[cpprototypes]

There's possibly a better alternative to batteries:

http://www.audiusa.com/newsroom/news/press-releases/2015/05/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-diesel

This type of technology can allow the extra power generated by solar/wind to be used to create oil. If this technology is developed further, I think it could be a better alternative to batteries. Imagine a desert full of solar panels creating oil with excess electricity during the day. And at night the oil can be used to either provide night time electricity or directly in the existing oil infrastructure (cars, gas stations, etc.) The oil would be effectively carbon neutral.

[schwabacher]

The benefit of creating oil like this is that it is energy dense, the downside is that it is hugely inefficient at every step compared to battery storage and burning it still produces air pollution.

[cpprototypes]

If cars and all the oil infrastructure didn't exist, EV and batteries are superior. They have far better efficiency and are a much more elegant solution. But all the oil infrastructure does exist and is a huge advantage for oil producing solutions. Consider asking a random person, would you rather keep your current car and use oil that has a side benefit of being carbon neutral or throw away the car, buy a brand new EV, and all the other associated costs (like upgrading the electric sockets in the garage). I think most would keep their car. And for someone living in an apartment without a personal garage, it's not even an option.

If we someday convert our deserts into massive solar energy farms, it may not even matter much that the oil technology is less efficient. There would be so much excess energy during daytime, the greater efficiency of EV wouldn't be a big advantage.

And gas engine technology itself isn't standing still. The traditional ICE engine efficiency of 25% is pathetic compared to the EV 80%. But the Prius combines both technologies and gets 40% thermal efficiency which is a big improvement. It's possible this could be increased further with more improvements in hybrid technology.

Many think that hybrids and plug-in hybrids are a bridge technology to a pure EV future. But the future may end up being a lot more similar to the present than expected. Maybe the typical car purchase in the future will be a 100 mpg hybrid with 60 mile plug-in battery range as an option. Those who have personal garages would buy the option, those who don't would not. And it would be all powered by massive solar power farms in the Mojave desert and wind farms in the mid-west. And the output from all this would be electricity and carbon neutral oil.

[trhway]

>But the Prius combines both technologies and gets 40% thermal efficiency

well, you can get an even better ICE with relatively simple improvements. In some sense there is just no business case for it as metal-air batteries would probably beat all the other options for passenger cars in near future.

>Many think that hybrids and plug-in hybrids are a bridge technology to a pure EV future. But the future may end up being a lot more similar to the present than expected. Maybe the typical car purchase in the future will be a 100 mpg hybrid with 60 mile plug-in battery range as an option.

kind of. Small personal cars will go EV (typical secondary and metal-air batteries). Starting with pickup trucks and into the big ones - will be hybrids with various plugin (probably with metal-air or similar) options.

[toomuchtodo]

> well, you can get an even better ICE with relatively simple improvements.

You really can't. Note the VW emissions scandal. We've already hit the wall regarding how much energy we can squeeze out of a unit of liquid fuel (most of the energy gets wasted as heat).

[trhway]

>We've already hit the wall regarding how much energy we can squeeze out of a unit of liquid fuel (most of the energy gets wasted as heat).

far from it. Just for example - the gas turbine reaches 50+% efficiency and in sequence hybrids there is no limitations which killed gas turbine car 50 years ago. Of course gas turbine is expensive, so we aren't going this way.

>Note the VW emissions scandal.

A BigCo stuck in old ways tells nothing about what is technologically possible. I'd say you can't do worse than current typical gas or diesel engine which basically hasn't changed for 100+ years :) Even well known Atkinson cycle was implemented en-mass only recently. Once i file my patents, i'll tell you in more details about other efficient designs and improvements :)

Without the efforts like CAFE and CA emission/efficiency requirements, we'd still be stuck with 20% efficient carburetor gas ICE. The increase of the regulatory pressure creates market opportunity for efficient designs, and you'll see what will come when CAFE hits 50mpg :)

[monochromatic]

> burning it still produces air pollution

Doesn't burning it just turn it back into what it was made from? You're not releasing any more carbon than you put into it.

[cpprototypes]

He is probably referring to other pollutants such as NOx. It is unavoidable to produce some amount of these pollutants in an oil combustion process. But California has shown that it's possible to get this down to a low level. Smog used to be really bad in LA. But a combination of catalytic converters, strict emissions testing, and oil refinery requirements to make cleaner burning gas has dramatically reduced smog. The oil refinery requirements make CA gas very expensive compared to the rest of the nation. But I think it's worth it for the air pollution improvements.

[thewopr]

Oxides of nitrogen, soot and various other pollutants come out of burning diesel, even if it's just carbon we pulled out of the air. It would be carbon neutral, but not pollution neutral.

[danieltillett]

You get other pollutants other than CO2 when you burn fuel in an internal combustion engine - things like NO2, NO as well as carbon particle, etc.

[Al-Khwarizmi]

This is an example of how the pollution debate has became ridiculously carbon-centric...

Yes, CO2 is what causes global warming, but other pollutants can cause acid rain and lung cancer among many other effects.