Compressed air is one of the worst options possible for energy density and efficiency. Compressing air is extremely inefficient and expanding the air afterwards is as well if you don't store the heat generated during compression to assist expansion later like they do in compressed air grid-scale energy storage plants. The only reason shops use compressed air to run hand tools is because air motors have high power density - small and light. Not having a 120/240V cord get in the way is also often safer for people and equipment. The only place in a car where compressed air may make some sense is using engine braking to pump pressurized air in a tank for immediate re-use during acceleration.
lol. "Hello is that Guy Nègre from beyond the grave." "Ohh you've done this already over 20 years ago but it never really took off and Tata motors were supposed to roll it forwards be seem of have gone quiet and sacked it off 4 years ago" "So this video is just spunkflute, got it, ok bye"
I find it funny about 0 emission claim. How do you compress the air? What weight a tank will have to keep enough pressured air for the car to have some range? Next keeping air under such pressur is extremely dangerous. So the tanks will need to be replaced regularly to prevent explosion.. Those tanks wont be cheap either. What is the energy density of such tank? because that is the main thing. And no matter I look at this. Unless the compression of the air is higher than what burning gaz can do, no way to even think about doing as much mileage on air.
@@FtanmoOfEtheirys Sure am. In over 100 years of having gasoline in cars, even as unsafe as behind the seat of 50's and 60's trucks- under the seat of the model T fords- in the dash board of the Model A ford - in the wings of GA aircraft, etc Gasoline has proved to be safe and reliable when treated with care. Compressed air tanks detonate if the tank is ruptured, plenty safe in an accident, right? EV batteries burn so hot they cannot be extinguished, fire fighters hate them. Arguments can be made for both sides but Gas and Diesel have proven themselves.
@@stevemiller6766 Right, except you're forgetting something significant... Remember when Ford got in trouble because they calculated out that it would cost them less to let people die in their cars when they were rear-ended than it would cost to recall the cars and fix them?? Yeah, that *LITERALLY* happened. That wasn't "over 100 years" ago, that was less than 50 years ago; all the cars that ever had style had already come and gone... Gazolene, commonly known as gasoline, was developed in 1864. We are 160 years into the use of gasoline for fuel. We are 0 years into the use of compressed air and just 16 years into high powered electric batteries as automotive "fuel".
I clicked on this video because of the absurdly ridiculous title. WOW, what a joke this video was. I guess enjoy your fantasy while you can... before reality kicks in.
Totally nutty. Compressing air heats the air and that's all wasted energy. When you use the air, it expands and cools, losing energy again. Totally nutty.
Would be great because all emission controls can be removed from the engine designs greatly freeing up efficiency and reliability, maybe cost less too? No fuss electronics-free engines would be pretty cool to see.
I'm not seeing it; the vision that is. I have a 21 gallon 2.5hp compressor that has a maximum of 125 PSI. It is extremely loud and runs out pretty quickly. FAR less energy that it would take to move a car a mile. Sure, I might not have the best tools, but I have a new hose so I don't have any leaks there. How much pressure would these tanks need to be rated for and how large would they need to be in order to have enough air stored inside to propel a vehicle for 60 miles?? Every single thing attached to the motor will only make the air less efficient at propelling the vehicle; power steering, power brakes, air conditioning, etc. And at the PSI rating needed, could the average person afford a compressor? And then where do you even put the tanks??
Do you know how you know this whole thing is a lie because when they talk about flying cars they show you some examples of stuff they’re working on and ones that actually work.
So how many meters you plan on travelling with that massive air tank, cause even if its airtank with bicycle wheels, light as possible it still wont travel more than few hundred meters with that air supply. Laws of physics prevent storing enough energy to make it even remotely useful other than oddity. Sure you can put in high pressure compressor, but you still need something to power it, meaning in the end its even less efficient than gasoline engine what is complained to be wasteful. In similar sense its just as dangerous to the EV that randomly catches on fire, so essentially it would be taking all the worst things from EV's and ICE engines and putting them into one vehicle and it has been tested time and time again. Its age old idea but it simply does not work due energy density. Hell putting steam engine in there would be more efficient and practical, or wood gasifier.
Those air tanks would have to be massive. Ever see scuba tanks? Those are for a human for less than an hour. Then go to a mechanic and look at their compressor. It’s massive and holds a couple hundred “gallons” of air and they need refilling every other minute depending on tool use. Imagine a car. I think this is another scheme to try and bolster a 3rd world country( India) economy. I heard about a decade ago there was some company there making an air car. Haven’t heard about any air cars since, until this video.
I'm sorry, but which is it? Is compressed air capable of actually being really dangerous? Or is it incapable of storing more energy than a battery?? They both can't be true. At least not in the context of how you're using those sentences. You know neither the volume of air nor the pressure it's being stored at so you're just wrong.
