My friend and I are having a theoretical physics argument about alternative fuel sources. He believes that electric is the future, that it is the most efficient, reliable, and convenient fuel source. I believe that gasoline is more reliable, but obviously it’s not as efficient. I’m attempting to develop an alternative fuel source involving electrolysis but I haven’t worked out all the details yet, but the main premise would be that you fill up your car with your garden hose, which would be convenient. Other sources I’ve considered would be related to steam power, but once again, I have not worked out the details. Who is right? My dream is to develop a new fuel source and start a new car company, but I would like to know the best energy route to go to start developing my dream. Thank you for any input!
So far, he is right. Electric cars are already on the road. Your car only exists in your dreams.
Your definition of "efficient" is a variable term, where both gasoline and electricity have advantages and disadvantages in their "efficiency". Gasoline is massively more energy rich than any battery source on an energy density per unit volume ratio, and weight vs energy content. The gas tank in my Ford Ranger holds 20 gallons of fuel that is able to power the truck for about 300 miles, and it weighs around 120 pounds when full. That total volume is equal to a cube roughly 20" on a side.
Compare this to a Tesla's lithium ion battery that requires 1200 pounds worth of battery cells to drive 300 miles and it fills the center of the car beneath the floor, from wheel well to wheel well with battery cells 6" thick. This is definitely not space efficient, nor is it weight efficient; my whole truck with a cast iron engine weighs 3500 pounds. The only thing that makes electric cars appear more efficient is that the electric motor converts somewhere around 90% of the battery's available energy into movement. Use the heat or air conditioner on a battery powered car, and you always reduce your range. The gasoline engine is a heat engine and wastes 75% of the energy it produces as heat. That heat is what warms the cabin and has no effect on your range when you use it. Air conditioning doesn't take advantage of this, and does ever so slightly reduce your MPG, you can't get something for nothing in physics.
Electric motors have an efficiency advantage over gasoline in available torque. As soon as you apply a voltage to an electric motor, you have the maximum torque right away, vs a gasoline engine that has to rev up to higher RPM to produce max torque, consuming fuel. The electric motor will out-accelerate the internal combustion engine every time. It's also much more space efficient than a gasoline engine, because it's just a bunch of coils and a metal shaft. The electric motor has the efficiency disadvantage of not being able to reduce its speed while the car maintains its speed. The electric powered car has no transmission as of now, only a fixed gear ratio, so it is not possible to convert torque into more speed or vice versa. This is what happens when you change gears in a conventional car.
Neither really are better for the environment. Most of our power is generated by burning fossil fuels. With electric cars, you're just polluting the rural areas more. Both vehicles require steel, which is pollutive to make, the lithium takes massive pit mines to harvest... This also neglects the discussion of recharging efficiency... haha.
Personally, I prefer internal combustion engines, but oil is finite, so a relatively carbon neutral, cheap, plentiful and combustible chemical needs to be discovered to stay that path. Keep chasing your dreams! You never know what you may come up with! 😀 Consider developing a transmission to reduce electric motor speeds? That would be an excellent idea!
Bear in mind that although, yes, oil is finite, fossil fuels are a a huge resource. I've read articles written in the 1950s by "experts" who said that we were going to run out of oil Real Soon Now. That's been the mantra of doomsayers for decades. Didn't happen then and it's not imminent now either. You're talking about a time scale of centuries for fossil fuels to be depleted and well before that time the normal pace of technological progress will see viable alternatives developed. No need to force it.
I've read about the peak oil theories over the years. It fascinates me at how much petroleum gets removed from the ground every year and that there is still any left, lol. We go through several cubic miles of it a year.
Conventional reserves of oil are becoming more scarce, but the quantity of unconventional reserves way outweighs the conventional before we started using it, so I'd agree, the thought of "running out" is overhyped. Technology brought us to internal combustion engines and gas furnaces from riding horses and having wood burning stoves or fireplaces, it will get us past fossil fuels in time. Natural market forces will cause the change when needed, artificially forcing the change doesn't really help at all. It just makes stuff expensive and failure-prone.
Excactly. What will happen is that as it becomes more expensive to extract oil from the ground, the fuels made from oil will of course become more expensive over time. The market will react by naturally gravitating to alternatives which will come down in price as those technologies mature and are more widely adopted. We've seen this time and time again with technology.
Electric cars are the past, they were very popular over 100 years ago.
There is no need for alternative fuel sources. Until we have something like portable fusion reactors ("Mr. Fusion") electric cars are a boondoggle.
Consider portable nuclear reactors using liquid metal for heat transfer. Can be very efficient, and as safe, as you engineer them to be. I bet after your first cars are on the road morning news will have a better topic to cover than burning Teslas 😉
I'm still thinking Hydrogen is the answer. Honda has already proven it can be done in a commercial vehicle. Just waiting to see if the infrastructure is plausible.
