Comments on: Vehiforce: Generate Energy With Your Parked Car! http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/ A Suburban Design Competition Fri, 16 Jul 2010 04:02:26 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: 5h4 http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1499 5h4 Wed, 27 Jan 2010 03:56:28 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1499 I find it depressing that the general public is not familiar with basic laws of physics. nothing about this is feasible, unless your car dropped to a lower elevation and never returned, in which case it would eventually be hundreds of feet deep in a hole and about as useful as this concept. I find it depressing that the general public is not familiar with basic laws of physics. nothing about this is feasible, unless your car dropped to a lower elevation and never returned, in which case it would eventually be hundreds of feet deep in a hole and about as useful as this concept.

]]> By: dennymack http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1497 dennymack Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:09:55 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1497 Oh my gosh. Wow. Umm... except. Wow. Oh my gosh. Wow.
Umm… except. Wow.

]]> By: sabs http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1450 sabs Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:04:25 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1450 Fail Fail

]]> By: andy http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1444 andy Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:49:32 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1444 just dont expect the miles to come off if your running it in reverse. just ask cameron frye. just dont expect the miles to come off if your running it in reverse. just ask cameron frye.

]]> By: Ribjig http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1437 Ribjig Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:33:15 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1437 How about weight-sensitive electricity-generating pads on highways, roads, sidewalks, etc., that react to vehicles & people passing over them? (I just asked vos Savant same question) How about weight-sensitive electricity-generating pads on highways, roads, sidewalks, etc., that react to vehicles & people passing over them?

(I just asked vos Savant same question)

]]> By: joe breskin http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1433 joe breskin Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:38:51 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1433 the most obvious application here (of cars to power dwellings) involves abandoning the silly perpetual motion stuff and looking closely at emission standards, thermodynamic efficiency of infernal combustion engines, and emerging carbon sequestering schemes. Given a larger alternator under the hood, or even under the floor, a heat exchanger and a carbon recapture system, you COULD run the lights and heat your apartment building off the fuel in your cars' fuel tanks. Given that the emission standards of the future were the same for cars and power plants, and that the cars ran off CNG, and CNG gets cheap (that is the current messianic "we are saved!" hoopla, right? Someone is fantasizing that we still have hundreds of years of oilshale methane?) then the relative inefficiency of the energy distribution chain becomes the deciding factor between energy distribution and power schemes, after ROI is addressed. The proponents of widespread adoption of plug-in cars forget that the power grid is totally unprepared for those loads, and that electrical power distribution is lossy and heats the environment, not the dwelling. On the other hand, the ROI problem is NOT trivial. Cuz the alternator in your cars are very very wimpy: 35 amps at 15 volts doesn't go very far when you are trying to run motors like the one in a dishwasher. the most obvious application here (of cars to power dwellings) involves abandoning the silly perpetual motion stuff and looking closely at emission standards, thermodynamic efficiency of infernal combustion engines, and emerging carbon sequestering schemes. Given a larger alternator under the hood, or even under the floor, a heat exchanger and a carbon recapture system, you COULD run the lights and heat your apartment building off the fuel in your cars’ fuel tanks. Given that the emission standards of the future were the same for cars and power plants, and that the cars ran off CNG, and CNG gets cheap (that is the current messianic “we are saved!” hoopla, right? Someone is fantasizing that we still have hundreds of years of oilshale methane?) then the relative inefficiency of the energy distribution chain becomes the deciding factor between energy distribution and power schemes, after ROI is addressed. The proponents of widespread adoption of plug-in cars forget that the power grid is totally unprepared for those loads, and that electrical power distribution is lossy and heats the environment, not the dwelling. On the other hand, the ROI problem is NOT trivial. Cuz the alternator in your cars are very very wimpy: 35 amps at 15 volts doesn’t go very far when you are trying to run motors like the one in a dishwasher.

]]> By: TW http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1278 TW Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:10:52 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1278 Great idea. How about mounting a small wind turbine on top of a car and driving it around to produce energy while we're at it? Great idea. How about mounting a small wind turbine on top of a car and driving it around to produce energy while we’re at it?

]]> By: Zane Selvans http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1265 Zane Selvans Sun, 23 Aug 2009 23:18:08 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1265 Wow, democracy is great and all, but somebody should have applied a reality filter to these contest submissions. Wow, democracy is great and all, but somebody should have applied a reality filter to these contest submissions.

]]> By: cucu http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1227 cucu Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:43:13 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1227 There is something in physics called conservation of energy. Shortly, energy can't be created out of nothing and it can't be destroyed, it can only be transferred. That disco-project is indeed totally plausible because it uses the energy of human motion, which comes from our internal combustion (metabolism). The analogy see-saw is wrong because a see-saw uses human energy in the same way. But the car can't produce energy out of nothing. That cylinder drown there doesn't do magic. It's magnets and spirals are creating resistance when they are moved and by this way they suck power. The car can't oscillate because most car's center of gravity is not right at the middle so it would just lean in one side. Even if it'd be perfectly balanced, it would be in indifferent equilibrium and thus not even move. As for the other "solutions" with cars descending from an upper level, remember that cars have to consume more gas in order to get to that higher level so we'd better burn that gas in a plant and get a better efficiency (a car engine has an efficiency of 25-30%). As for the cars going over flexible tubes, that energy comes again from the cars engine, as going over bumps would cause the car to slightly change it's center of gravity, thus consuming more gas. Just stick to the conservation of energy and you'll realize how stupid all these solutions are. There is something in physics called conservation of energy. Shortly, energy can’t be created out of nothing and it can’t be destroyed, it can only be transferred. That disco-project is indeed totally plausible because it uses the energy of human motion, which comes from our internal combustion (metabolism). The analogy see-saw is wrong because a see-saw uses human energy in the same way. But the car can’t produce energy out of nothing. That cylinder drown there doesn’t do magic. It’s magnets and spirals are creating resistance when they are moved and by this way they suck power. The car can’t oscillate because most car’s center of gravity is not right at the middle so it would just lean in one side. Even if it’d be perfectly balanced, it would be in indifferent equilibrium and thus not even move.
As for the other “solutions” with cars descending from an upper level, remember that cars have to consume more gas in order to get to that higher level so we’d better burn that gas in a plant and get a better efficiency (a car engine has an efficiency of 25-30%).
As for the cars going over flexible tubes, that energy comes again from the cars engine, as going over bumps would cause the car to slightly change it’s center of gravity, thus consuming more gas.
Just stick to the conservation of energy and you’ll realize how stupid all these solutions are.

]]> By: patrick http://www.re-burbia.com/2009/07/28/vehiforce/#comment-1197 patrick Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:54:53 +0000 http://www.re-burbia.com/?p=1544#comment-1197 It's kind of shocking how many people think this idea has any validity to it, or that it even made it to this competition. Is our educational system that bad? It’s kind of shocking how many people think this idea has any validity to it, or that it even made it to this competition. Is our educational system that bad?

]]>