All that is true of internal combustion engines. We have learned to maintain those for 100K miles and more. LNG engine should have similar service life with no problems from dirty fuels etc.
And ICEs provide their power over a narrow range of rpms. That is why we have transmissions. Similar likely to be necessary for an LNG vehicle. But that’s a design problem. No major breakthrough required.
Liquid nitrogen is made from air. Can be made where ever you have energy. Is available where ever you find oxygen. Well known air separation technology from WWI Linde in Germany and now many such as Air Products. Will build a plant whereever you want for a long term supply contract.
Yes, but you can produce H2 anywhere you have energy…just add water. And look at how many H2 refueling stations we have.
Anywhere you have energy you can recharge an EV…and look at how so many complain about range anxiety when we have tens of thousands of fast chargers and (probably) 10x as many slow chargers.
Just because making the “fuel” is not technologically a hurdle doesn’t mean building out the stations is easy. Companies will put up the stations if they can make money doing it. So it only makes sense if there are lots and lots of vehicles. It won’t happen if the fuel costs too much and I’ve seen nothing about the costs. So my inclination is that this is a fossil fuel creation just to cause slower EV adoption…I’d love to be proven wrong.
Mike
This would be good for A/C, just blow the air across the icy area!
I see no need for cylinders in this engine. Likely it will be a gas turbine of some sort. Wonder how big they need to be for the hp required.
For heat exchanger, think radiator. But I think you would design it as a flow through device that chills the air enough to condense out the water vapor and then heats the liquid nitrogen. Keeping it from blocking and plugging with ice is the tricky part. But removal of water vapor is part of every air separation plant. So probably known technology. Can it be adapted to auto sized vehicle?
Yes, A/C should be easy but maybe too cold. So need to blend the air for comfort.
1 Like
Here’s more info from the start of this project. Interesting to see what 27 years of work has accomplished on this vs hydrogen vs BEV.
Hertzberg pursued the LN2000 project in part to slow down the electric car bandwagon being propelled by laws in California and elsewhere that require 10 percent of all cars sold by the year 2003 to be zero-emission vehicles.
Fossil fuels would mostly likely be burned to power the refrigeration plant.
in the long run, fuel cells hold the most promise of any zero-emission vehicle technology to match the performance and range of today’s gasoline-powered engines.
Unfortunately, no infrastructure exists to distribute hydrogen for refueling. And, though the gap is narrowing, fuel cells remain seven to 10 times more costly than conventional power trains.
“We’re probably 10 years away from a fuel-cell car,”
Always 10 years away is a safe prediction
Today’s filling stations can easily be converted to dispense liquid nitrogen instead of gasoline. And users will be able to fill up in minutes rather than the 4-6 hours required to fully re-charge an electric car battery.
Let’s compare 27 years of progress. LN hasn’t done anything. EVs can DC fast charge to 80% in ~20-30 minutes and range has gone from 70 miles (EV-1) to 250 - 350 miles.
Mike
7 Likes
Yes, because grants rarely exceed 10 years. This way you can be funded for the maximum amount of time, and then when the funding runs out, you come up with a new project to get funded. Usually you spend the last year or two of previous funding coming up with a proposal for the next grant that will fund you.
3 Likes
20 years ago we had better predictions.
1 Like
In 10 more years we’ll be using AI to make predictions and they’ll be much better
Mike
2 Likes
Seriously there is a good argument in the arts that AI makes things that would only have been considered mistakes a few years ago.
No a dog head does not belong on a cat’s body.
1 Like