You are currently browsing the forum as a guest which gives you limited access. To make use of all forum features such as posting to topics, reply to other postings, starting polls and using the Private Messaging System (PM) you are invited to register. Registration is free and simple. All you need is an e-mail address and a password and you are ready to go! Sign up and join the Green Car Network today!
Should you have problems with the registration process, please contact us.
Steam Powered Automobiles - I think they deserve a second chance
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Written on: 07 October 2010 [21:01]
|
|
|
krazeecain
Topic creator
registered since: 07.10.2010
Posts: 5
|
Yes, that's right, I think STEAM cars require some research. Now, when you think steam car, you might be thinking of some coal-burning Edwardian monstrosity, chugging down the road leaving behind a massive cloud of soot and water. How could a vehicle like this possible have a future in our society? Well, lets take a look at the Doble steam car: http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/at-the-garage/steam-cars/1925-doble-series-e-steam-car/ So clearly it is possible to have a steam car without any of the shortcomings we normally associate it with. So what are the perks? What makes it potentially better than a normal gas-burning car? Well, it can run on any liquid fuel that burns. So if we made a steam car for the mass public, the transition from gasoline to whatever fuel we may switch to in the future will be very smooth. This is a major plus in my books. The steam engine is also a bit like electric engines, in that it doesn't need a clutch or transmission, thanks to instantaneous torque. In fact, steam cars have MONSTROUS torque. The Doble mentioned above supposedly has over 2000 ft/lbs of torque! Steam cars are also very quiet, and could be at least as quiet as an EV. Now, one of the major shortcomings of the Doble was its insanely high price tag. I don't think this will be as much of a problem nowadays, as technology is much cheaper than it was back then. Also, steam cars don't do much about pollution, although due to their slow-burning nature, catalytic converters are completely unnecessary on steam cars. I'll admit I'm a bit skeptical about global warming, so I don't really think theres a problem with continuing to use fuel, just that we need to get away from fossil fuels, and possibly find a cleaner fuel. Here's an older article that goes into much deeper detail about the future of steam cars http://www.stanleysteamers.com/modern_steam.htm The author of this article couldn't have said it better in the first line; "It is very strange today that a well designed steam engine is not considered as a potential alternate to the internal combustion engine." I've been scratching my head about this for quite a while now, so what do you guys think? |
|
Written on: 11 October 2010 [13:13]
|
|
|
Yardonn
 
registered since: 22.08.2007
Posts: 160
|
Well, the Problem remains. Burning fuel always emitts CO2. Reducing other polution is not bad, but the fuel efficiency remains to be proven. Of Course in comparisson to a (micro-) hybrid, not a regular fuel burner. And who wands to invest millions, to find out? Alleweder 4
http://www.akkurad.com allmost full weather protection for one person at 0 - 1.5 kWh / 100 km CityEl as secondary E-Car |
|
Written on: 12 October 2010 [07:27]
|
|
|
krazeecain
Topic creator
registered since: 07.10.2010
Posts: 5
|
Those are all very good points, and the R&D would cost millions, but I still can't help but wonder why steam was ignored up until now. I mean, it's insane torque alone should have piqued the interest of truckers, so why hasn't ANYONE invested a little R&D into it? I think it would be worthwhile to research for industrial machines, such as semi-trucks and bulldozers and stuff. |
|
Written on: 18 October 2010 [12:32]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 586
|
Hi krazeecain, You brought up an interesting subject. Actually something I don't know much about it! I agree, I think we will have to consider not just one alternative (EVs) on our way to get rid of our oil dependency. A possible downside of the steam engine is maybe it's weight. Not sure about this, but I could imagine with such immense pressure, you would have to build a pretty strong structure/drive-train. And weight is something we should try to reduce, so as to increase efficiency. Another limitation could be the energy content of the fuel of steam powered vehicles. Gasoline has a very high energy density and this fact was a main driver for it's success. Money is always spent where people see the highest potential. A return in investment. The EV has a high potential and that's why investments in this area have dramatically increased. The steam engine might be an alternative for heavy duty vehicles, but it will take another few centuries until investments into this area would become possibly economically viable for companies. And: steam-powered cars are powered by resources such as wood, plants to name a few renewables, the same fuel a vehicle is using powered by Biogas. So the question is, which one is more efficient? Biogas or Steam-powered? Twike 890
 |
|
Written on: 18 October 2010 [20:55]
|
|
|
krazeecain
Topic creator
registered since: 07.10.2010
Posts: 5
|
%99.9 of people don't know much about steam cars, which is exactly why I'm trying to spark some discussion.  Old steam engines were quite heavy, the doble being no exception, as it used something called super-heated steam, requiring even more strength in the boiler. But with modern materials we might be able to reduce the weight. You also have to keep in mind that steam engines don't need transmissions or clutches. I think if we made a modern steam car, the weight of the power plant would fit somewhere in between a normal gas engine and a longer range EV (because of the batteries.) In terms of fuel, the biggest plus imo with steam is that it can run on virtually anything. It'll be a long time until batteries can match the energy density of fuel, so I think that steam would make an excellent stepping stone between IC and EV's. It could start burning gasoline, then we would phase out gasoline to switch to some sort of biofuel, then we could try EV's again. Maybe if I spread enough this idea around enough, some billionaire might be interested enough to invest into R&D?
|
|
Written on: 19 October 2010 [19:02]
|
|
|
ecoadmin
Administrator
registered since: 20.07.2007
Posts: 586
|
What is 'R&D'? Thanks for clarification. Twike 890
|
|
Written on: 19 October 2010 [22:50]
|
|
|
krazeecain
Topic creator
registered since: 07.10.2010
Posts: 5
|
"Research and Development", basically it just means researching new technologies, like steam lol |
|
Written on: 29 October 2010 [17:55]
|
|
|
OwningElectricCar
 
registered since: 16.01.2010
Posts: 31
|
Not sure it could work for cars, because of the weight issue... but for heavy trucks, that could be worth investigating further. I guess the problem with steam is that you have to heat the water up first. Which means you can't just hop in and drive the thing away, and even refueling is going to be a problem. Steam is used for one form of transport - if you can call it that - submarines. In fact, a number of warships as well. Nuclear powered submarines use the nuclear reactor to generate steam and the engine itself is a steam engine. So there is some technology there that could be used as a starting point for a road going truck (and no, I don't mean the nuclear bit!  ) Author of the book 'Owning an Electric Car' - http://www.OwningElectricCar.com
|
Portal information:
At the moment there are 8 users online, thereof 0 registered users and 8 guests.
Today 0 registered users and 506 guests were already online.
Now online
ecocarforum.com has 874 registered user, 629 topics and 1219 answers. On the average 0.87 posts are written per day.
Today 0 registered users and 506 guests were already online.
Now online
ecocarforum.com has 874 registered user, 629 topics and 1219 answers. On the average 0.87 posts are written per day.