Honda FCX

[CD5Passion]

starting in 2008 we should be seeing the use of a Fuel Cell car. hello Hydrogen power!

http://world.honda.com/FuelCell/


Specifications
Number of passengers 4
Motor Max. Output 95kW (129PS, 127 horsepower)
Max. Torque 256N-m (26.1kg-m, 188.8 lb-ft.)
Type AC synchronous motor (Honda Mfg.)
Fuel Cell Stack Type PEFC(proton exchange membrane fuel cell, Honda Mfg.)
Output 100kW
Fuel Type Compressed hydrogen
Storage High-pressure hydrogen tank (350atm)
Tank Capacity 171 liters
Dimensions (L × W × H) 4,760 × 1,865 × 1,445mm
(187.4 × 73.4 × 56.9 inches)
Max. Speed 160km/h (100 mph)
Energy Storage Lithium Ion Battery
Vehicle Range* 570km (354 miles)

http://world.honda.com/news/2006/4061129LAShowFCXConcept/photo/images/01.jpg
http://www.autobytel.com/images/AutoShows/2005/Tokyo/400/Honda_FCX_Concept_exdrvr34.jpg

[GT40FIED]

Dear lord...they've put wheels on a doorstop. And where do you put 171 liters of anything? That's a shit ton of hydrogen for a range of 350 miles.

[CD5Passion]

Dear lord...they've put wheels on a doorstop. And where do you put 171 liters of anything? That's a shit ton of hydrogen for a range of 350 miles.

ahah hey i like it and the fact that they are finally implementing the use of hydrogen in cars is awesome. it's just nice to see the steps being taken for less fossil fuel dependency.

[Robert]

Japan is affriad they will be leap frogged by american fuel cell technology. The same thing happened with hybrids. Billions were spent developing American hybrids, and only the japs made money on it.

BTW - I think hydrogen is a joke. It takes too much energy to produce a product to use. I want an electric car.

[GT40FIED]

BTW - I think hydrogen is a joke. It takes too much energy to produce a product to use. I want an electric car.

FINALLY...someone besides me gets it. The only way we currently have of extracting hydrogen (ironically the most abundant element in the universe) is through electrolysis which takes considerably uses energy than it saves once the hydrogen is used in cars. Not to mention the fact that if a hydrogen car were in a bad enough accident it could easily take out a city block. I'm still waiting for E-85 and natural gas to become more widely used...which means it'll first have to be available. I think I've seen one gas station carrying E-85.

[blind34_1]

I'm leaning towards electric solutions as well. Check this out:
http://www.teslamotors.com/

I'm very interested to see how these operate in real life, in person.

[Racing Rice]

I kinda dig the futuristic look of the car, but don't know about the whole Hydrogen thing..

[ChrisCantSkate]

well, im glad they are pushing the industry, hydrogen is inefficient to "mine" at the moment, but if this proves to be a new sourse... then let them try to develope. im sure someone somewhere once said that oil was too expensive and we should stick to wood boiling steam engines....

[Robert]

Actually the model T car was to run on corn oil. Oil industry made sure that it wasn't available so Henry developed it to run on gas.

The elecrtic car could be running TODAY. We need it to clean up our air and reduce the need for oil. If you consider what we use oil for (almost everything) I am of the opinion its to valuable to burn.

Steve - to your point. They have been developing this technology for almost 20 years now. Still with nothing to show for it. Hydrogen is that carot the donkey chases. Just in this case we're the donkey and we keep buying gas.

telsa is an interesting idea. It's been co-developed with Lotus hence they nice design. They have run into some problems that make the car hard to sell. MOstly since there isn't the noise of a motor, you hear alot of the moving parts in the car. Otherwise its a great car.

Alternatively one can buy a hyrbid and modify it. Adding a second battery and electronic over ride forcing the car to stay in electric mode and using the gas only to charge the battery. Apparently with this set up you can get about 120mpg. This is something I am considering once I have stable income. I cant stand buying gas.

Did you know domestic hyrbids average 28mpg and jap hyrbids 40mpg. What gives?

The entire auto industry sinks of bad business. Also remember cleaner cars mean less service and require the industry to realize for the last 100 years they have sold a dirty product.

[CD5Passion]

Japan is affriad they will be leap frogged by american fuel cell technology. The same thing happened with hybrids. Billions were spent developing American hybrids, and only the japs made money on it.

BTW - I think hydrogen is a joke. It takes too much energy to produce a product to use. I want an electric car.

would you please not use the term japs, thanks

did anyone watch the movie on the website I posted? They do have a working model and they do drive it. So it works, sure it takes energy to get the hydrogen but it works. Nothing is perfect when it first is introduced. I strongly beleive they will make it a very efficient car. One thing that bothers me is when I ask people if they would own a electric or anyother kind of fuel efficient vehicle, they say no because they "can't hear the engine". it's a pyschological thing that people need to hear their cars, and it really bugs me.

Honda has had the FCX since 2002

n July 2002, Honda's FCX was certified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB), making it the first and only fuel cell car in history to be approved for commercial use. CARB and the EPA have also certified the FCX as a Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV), Tier-2 Bin 1.n December 2002, the city of Los Angeles began leasing the first of five Honda FCXs, which are now used in normal, everyday activities by city officials. And as the official pace car of the L.A. Marathon for five consecutive years, the FCX has proudly served in some not-so-everyday activities as well.

While the 2005 Honda FCX is our second-generation fuel cell vehicle (FCV), it is the first to be powered by a Honda designed and manufactured fuel cell stack. And it has been certified by both the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for commercial use. The 2005 FCX achieves a nearly 20-percent improvement in its EPA fuel economy rating and a 33-percent gain in peak power (107 hp vs. 80 hp) compared to the 2004 FCX.

With an EPA city/highway rating of 62/51 mpkg (57mpkg combined) and an EPA-rated driving range of 190 miles, the hydrogen-powered FCX delivers nearly a 20-percent improvement in fuel efficiency and range versus the 2004 model with an EPA rating of 51/46 mpkg (48 mpkg combined) and a range of 160 miles. In terms of energy efficiency, one mile per kilogram (mpkg) of hydrogen is almost equivalent to one mile per gallon (mpg) of gasoline. The hydrogen-powered Honda FCX has been certified by CARB as a Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) and by the EPA as a Tier-2 Bin 1, the lowest possible national emission rating.

The FCX is a technology of the future that's becoming more and more prevalent today. Keep an eye out for FCX sightings-because you definitely won't smell them coming.

http://corporate.honda.com/environment/fuel_cells.aspx?id=fuel_cells_fcx

[Robert]

So it only gets 60mpg at best, and when you measure the energy required to make that one kg it drops back down.

It takes 6 times more energy to go a mile in hydrogen then it does with an electric car.

japs is not ment racial, you are hyper sensative. It's just short for a word I have trouble spelling in full.

[CD5Passion]

So it only gets 60mpg at best, and when you measure the energy required to make that one kg it drops back down.

It takes 6 times more energy to go a mile in hydrogen then it does with an electric car.

japs is not ment racial, you are hyper sensative. It's just short for a word I have trouble spelling in full.

ok so it makes 60mpg...the main reason for hydrogen energy being used is that the exhaust is nothing more than water vapor. it's non pollutant and it's easy to come by hydrogen. remember most of the earth is covered in water.

and...

man are you clueless.
Jap (variants: Japo, Japse) is a term denoting anything Japanese. In most English-speaking countries, it is accepted that it is a derogatory racial slur similar to the term nigger when referring to dark skinned people. ...
In Japanese dictionaries, the term "Jap" is only defined as a disparaging term used against the Japanese people, like it is the case in many English language dictionaries.

I'm sure if I was black I wouldn't want to be called a nigger.

[GT40FIED]

ok so it makes 60mpg...the main reason for hydrogen energy being used is that the exhaust is nothing more than water vapor. it's non pollutant and it's easy to come by hydrogen. remember most of the earth is covered in water.

This is true...but eletric cars have 0 emissions, not even water. And while it's true that 70% of the earth is covered in water, that becomes pretty irrelevent when you consider the energy required to extract the hydrogen from water. Not to mention that hydrogen is incredibly volitile.

That said, I don't like the current eletric car technology. That Tesla is certainly an improvement in terms of distance on one charge, but until a big name auto manufacturer gets on board no one will buy them. Mostly because that's the only way things like service will become widely available. I mean...the closest Tesla service center to me is in Chicago. You think I wanna have my car towed to Chicago if something goes wrong? Besides, when it comes to fuel saving tech, the Europeans will always beat us to it. I'll become more optimistic when there's a ton of electric cars on Europe's streets.

[CD5Passion]

This is true...but eletric cars have 0 emissions, not even water. And while it's true that 70% of the earth is covered in water, that becomes pretty irrelevent when you consider the energy required to extract the hydrogen from water. Not to mention that hydrogen is incredibly volitile.

That said, I don't like the current eletric car technology. That Tesla is certainly an improvement in terms of distance on one charge, but until a big name auto manufacturer gets on board no one will buy them. Mostly because that's the only way things like service will become widely available. I mean...the closest Tesla service center to me is in Chicago. You think I wanna have my car towed to Chicago if something goes wrong? Besides, when it comes to fuel saving tech, the Europeans will always beat us to it. I'll become more optimistic when there's a ton of electric cars on Europe's streets.

true true, it probably just takes the kind of person. I'm really into small cars, and I'm a huge fan of SMart cars. btw i just took a look at the Tesla, and that thing is sexy.

how volitile would the hydrogen be though? you would think they wouldn't put a platform on a bomb....of course gasoline isn't exactly risk-free

[GT40FIED]

Well really man...there are a lot of people out there like you and me. I'd absolutely drive an electric car if they could make one that looked and (most importantly) drove like a conventional car. The problem is that a lot of people won't buy these cars simply because they aren't generally available. Without a lot of people owning them, they almost become a niche product.

And how volitile is hydrogen? Well...they built a bomb around it. I'm sure the principle is pretty different, but it's still incredibly flamable in liquid/gas form.

[Robert]

I'm sure if I was black I wouldn't want to be called a nigger.

I respectfully disagree. I dont get worked up with people call me a canuk. So take a seat buddy.

[Robert]

true true, it probably just takes the kind of person. I'm really into small cars, and I'm a huge fan of SMart cars. btw i just took a look at the Tesla, and that thing is sexy.

how volitile would the hydrogen be though? you would think they wouldn't put a platform on a bomb....of course gasoline isn't exactly risk-free

The smart car company has an interesting concept, the problem is they make no money. Actually they are running at a lose and seeking to be bought out. Merc is looking to unload them.

How dangerous is hydrogen? If you were rear ended with a full take it would explode like a bomb. A full tank in a car would more then level a home. Steve is right, hydrogen bomb.

[Robert]

Well really man...there are a lot of people out there like you and me. I'd absolutely drive an electric car if they could make one that looked and (most importantly) drove like a conventional car. The problem is that a lot of people won't buy these cars simply because they aren't generally available. Without a lot of people owning them, they almost become a niche product.

And how volitile is hydrogen? Well...they built a bomb around it. I'm sure the principle is pretty different, but it's still incredibly flamable in liquid/gas form.

THey say right now what holds electric cars back are teh batteries. We've held onto the same battery technology in many cases for 30-40+ years. The increase in storage and ability to rapid charge could see the electric car become more possible.

Service, there is little service required unless something breaks. According to the GM service guide, every 5000miles for a tire check and rotate. You could have the breaks done anywhere.

Personally I'm looking at getting a tesla. The 1 year wait time has me concerned though, alot can change in one year. However I know I dont drive more then 200 miles/day on average when I'm driving around town so that is alot better then the 120 miles you could go in the GM electric car and those had waiting lists for them.

Starting a new car company is risky, but with the technology shift it might be wise for all manufacters to develope alternative fuel cars under different brands. It will protect oil burning cars from becoming 'dirty' compaired to electric/hydrogen.

[ChrisCantSkate]

it would not explode anything like a hydrogen bomb. the only way to get the hydrogen atoms to fuse together here on earth, fusion, would be in a fission nuculear explosion. only then is it hot enough (the reason we dont have cold fusion, which would solve 80% of our problems) for the atomic bonds of the hydrogen to break down and fuse together releasing tons of energy. the hindenburg was a giant balloon of hydrogen gas and that blew up on a runway and didnt relly have too much collateral damage.

its not safe, or not safe enough to think its safer than gas, but it can be contained under pressure better than gas, and it has a longer shelf life(like the begining of this universe) than gas(maybe a few months once refined). i still say move forward till you break the first barrier in the economy of scale

[Robert]

it would not explode anything like a hydrogen bomb. the only way to get the hydrogen atoms to fuse together here on earth, fusion, would be in a fission nuculear explosion. only then is it hot enough (the reason we dont have cold fusion, which would solve 80% of our problems) for the atomic bonds of the hydrogen to break down and fuse together releasing tons of energy. the hindenburg was a giant balloon of hydrogen gas and that blew up on a runway and didnt relly have too much collateral damage.

its not safe, or not safe enough to think its safer than gas, but it can be contained under pressure better than gas, and it has a longer shelf life(like the begining of this universe) than gas(maybe a few months once refined). i still say move forward till you break the first barrier in the economy of scale

Chris, I suspect you're right that it would not be 'nuclear' in size, however the hindenburg was not under the same preasures a vehicle would be. If memory serves me the hindenburg blew up in the air as it tried to touch down. It was on an air strip, no surprise it didn't nock any buildings down.

[CD5Passion]

I respectfully disagree. I dont get worked up with people call me a canuk. So take a seat buddy.

it depends on the conditioning of the individual, and to me it is a word that offends me and my heritage. I would respect your wishes if you asked me not to call you a roundeye or something in that nature, I just ask for you to do the same and respect me.

and in any case, go find a black guy you don't know and call him a nigger and see what happens to you. Or go find a jewish man and call him a jew, go find a hispanic individual and call him a spic. I don't know how canada works but I promise you that here in the US you probably would end up with at least a broken face.

[CD5Passion]

The smart car company has an interesting concept, the problem is they make no money. Actually they are running at a lose and seeking to be bought out. Merc is looking to unload them.

How dangerous is hydrogen? If you were rear ended with a full take it would explode like a bomb. A full tank in a car would more then level a home. Steve is right, hydrogen bomb.

do you have a reference when you say they don't make money? because SMart is supposed to be a fairly popular company in europe. not to mention that SMart, which stands for Swatch-Mercedes Art, is the brain child of Swatch products and Mercedes-Benz. Needless to say Mercedes makes a damn good amount of flow.

[Robert]

do you have a reference when you say they don't make money? because SMart is supposed to be a fairly popular company in europe. not to mention that SMart, which stands for Swatch-Mercedes Art, is the brain child of Swatch products and Mercedes-Benz. Needless to say Mercedes makes a damn good amount of flow.

I dont have any documentation for this. However a friend of mine worls for mercedes was explaining their situation. They lose money in the making of the cars, they have such 'green' practices that for example there is no A/C in the building. So when it gets over 100f they either pay extra or shut the factory down.

He explained to me the lose about 15-20% on each car. They are attempting to correct the problem but it hasn't happen.

This is why for example in Canada there is only one version of the car available. They have decided not to roll the others out and focus on one vehicle.

This source has given me very good information prioviously so I deam it accurate. Side note VW is in major trouble in the US.

[ebpda9]

i think the whole hydrogen/electric thing is just a feel good thing used by auto manufacturers. Look at darin's echo, while it might look like shit, but it's great on gas and gets great mileage. the problem right now is that we are obsessed with power. More power means heavier cars, just to keep the frames from twisting, then you endup with a car marginally faster, yet few hundred pounds more of a porker. remeber the early 90's hondas ? you'd fill them up once and drive for 2 weeks on a tank of gas. why can't they do the same thing now ?

and for the hybrids: the prius is the only one that gets decent gas mileage, but yet is marginally bigger than a civic. all the other hybrid lexuses i drove so far would get maybe 1-2 more mpg than my 175hp awd subaru.

[CD5Passion]

I dont have any documentation for this. However a friend of mine worls for mercedes was explaining their situation. They lose money in the making of the cars, they have such 'green' practices that for example there is no A/C in the building. So when it gets over 100f they either pay extra or shut the factory down.

He explained to me the lose about 15-20% on each car. They are attempting to correct the problem but it hasn't happen.

This is why for example in Canada there is only one version of the car available. They have decided not to roll the others out and focus on one vehicle.

This source has given me very good information prioviously so I deam it accurate. Side note VW is in major trouble in the US.

ok, touche. Now whats with VW?

[CD5Passion]

i think the whole hydrogen/electric thing is just a feel good thing used by auto manufacturers. Look at darin's echo, while it might look like shit, but it's great on gas and gets great mileage. the problem right now is that we are obsessed with power. More power means heavier cars, just to keep the frames from twisting, then you endup with a car marginally faster, yet few hundred pounds more of a porker. remeber the early 90's hondas ? you'd fill them up once and drive for 2 weeks on a tank of gas. why can't they do the same thing now ?

and for the hybrids: the prius is the only one that gets decent gas mileage, but yet is marginally bigger than a civic. all the other hybrid lexuses i drove so far would get maybe 1-2 more mpg than my 175hp awd subaru.

thanks stefan haha you fag.
I really don't see the point in a hybrid suv, because it just seems like a dog chasing it's tail in that instance.

[Robert]

ok, touche. Now whats with VW?

If they dont make up better sales in 2007/2008 you might seem them leave the market place. Where as Audi has done far better with their better designs/features.

VW as a brand has a poor image in America. It's the small german car without any power. It's had the same boxy image for the last 20 years and consumers have been caught up in the sexy jap. cars.

THis is what I'm told, their line of cars is some of the worst in sales in the industry (when looking at the US market - in europe they sell).

[CD5Passion]

If they dont make up better sales in 2007/2008 you might seem them leave the market place. Where as Audi has done far better with their better designs/features.

VW as a brand has a poor image in America. It's the small german car without any power. It's had the same boxy image for the last 20 years and consumers have been caught up in the sexy jap. cars.

THis is what I'm told, their line of cars is some of the worst in sales in the industry (when looking at the US market - in europe they sell).

i'm not so sure it matters much since audi and vw are one in the same, not to mention that Audi is only a more expensive VW and with more problems so I've heard. as far as the boxy designs, i really don't see it. especially with their new Scirocco in design. I for one really like the Eos.

in any case it can't be much worse than Mercedes lol
But what is striking about Mercedes' performance is its consistency. Of the 11 models reviewed by Consumers, none are recommended. Seven are left off of the list because of poor reliability; the remaining four are considered too new to predict.
Mercedes has the worst record of any automaker with that many models. For a brand that claims to be "engineered like no other car in the world," that is fairly frightening.

[Robert]

Though Mercedes isn't doing as well as they have done in the past, they still out perform their partner in profits.

VW/Audi - I realize this, I'm not talking about that I'm talking about brand images. This is far different. Audi and VW call up very different brand images. Audi is able to sell the larger cars, VW can't.

[Gone]

Does anyone happen to know what state of hydrogen they are using in these new cars?

[ChrisCantSkate]

more importantly, how they intend on making power with that hydrogen?

[GT40FIED]

more importantly, how they intend on making power with that hydrogen?

Uhhh...by burning it.

As for the state it's kept in, I'm fairly sure it's stored under pressure in liquid form until it reaches the injectors or combustion chamber.

Honestly, I think we've just about reached the limit of our propulsion technology. Hydrogen won't work, electricty would work if you could get people on board (and that's unlikely within our lifetimes), and alternative fuels like ethanol and biodiesel are so pathetically marketed that it's no wonder that they haven't caught on. I really think car companies are announcing this kind of technology so they can pretend they're making advances. Not just in environmental arenas, but advances period. Hell...I'll bet it's just a matter of time before they propose a nuclear powered car. Shit...it's only marginally less safe than hydrogen.

[Robert]

Uhhh...by burning it.

As for the state it's kept in, I'm fairly sure it's stored under pressure in liquid form until it reaches the injectors or combustion chamber.

Honestly, I think we've just about reached the limit of our propulsion technology. Hydrogen won't work, electricty would work if you could get people on board (and that's unlikely within our lifetimes), and alternative fuels like ethanol and biodiesel are so pathetically marketed that it's no wonder that they haven't caught on. I really think car companies are announcing this kind of technology so they can pretend they're making advances. Not just in environmental arenas, but advances period. Hell...I'll bet it's just a matter of time before they propose a nuclear powered car. Shit...it's only marginally less safe than hydrogen.

Hyrdrogen is treated like propain, liquid under pressure until burned.

Steve - I agree with your car company point and your alternative fuels point. We wont see alternatives until consumers push for it and stop buying whatever is pushed upon us.

[CD5Passion]

hopefully a meteor will wipe out half of the earths populace and technology and we can start over again -_-

[Gone]

I've been keeping a close eye on the issue of hydrogen. The newer models have been using high compression forms of it in liquid form which I have problems with because it might as well be a stick of dynamite. However back in the 90s I believe when they were originally testing this in cars they used sealed hydrogen capsules that were solids and the engine would have to do the extra work. Downside of this engine does more work. Upside it's not an explosive and plus who wouldn't want to just go pick up capsules at your local market to slip into your car. I think they would look cool, but hey that's just me.

[Robert]

I'm for electric, and when people need a car for distance a hybrid/electric car.

the average american drives 30 miles/day. Currently electric designs go anywhere from 120-250miles/charge. It seems only logical that this could work for a huge number of people in society and it's ready for mass production. Heck we had mass production in Cali in the 90's.

[ChrisCantSkate]

magnent is the way of the future. it will take some time, but it will be by far the best, cleanest, and most reliable. they've already got trains going 300+ mph on magnets, it will take more control out of the driver(which i think is a great thing, people have abused driving) but has the ability to completely control traffic.

[Robert]

magnent is the way of the future. it will take some time, but it will be by far the best, cleanest, and most reliable. they've already got trains going 300+ mph on magnets, it will take more control out of the driver(which i think is a great thing, people have abused driving) but has the ability to completely control traffic.

That has to be 50+ years off though right?

[ChrisCantSkate]

well, if we tried, maybe 10-15 years off before full implimentation, the trains are already working perfect, as are other applications using the same technology. it pretty much comes down to redoing our current road system to be magnent compatable and building a whole new vehical. so you might be right about 50 years, but only because we want to be nice to these oil companies and not put them out of business... the technology is there, its 1000x cleaner. "cars" would not need alot of power if any, just to run the onboard controls, so you could program in your destination. only the roads would have to be electricomagnetically operated. i picture it like the current nav systems where you put in your destination only instead of it telling you where to turn it takes over and takes you there, and since the whole road system is operated via magnents you can easily control vehical locations and speeds, making accidents near impossible on a funcitional system.

[Robert]

I think this system you speak of would be impractical. People like to drive their cars.

[ChrisCantSkate]

as much as i agree, we have too many people. traffic is terrible in large cities and the pollution from cars isnt helping anything. we're doing better with pollution than we were in the 70's but there are tons more people now there will be more before theres less, we are using up the natural resources much faster than we should be and it will only get worse.

now i understand the "i want to drive" theory, but theres also the "we need to survive" theory, which is why there is this push towrds alternative fuels. you can say there are economic or political reasons, global warming reasons, population or consumption reasons, but the underlying theme is we need a better, reliable mode of transportation. people loved to ride their horses 100 years ago but the time moved on and people had to adapt to the world they are creating around themselves.

now if hydrogen ends up being more expensive but cleaner what will win? is it safer? who knows, there are no definite answers since its not in full market production and competition yet. but magnetism is one of the 4 forces of the universe, it is always there, its 100% predictable, it can be controlled(electromagnets) very easily, we could use hydrogen fusion powerplants to power the whole system cutting down drastically on pollution. not only is the fusion(considering it dosnt blow up, which given our track record and new technology, we're pretty good) safer than burning hydrogen you get massivly massivly enormously more energy out of it by creating heilum(nuclear fusion) with it rather than burning it.

i understand wanting to drive and to feel the power and be in control... but in 50 years with the population we have are we going to be able to drive around in traditional cars? think of how NYC is already.. its near impossible to drive there so everyone uses the subways and taxi's to get around. this would be a personal, automated taxi which you are in with everyone elses "taxi". you could go all over the country via magnocar(i just named it :D) and never have to worry about accidents, gas, etc..

some of the technology is probobly 10-15 years away, but you have to look ahead, not try and get something out now as the solution that will need change by the time its fully implimented.

heh.. ranted..

[CD5Passion]

I think they've touched on the idea of using magnetics, it had something to do with the the possibility of autopilot on cars. but i think that would be a great idea, the only problem you would be faced with then is having to adhere to what they built, there wouldn't be any "adventure" i driving because the government would have to build all the roadways to suit it.

[ChrisCantSkate]

well shit happens when there are too many people in the world. it solves 2 or 3 of the major problems that the current car has. sure it takes away "driving" but we can still have tracks, and road courses. maybe even the rural backroads still use regular cars, but at least the major interstate and city roads are out of control. for normal transportation you dont need to be able to "drive" in traffic, to the store, or anywhere for that matter. out of enjoyment i understand, but then we could move away from half street half track polution animals that get driven every day and have your "fun" car for when you actualy need it and have a clean, safe reliable, and socially tolerable mode of transportation when you need to go somewhere.

i kinda want to start a new thread but ehh.... jsut cause i kinda went off from the new honda and can go on about this and or any other similar idea for a while since me and my roommate have been throwing this idea around alot the past few days.

[Robert]

I think it's a neat idea, and it probably would work in reducing polution.

However if you consider the reason stopping alternative fuels from taking of is the consumer being 'affriad' they wont be able to fill up. Imagine not being able to take your car in every city or on every road. The roll out of this type of system would waste our entire roadworks and be a very slow roll out.

Maybe a magnet system could be used to create motion - there is a motor out there that generates more energy then it consums. Something like this could solve our problem and be a 0 emision car.

I think we need a multi stage roll out to fix the enviornment. It looks something like this.
1. Set tough new standards & impliment current available technologies to reduce energy use and polution
2. Look at shifting peoples views towards a greener living.
3. Develop new tech. to reduce energy needs, move away from oil
4. Develop new energy sources/means of generating


I suspect something like this takes 50-60 years and the problem with that is often the founders arent there to maintain the vision.

[ChrisCantSkate]

However if you consider the reason stopping alternative fuels from taking of is the consumer being 'affriad' they wont be able to fill up. Imagine not being able to take your car in every city or on every road. The roll out of this type of system would waste our entire roadworks and be a very slow roll out.


yes, that is the problem. i know its the hardest, most expensive and time consuming part of the whole project, but even if its not this, something has to be done, and when it is done, it wont be easy or cheap. if its put in place under/on/however the current roads then the new "vehical" still uses road tires and whatnot, we could have an integrated old and new cars... slowly move away from gas vehicals.. i dont know... 50 years from now will be interesting