ARRRH I'm gonna explode. This is my pet hate

  • Thread starter Thread starter uart
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    pet
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around skepticism towards a video claiming to present a zero-pollution automobile, with participants expressing frustration over perceived misinformation and the allure of such claims. The scope includes conceptual critiques of energy storage methods, particularly compressed air, and the implications of these technologies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express anger at the video's claims, suggesting that many people will uncritically accept such information.
  • There is a concern about the feasibility of achieving free energy, with one participant questioning the practicality of compressed air as an energy storage method.
  • One participant argues that the inefficiency of compressing air leads to energy loss, raising doubts about the viability of using compressed air for vehicles.
  • Another participant notes that while compressed air vehicles may be quiet and low in pollution, they are currently limited to niche applications and may soon be replaced by electric vehicles.
  • There is a suggestion that the design and efficiency of compressed air storage could improve over time, drawing a parallel to the evolution of combustion engines.
  • One participant humorously remarks on the potential dangers of compressed air vehicles in terms of safety during accidents.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally share skepticism about the video's claims and express concerns regarding the practicality of compressed air as a vehicle energy source. However, there is no consensus on the potential future of such technologies or their safety implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss various assumptions regarding energy efficiency, safety, and the evolution of technology without resolving the underlying technical uncertainties or the feasibility of proposed ideas.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in discussions about alternative energy sources, skepticism towards technological claims, and the evolution of energy storage methods may find this thread relevant.

uart
Science Advisor
Messages
2,797
Reaction score
21
Does anyone else get really mad when they see stupid videos making stupid claims like this one. Sorry I just had to have a rant about it.

See : http://www.flixxy.com/zero-pollution-automobile.htm

PS. Make sure you watch that last 30 seconds, it's got the real kicker.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What a joke... So many people will eat this up too. Way to go Michiu Kaku... (I think that was his voice, right?)
 
denni89627 said:
What a joke... So many people will eat this up too. Way to go Michiu Kaku... (I think that was his voice, right?)
You're right on the point there denni. If people didn't "eat it up" as you say then I'd just think of it as a joke. But people are really taken in by stuff like this - confidently delivered yet absolute complete rubbish!
 
hard to believe they say things like that , like they think they can get free energy
 
A fool and his money are soon parted.
$15k ?- I ask yer.
 
uart...worthwhile ranting about...like IPCC claims...
 
"It's always easier to be a skeptic than to think in a positive way."
This is certainly one of the top 5 most retarded things I ever heard.
 
denni89627 said:
What a joke... So many people will eat this up too. Way to go Michiu Kaku... (I think that was his voice, right?)

No, the voice at the end making the ridiculous perpetuum mobile claim is not Kaku. And I'm guessing Kaku is pretty displeased about having that statement in a show he has contributed to.

The beginning of the video is OK, it simply stores energy in the form of compressed air. Nothing new there. I think this method is too dangerous for widespread use (explosions during car accidents...).

Torquil
 
The problem with compressed air is, surely, the inefficiency due to heating the air when you're compressing it. All that energy is lost after a short while and the compressed gas cools down to ambient. I suppose you could heat your house with this heat if you charge up in the evenings. (Presupposes that you want to share your living room with a vehicle.)
Nice and quiet though. Ideal for early morning deliveries and for mowing down pedestrians who can't hear you.
 
  • #10
sophiecentaur said:
Nice and quiet though. Ideal for early morning deliveries and for mowing down pedestrians who can't hear you.
And low pollution at the point of operation. I've seen pneumatic vehicles in niche applications like fork-lifts and motorized trolleys, primarily operating in confined or poorly ventilated areas where the fumes from internal combustion engines are objectionable. I think that even these applications will soon give way to electric vehicles, given their rapid improvement.
 
  • #11
iv seen it on a news broadcast it looked like a toy and sounded like a toy (or a toy box getting shaken hard)but it does work,and if you look at how the first combustion engines looked compared to now,the main thing if isues with compressing enough air into smaller stronger storage tanks,could be over come (like into frame work),think of what goes into a car battery,what is lost in charging it and cost to replace it,1000 mad idears can trigger off 1 good idear,so i say keep them idears going keep thinking,then don't let the government know or he will tax you for it :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
12K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
7K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
42K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
17K
Replies
14
Views
3K