RE: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car

2008-02-16 Thread Lawrence de Bivort
Many thanks.

-Original Message-
From: Michel Jullian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 5:32 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car

Here: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/

Michel

- Original Message - 
From: Lawrence de Bivort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:51 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car


How do I find my way to the archives?





RE: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car

2008-02-15 Thread Lawrence de Bivort
Many thanks, Michel. I was traveling and missed the discussion. The
introduction route that the article reports made me wonder whether this
might be 'too good to be true.'  How do I find my way to the archives?

Generally, to members of the list: 

On a much larger question, and not referring to the compressed air car, I
wonder if the energy-engine field lends itself more readily to exaggerated
(or even crack-pot) claims more than other fields?  

Is there something about it -- the universal and eternal desire for a
machine that will do anything we want to for nothing, the current worry over
energy sources, the sometimes counter-intuitive (to the lay-person)
mechanics of energy conversion, the relatively cheap entry cost for
newcomers to the field, the levels of interest and publicity that attend the
announcement of such claims, etc. -- that makes it vulnerable to successive
claims and disappointments?

Is there any particular cognitive or sociological key to the false or
exaggerated claims in the energy-engine field?

Your thoughts?

Lawrence



-Original Message-
From: Michel Jullian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 6:15 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car

Lawrence,

We discussed Guy Negre's CAT cars about a month ago, cf the archive look for
compressed air in the subject lines. IIRC we came to the conclusion that
out of the ~12kWh mechanical energy the 300 bar 300L compressed air tanks
can give you, about 9kWh must come from the environment (expanding air gets
cold, and heat energy is taken from the environment to bring it back to
ambient temperature and thus to its full original volume). In effect it' sa
heat pump mechanism. Also Robin judiciously noted that when you compress the
air at home, if you're clever enough to capture the equal valued (9kWh)
compression heat e.g. for domestic hot water, the 12kWh you will get only
cost you 3kWh!

The article you quote tells clearly how the auxiliary fuel is used for
longer trips: it heats the air even further to make it occupy even more
volume... I must admit that I am a bit surprised that this trick can be so
efficient that it yields 120 miles per gallon of fuel, if this is for real
the guy must have put his finger on the most efficient way to turn
combustion energy into mechanical energy!

Michel

- Original Message - 
From: Lawrence de Bivort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:32 PM
Subject: [Vo]:Compressed air car


Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7241909.stm

An engineer has promised that within a year he will start selling a car
that runs on compressed air, producing no emissions at all in town.

The OneCAT will be a five-seater with a glass fibre body, weighing just
350kg and could cost just over £2,500.

It will be driven by compressed air stored in carbon-fibre tanks built into
the chassis.

The tanks can be filled with air from a compressor in just three minutes -
much quicker than a battery car.

Alternatively, it can be plugged into the mains for four hours and an
on-board compressor will do the job.

For long journeys the compressed air driving the pistons can be boosted by a
fuel burner which heats the air so it expands and increases the pressure on
the pistons. The burner will use all kinds of liquid fuel.

The designers say on long journeys the car will do the equivalent of 120mpg.
In town, running on air, it will be cheaper than that.

SNIP




Re: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car

2008-02-15 Thread Harry Veeder
On 15/2/2008 7:51 AM, Lawrence de Bivort wrote:

 Many thanks, Michel. I was traveling and missed the discussion. The
 introduction route that the article reports made me wonder whether this
 might be 'too good to be true.'  How do I find my way to the archives?
 
 Generally, to members of the list:
 
 On a much larger question, and not referring to the compressed air car, I
 wonder if the energy-engine field lends itself more readily to exaggerated
 (or even crack-pot) claims more than other fields?
 
 Is there something about it -- the universal and eternal desire for a
 machine that will do anything we want to for nothing, the current worry over
 energy sources, the sometimes counter-intuitive (to the lay-person)
 mechanics of energy conversion, the relatively cheap entry cost for
 newcomers to the field, the levels of interest and publicity that attend the
 announcement of such claims, etc. -- that makes it vulnerable to successive
 claims and disappointments?
 
 Is there any particular cognitive or sociological key to the false or
 exaggerated claims in the energy-engine field?
 
 Your thoughts?
 
 Lawrence

Even a free energy machine will need maintenance, so the notion that
free energy enthusiasts are out to build a machine that will do anything we
want for nothing is simply rhetorical bullsh*t.

Harry



RE: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car

2008-02-15 Thread Jones Beene
--- Lawrence de Bivort wrote:
 
 Is there any particular cognitive or sociological
 key to the false or
 exaggerated claims in the energy-engine field?

Most definitely - but it is far from a new phenomenon.

On the biochemical level, I suspect that it is an
adjunct, or even a perversion, of the same neural
pathways which inbue most humans with the generalized
'need' for the hero (or divinity).

Need does not necessarily negate an underlying level
of reality, however; unless you also believe that
modern science is nearly infallible (which is nearly
the opposite perversion, and equally indefensible
IMHO).

Aside from theology, there is plenty of evidence of
this kind of thing in Ancient times (mystical
technology)- secret machines to build the Pyramids,
Vimana, magic carpets, the Hebrew Ark and
sono-weaponized Rabbis to bring down enemy walls
(Jericho), Bessler wheels, etc etc... One of my
favorites is the 'perpetual' Botafumeiro a famous
thurible at the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela
which was rumored to be in continuous unattended
motion for many years, before it drew too much
unwanted attention. 

In modern times, the fascination of this merger of
technology and mysticism has been artfully captured in
David Mamet's play The Water Engine 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water_Engine

BTW the TV version of the play had a great cast and is
worth viewing. And - just as life often imitates art -
there is a whole misguided cult which has grown up
around a more modern Charles Lang - his name: Stanley
Meyer. 

Which brings up another facet of the phenomenon: Going
hand-in-hand with the exaggerated claims of magic-tek
are the even more exaggerated claims of suppression
and high level conspiracy. 

Hey- the alternative-energy field is a treasure-trove
for sociologists- in which small grains of truth are
imbedded within massive tonnage of clinical-level
pathology -BUT- and I cannot stress the contradiction
enough - there are a few of us who realize all of this
but still rationally suspect that there is a way.
IOW that the fascination of this merger of technology
and mysticism - does indeed rest on kernels of truth
which modern physics has largely missed, sometimes
intentionally.

That is why the Z word (ZPE) conjures up all kinds
of quasi-mysticism to the point that it is best
avoided, even though it rests on stronger science that
many well-funded pet projects of the mainstream.

Jones


--- Lawrence de Bivort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 Many thanks, Michel. I was traveling and missed the
 discussion. The
 introduction route that the article reports made me
 wonder whether this
 might be 'too good to be true.'  How do I find my
 way to the archives?
 
 Generally, to members of the list: 
 
 On a much larger question, and not referring to the
 compressed air car, I
 wonder if the energy-engine field lends itself more
 readily to exaggerated
 (or even crack-pot) claims more than other fields?  
 
 Is there something about it -- the universal and
 eternal desire for a
 machine that will do anything we want to for
 nothing, the current worry over
 energy sources, the sometimes counter-intuitive (to
 the lay-person)
 mechanics of energy conversion, the relatively cheap
 entry cost for
 newcomers to the field, the levels of interest and
 publicity that attend the
 announcement of such claims, etc. -- that makes it
 vulnerable to successive
 claims and disappointments?
 
 Is there any particular cognitive or sociological
 key to the false or
 exaggerated claims in the energy-engine field?
 
 Your thoughts?
 
 Lawrence
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Michel Jullian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 6:15 PM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car
 
 Lawrence,
 
 We discussed Guy Negre's CAT cars about a month ago,
 cf the archive look for
 compressed air in the subject lines. IIRC we came
 to the conclusion that
 out of the ~12kWh mechanical energy the 300 bar 300L
 compressed air tanks
 can give you, about 9kWh must come from the
 environment (expanding air gets
 cold, and heat energy is taken from the environment
 to bring it back to
 ambient temperature and thus to its full original
 volume). In effect it' sa
 heat pump mechanism. Also Robin judiciously noted
 that when you compress the
 air at home, if you're clever enough to capture the
 equal valued (9kWh)
 compression heat e.g. for domestic hot water, the
 12kWh you will get only
 cost you 3kWh!
 
 The article you quote tells clearly how the
 auxiliary fuel is used for
 longer trips: it heats the air even further to make
 it occupy even more
 volume... I must admit that I am a bit surprised
 that this trick can be so
 efficient that it yields 120 miles per gallon of
 fuel, if this is for real
 the guy must have put his finger on the most
 efficient way to turn
 combustion energy into mechanical energy!
 
 Michel
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: Lawrence de Bivort [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Compressed air car

2008-02-15 Thread R.C.Macaulay


Howdy Jones,
Speaking of magic carptets, etc.It would only be proper to include The 
greatest magician of all times.. Warren Buffett.

Richard

Jones wrote,


Aside from theology, there is plenty of evidence of

this kind of thing in Ancient times (mystical
technology)- secret machines to build the Pyramids,
Vimana, magic carpets, the Hebrew Ark and
sono-weaponized Rabbis to bring down enemy walls
(Jericho), Bessler wheels, etc etc... One of my
favorites is the 'perpetual' Botafumeiro a famous
thurible at the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela
which was rumored to be in continuous unattended
motion for many years, before it drew too much
unwanted attention.