Bob Hobden wrote:


No it's not! everything I've written above is true. Ignoring the data, if
you simply look at the petrol consumption of ,say, a 1600cc car 30 years ago
( about 26mpg)


My 30 year old triumph spitfire in stock form at leagal speeds would do
better than 40mpg. It didnt after I had tuned it up to 110bhp,
admittedly :-) BMC A and B series engines were also capable of well in
excess of 40mpg.

Ford 1600 engines were alwasy carp its true, but at least you coudl
tweak em up to ridiculous power easily. Fuel injection has been the
greatest benefit.


and compare it with a modern engine ( about 40+mpg) you will
find significant improvements in efficiency which also does relate to the
pollution produced, even without catalists in the exhaust system. The fact
that these modern cars also have much more inside them consuming power
proves my point further.


And elecric fans, to redice power loss on cooling fans.

However, we now use fatter tyres (more rolling resistance) and travel
fatser, and in general spend so much time in congestion that average
fuel consumption is in fact worse.




Probably due to the significant rise in the use of Diesel engines (in cars)
which produce lots of small particules (soot) which get into our lungs and
clog them up. Particle Traps are on their way to cure this problem, I think
it's one of the French manufacturers that is already installing them. I too
have developed Asthma in the last 10 years.


I totally agree on that one. Catalytic convertors work extremely well in
places like califirnia, where temperatures are higher and the big
problem was unburnt hydrocarbons producing smog.

They arer wuite good in countries where average jorneys are long enough
for them to get up to temp as well.

Not so here, and the stuff in fuel now to repalce lead, is highly toxic
and carcinogenic ...diesels are disgusting. They nee filters and
catalysts too.




Nobody has pointed out a flaw at all, to me they just show they don't know
about Fuel Cells, their possibilities, uses and how fast the technology is
advancing so there is little chance of agreement on this topic.



No, ther are more issues at stake than lung irritation. On the global
warming front, you are still using fossil fuels with fuel cells.

I attended a 'clean energy' conference some years back attended by
represntatives from teh finacial, oil, and automotive industries.

The oil men want fuel cells, because it menas they still get to sell oil.

The automotive men wanted hydrigen, because it meant they could still
sell cars.

The financial lot, shook their heads and walked out early. "If its sll
tio be enfirced by legistlation, the government will ensure its barely
profitable"

I asked the one question - "what is the most energy efficient way of
transporting a ton overland" "Railways" muttered someone from the
back...and that was it.

Not one preson in that room was actually interested in what was the
ultimately sanest transport policy. "Not my problem".

All these latrenatives are being touted by groupps with vested interests
in preserving their installed base of manufacturing capability.

Ther IS no installed base of electric ras manufactures: Up till a couple
of years ago there wasn't a suitable battery. There is now.







Oh, and with power stations also going over to the use of Fuel Cells
pollution from them will reduce too. :-)



No argument there.
And windmills, and tide power and hydroelectric and burning biomass and
burning rubbish - especially paper, and CHP and and and...a million ways
to make power that cannot be put in a car.

As you may know, I have a little hobby. Flying electric model aircraft.
Up to tow years ago there was no way to even approach the power and
energy densities of a tank of fuel. There is now. And its tipped the
balance so that applied to cars, it comes out damn near equal overall in
terms of power and range to weight of a tank of petrol and what is
needed to make it turn the wheels..

I can buy all I need to use this technology NOW.

I can't buy a fuel cell.

I am sure that I weill be able to buy both in a few years time, BUT with
fuel cells still using FUEL I am convinced teh electric will win ot,
because you can generate electricity inso many more ways than "burning"
FUEL.