of electric and "green" cars. Zoar is a proponent of electric cars and feels that the technological problems surrounding their development would have been overcome if the "Big Three" automakers (et al), hadn't acted to kill electric cars in the early years of mass production. I feel that most electric cars lack the range and functionality of cars as Americans have become accustomed to driving them -- and that some of the problems, especially storage, have yet to be overcome. (A hydrogen fuel-cell car would be amazing, but that doesn't seem to be in the offing at the moment).
So, I think we can stipulate some design goals for a greener car. It should expel fewer (optimally, none) pollutants into the environment. At the same time, it shouldn't create pollutants that are related to its lifecycle (or at least the pollutants shouldn't be any more harmful than the pollutants currently produced by cars at the end of their lifecycles). It's operating costs must be similar to, or less than, the operating costs of internal combustion cars with similar features. And in terms of range and performance it needs to be near or above current internal-combustion cars -- this last is for marketing purposes. There is no point in making a greener car if it is so expensive or so lacking in performance that no one wants it.
My own solution to the problem is simple. I think it was solved in the 1920s by a company run by the Doble Brothers, in a couple of different guises. The Doble steam car used external combustion (they used kerosene, but there is no reason that we would have to use it -- it's a steam engine and can take heat from other sources). Its performance was similar to or greater than internal combustion car performance (it had no need to "build up" steam as the Stanely steamer did and could go from cold start to driving in less than 90 seconds). Powered by natural gas or hydrogen, and put in a modern chassis, a Doble power plant would offer a green alternative to internal combustion, and could be scrapped with little or no difference in pollutants than an internal combustion car.
But its only one idea, and a discussion of other ideas would be interesting.
Although Zoar and I are frequent political opponents, we found common ground in our admiration for certain pre-WWII concept cars such as the Phantom and Y-job that contained advanced features, some unseen in production cars until 30 or more years after the concept cars displayed them.
This led to a discussion of electric and "green" cars. Zoar is a proponent of electric cars and feels that the technological problems surrounding their development would have been overcome if the "Big Three" automakers (et al), hadn't acted to kill electric cars in the early years of mass production. I feel that most electric cars lack the range and functionality of cars as Americans have become accustomed to driving them -- and that some of the problems, especially storage, have yet to be overcome. (A hydrogen fuel-cell car would be amazing, but that doesn't seem to be in the offing at the moment).
So, I think we can stipulate some design goals for a greener car. It should expel fewer (optimally, none) pollutants into the environment. At the same time, it shouldn't create pollutants that are related to its lifecycle (or at least the pollutants shouldn't be any more harmful than the pollutants currently produced by cars at the end of their lifecycles). It's operating costs must be similar to, or less than, the operating costs of internal combustion cars with similar features. And in terms of range and performance it needs to be near or above current internal-combustion cars -- this last is for marketing purposes. There is no point in making a greener car if it is so expensive or so lacking in performance that no one wants it.
My own solution to the problem is simple. I think it was solved in the 1920s by a company run by the Doble Brothers, in a couple of different guises. The Doble steam car used external combustion (they used kerosene, but there is no reason that we would have to use it -- it's a steam engine and can take heat from other sources). Its performance was similar to or greater than internal combustion car performance (it had no need to "build up" steam as the Stanely steamer did and could go from cold start to driving in less than 90 seconds). Powered by natural gas or hydrogen, and put in a modern chassis, a Doble power plant would offer a green alternative to internal combustion, and could be scrapped with little or no difference in pollutants than an internal combustion car.
But its only one idea, and a discussion of other ideas would be interesting.