This Battery Gives EVs 1000 Miles of Range! 

I was about to say that

8:05

New Fuzzy Math ! ;)

@@eddieneves1808 I was about to say I was about to say that, but you said I was about to say that

seen so many battery technologies. I guarantee you, we won't see them ever

You need a hybrid setup. Like the Toyota Prius, you would need a rechargible battery (NiMH or Li-Ion for starting and stopping) for regenerative capture, then the Al-Air battery as the main power source. A typical Prius like layout with like for like weight should give about 3Km range (1800 miles). The REAL factor here would be limiting patents and forcing automakers to use standardize battery packs to make swapping stations possible/profitable. We cannot allow a repeat of the the proprietary inkjet market to repeat itself in the battery swap market.

Even two 500 mile batteries instead of one 1,000 mile battery because I want to get my full value out of the battery but I can't wait until 0% to swap it if I only have one because the car won't drive to the swap shop. More than one battery pack is a must.

Oh hey there Cuckoo! Love your OPZ vids :)

Elon wont buy out this tech's patent and terminate it. Just like how his tweet push bitcoin price up ... or NOT

Battery waste would be a huge problem if everyone went to single use batteries. Rechargeable battery waste in the future is going to be a problem when the whole world transitions to electric. Just imagine that amount of waste times by atleast 50 Single use batteries could be quite useful for airplanes/ships as it got high energy density similar to fuel, but fuel can be made by extracting CO2 and Water which are the main waste that comes out of burned fuel and turned back into fuel such as biodiesel so I don’t think single use batteries will be anywhere close to mainstream.

Agree! if this works I can see that airplane will be using this extensively. It is cheaper, lighter and only requires replacement on every trip

Great idea! And all those batteries are landing in the same place! Recycling companies could turn up with a bunch of Tesla Semi's at Atlanta, JFK, LAX, Heathrow, Charles de Gaulle, etc. Could be pretty slick... deliver 5000 batteries, pick up 5000 batteries... repeat :) And if they could make them modular, like 2070,4680 etc... you build the vehicle to accommodate the range you need.

I think I saw a video some time ago about a prototype electric plane that used these

@@jamespaul2587 it's weird when a use-case seems 'obvious' that wasn't quite that before :) Now I am as dumb as a box of rocks, so of course the 'obvious' will not be that :) But as a thought experiment it does start to get interesting! I wonder how long it takes to re-fuel a 747? And if it all starts with new smaller routes, like I imagine your prototype electric plane was... well...mix it up with VTOL and DHL delivering/picking up the batteries... :)

@@nadgerz I think it was a small plane that I saw a video about, I'll have to see if I can find it. I still don't understand what actually happens to the aluminum plates after use, I think the video said the aluminum had to be melted and reformed into a new anode, perhaps it has to be purified also?

what do you need a "mileage extender" for with newer cars having 400-500 mi range already ?

Carrying a heavy rechargeable lithium main battery with a light weight auxiliary aluminum extender kind defeats the purpose. Total weight of batteries increases while useable space somewhere in the car gets reduced.

You *believe* that? Ho hum, there is another one born every second.

Good call!

And let's not forget how green the mining process is for mining Obama and lithium! Heavy equipment used to mine those metals runs on DIESEL ENGINES not electricity!

@@DrDiff952 Old, tired argument. Ford had horses in his supply chain.

@@bob15479 Not to mention mining companies are switching to electric vehicles themselves as they save on diesel fuel and the issues arising from that.

@@DrDiff952 Obama is no longer your gawd damned President

This would just be the same as putting a lid on innovation. The work that goes into every aspect of car battery design is arduous and full of ingenuity. But you would need to understand many Engineering and Physics principles to grasp that. They haven't even sought to standardize something as plain as phone batteries and you're suggesting moving up the complexity chain to the highest order of extremities.

@@user-uu6bi4tn5o But the Aluminum Air battery would have to be swappable. Cars would have to build around a standardized battery pack, limiting the design. Lithium packs can be build as part of the structure of the car and customized for every vehicle.

@@thtiger1 the government cannot dictate industry in this way. Ut has not been done for phones as a results given that innovation dictate requirements. EV innovation is a hotbed of engineering and techonigical ingenuity which means tweaks to optimise are required, which means flexibility to upgrade cannot be hindered.

@@thtiger1 structural pack's may well move things in this direction I don't know but battery designers worst nightmare is you coming along, limiting their space envelope and giving them unachievable requirements alongside. You simply cannot place such restrictive dictates on innovation industries.

@@user-uu6bi4tn5o Never suggested they would. Industry itself would do so if it were needed. You don't see different sized nuts and bolts on every single car. they all use the same standardized fasteners. At most you will see special security heads that require a special tool to remove them. Same goes for other components.

You should, these ‘air’ batteries have a life shelf of 35,000 miles until they are replaced.

I think batteries will always be of lithium, you hear every week that researchers have found a new wonderful battery that is made of different materials, these are scams, the team of researchers wants people to "invest" there it is! they just want people's money

@@Zo-hc2fn ...Zodiot... that is like saying... I think we will always ride horses! DONK!

@@DormantIdeasNIQ alright, but every week we hear that they discovered a new great battery, none came to fruition, who is the fool?

I agree. Instead of comparing a lithium-ion electric car to an aluminum-air electric car, the better comparison is internal combustion vs. aluminum-air electric. To make it a 5-minute swap, A-A batteries need come in standard sized modules, where the number of modules to swap out when it's time to "gas up" depends on the size of the vehicle. IIRC, in the earliest days of gasoline engine cars, oil companies tried to monopolize by having unique tank nozzle systems, forcing a car owner to only fill up at their oil company owned stations. Today, fuel nozzles are standardized so it doesn't matter what brand of car you drive or station you visit. I think the same needs to happen for A-A battery systems to be accepted.

Yes. .Blessings & Thanks.

I have a 2,000 mile range with my freightliner and 280 gallon fuel tanks. I'd love to put solar panels on top of my cab and sleeper and put batteriesI have a $2,000 mile range with my freightliner and 280 gallon fuel tanks. I'd love to put solar panels on top of my cab and sleeper and put batteries in place of my fuel tanks. With a generator or even with an apu, a good battery pack and solar regeneration could give unlimited range with the most efficient use during sunny daytime. I'm looking for the best drive motor or motors to use in this application. Since my engine weighs over 6,000 lbs, I could put 6,000 lbs of battery under the hood, and another 1,000 on one side where I have a 140 gallon tank and keep 140 gallon fuel capacity for the apu/generator. If I could find a lighter battery (or storage unit) I could get even further ahead in this situation.

Whenever independent tests of tesla acceleration and range are done the cars don't quite live upto the tesla hype

@@allensaunders449 agreed what ever happened to EPA rating city and hi way miles separately.

@@allensaunders449 might you have some links to said testers?

Yep. And Lucid is right up there with them along with a couple of Chinese manufacturers.

JUST remember not too long ago lithium ion batteries were not so well known or excepted ,so all things being equal aluminium air batteries seem to fit the void in ev vehicles

@gnorweb The one reason electric motors aren't "better than internal combustion engines in every way"

Yay! An electric car that needs a manufacturer update every 6 months... then is considered obsolete by the manufacturer after 6 years and no longer supported.

unless the graphene can be as easily recycled as aluminum then it'll work doubt it though

Let me know what Stock symbol. Thanks

@@christophercardono6274 don't think there is one yet

@@christophercardono6274 (GMG) on TSX Venture Exchange in Canada

@@pavellelyukh5272 Thank you

Yeah like a computer UPS battery pack. Just make sure the batteries are recyclable. If you cannot recharge them.

@@ronb6182 While recycling the batteries would require a little more carbon foot print, the atoms are all there to be rebuilt. The initial build would be a bit more resource intensive, but over all a system like this could actually work great.

@@lyrapsi it's not so much about carbon imprint but recycle to keep aluminum out of the land fills. I'm not buying this so called carbon this or carbon that. Yes electric can be clean energy but I would not think electric is environment friendly. Too many unknowns about solar panels and the effect it will have on our weather. And wind energy failed Texas this past Winter. And how many birds are killed every day from windmills. There is no such thing as free electricity.

If you drive that little, you could probably just plug a regular EV into your regular home outlet and keep it charged up just fine, no heavy lifting required

I definitely could use a car like that especially because I drive 120 MI going to work and back home everyday

I would need to change every fortnight, and that's just for work driving.

No, it's too much waste with this throw away AL-O2 battery. And it would not be available in any region far away...

@@jerodoverfield9635 damn

Was thinking the same thing back when battery swap stations were being discussed a few years ago. Let me have a 550km+minivan with the option to put a 100kg/600km+ swappable extender AlO2 battery in the “frunk” or underneath via swap stations. Instant cure for range anxiety, but also heaven for those who live in apartments and can’t readily charge overnight/at work. Also really good for the car rental fleets as well while charging infrastructure is being built out. Even can be used in an emergency extended blackout situation… once the closed circuit supply/recycling chain is running, there’s really no downsides

Nothing wrong with mumbo-jumbo batteries.

Definitely. Since, it's only beginning and it's already better in my view than lithium ion batteries if petro/diesel stations can easily transition into swapping stations. With incremental changes if the world supports the technology, it can easily surpass current system in place because of recycling and safety advantage that comes with it. The cost of battery replacement and charging are also depreciated by swapping, basically outsourcing the responsibility of battery or having a subscription instead of purchase.

Something like a srive through car wash where it pulls you along the stages. No need for cash as can all be done robotically charged via reg plate

Under the system we have Money is God, so it won’t happen by killing the Golden Goose. Anything that make life easier is targeted for profit, cost more than gas Petrol.

Description is starting to look more & more as a fuel cell. Initial resources in; Reactions with O2; Produces power & waste material

it is absolutely a fuel cell. Aluminum air fuel cell. An interesting idea for energy transfer. But, not even rechargeable.

@@AlexFoster2291 Fuel cell as opposed to primary (non-rechargeable) battery because it uses atmospheric oxygen? OK, I guess that could be an useful distinction, but zinc-air batteries (used in, say, hearing aids) are called batteries, although they work on the sam principle. (Wikipedia article indicates that they are called fuel cells if the zinc electrode can be mechanically "recharged", that is, replaced.)

They called this aluminum fuel cells 30 years ago when this wacky idea got canceled first time because of costs . Still way to expensive to be practical.

He's*Selling* something sunshine; when did you last meet a truthful salesman?

I wondered about that because if the Al.air battery is not rechargeable, the 1000 mile range means a new battery at every 1000 miles. Um. Considering the cost of new battery packs presently, this seems like it might be a big bill. I did like that idea that aluminum is recycleable and plentiful. It is clear to me that we are on the brink of something wonderful in terms of hanging on to our cars we love so much. While the idea of standardization is appealing, I thought of the big AC/DC argument at the beginning of electricity usage. At the moment, everyone gets an electric bill. Everyone. Wouldn't you like to be the person getting the $ from every household in the country? There will be greed driving the choices. I wonder if the vehicles could be adaptable to different types/sizes of batteries while we make up our minds about which alternative we think is best. (The EU just passed a law requiring that cell phones all have standardized charging cables by a certain year.) I wrote down "aluminum air batteries" and plan to poke around and hear other points of view on this idea.

As Aluminum mixture chemically reacts, it has qualities of regular fuel. What is full list of initial resources; End resources/waste; Reusability Does the video, answer these questions ?

10min mark !! Hope video improves !! Starting to sound more like gasoline, vs electric ! The resulting sludge, could be a great waste. Similar to emisions from gasoline !

@@dirktween244 The video does address this, yes.

30-60 miles for TWO gallons??? What are you driving, a supercar at breakneck speeds? BS. ONE gallon should get you at least 60 miles in a modern average family saloon.

@@saiello2061 3.8 litres / 100 km? No family sedan gets that level of fuel economy. 8 l/100 km, I can accept as common.

There are also areas without a sufficient electric grid to power big EVs. Developing nations etc

@@TwoBitDaVinci So why not build a bunch of said aluminum air batteries mostly for export into said developing nations? Mostly for export, but also for use as range extenders for fitting into conventional EVs.

Agree it cost me less than $2.00 per day in my sustainable electric use from home. vs old 4 tanks of Gas per month, I spend less than $50 now with Electric vs old $240 per month in Gas.

@@TwoBitDaVinci Its cheaper and simpler to build solar/wind charging stations or home installations than Al recycling facilities.

I think batteries will always be of lithium, you hear every week that researchers have found a wonderful battery that is made of different materials, these are scams, the team of researchers wants people to "invest" there it is! they just want people's money

Good idea about "standard units" But name me three "standard battery packs" for cell phones, or 3 of the same battery charging plug ins, or 3 of the same starters, generators, fuel pumps, tires, etc, etc. etc for standard cars.

@@hardset-vi3ze That is the second issue with swapping: you cannot swap a battery with one that has different technical specifications without testing it. that is even if the batteries have same dimensions and plugging system. Relying on a standard model will negatively affect competition and development which requires drastic changes. I opt for fuel cells and flow batteries which allow to fill a tank with a liquid that generates electricity.

If they were 25 lbs each 8 per car to = 200 lbs most people would be able to replace them, but if that doesn’t work I think they should stay in larger machines, or as a 1.5v battery alternative

That would be the Volt (I have a ‘19, and drive 95% electric).

@@kenhenningsen1 thanks, was close but no Cigar on that one!

Super capacitors could harness lightning as an energy source. They could recharge by bleeding the charge off of clouds before they build enough energy to spark.

But graphene production is very expensive. But some chinese material companies have started producin it

@@ripper5941 It is getting much cheaper as larger production facilities are completed. At scale it will be far less expensive than lithium and FAR better for the environment.

@Allen Loser I was under the impression that Graphene based super capacitors are ⅓ the size and ¼ the weight for the same capacity of traditional large capacitors, so are they still going to be heavier for the same storage capacity? They also can be charged if a fraction of the time of normal batteries, so even if I have to stop twice as often to recharge, I would prefer charging every 150 Miles for 2 minutes, rather than every 300 miles for 45 minutes not to mention hours in line to even get to the charger because of such long charge times. Integrated solar panels, micro wind generators and regenerative braking could all be added as well. I think the environmental costs of lithium are also another factor making other technologies a must for the future.

@Allen Loser yikes, I guess they still have some work to do lol

Why bother when petrol engines work so well? -Unless you buy all that global warming religious mumbo jumbo.

@@vhawk1951kl I believe the science. And no one with any integrity and intelligence can deny burning petrol and diesel isn't harmful to the environment. What happens when you pipe the exhaust into your car? You die. The planet is dying just the same.

Excellent point! Cell phone technology gave all of India access to phones without the old world method of telephone poles and wires. Why not bypass charging stations everywhere in developing nations, and have battery swapping locations instead.

@Bohica Johnson Gallons needed=300÷mpg

The same could easily be said for the trucking industry.

And for trains!

They'd then make one that is a plaid edition and comes complete with all the mp3's of the irish rovers who was first to introduce plaid even though they didn't invent it, they reinvented it.

Also doesnt know difference between anode and cathode ( or is it just the U.S. influence ?)

@@paulhousden3825 To be fair, I still sometimes have to use a mnemotechnic trick "kovina ka katodi" (" metal towards cathode" in Croatian) to remember which is which.

Yeah I agree I think it’s fine for most.

MORE range is better. I want a model 3 with 8 billion miles of range

John Cahill On my longest commute, it was 1.5 hours one way. That was about 80 miles with traffic. I think you are spot on.

More range is good, but if the smaller battery could charge at a sustained 350 Kw, I'd take a shorter range al-ion battery and blisteringly fast charge time over just straight range. Lots of 350 Kw chargers in my area now.

While this might be enough for you but those who travel long distances on the weekend (New York to N/S Carolina or even all the way to Florida) 322 mi range is nowhere near enough. In order to move away from ICE the current iteration has to blow it away so there is no looking back. I'm glad they are able to reach for 4x-5x the range of ICE so there is no question no reason to stick with ICE.

Agreed Swapnil, if it has worked for LPG cylinders (the swapping of standardised cylinders) it can work for battery swaps as well

The most common aluminum ore is bauxite, which is an hydroxide form, so a spent Al-air battery would be like starting with a super-pure ore. Most of the "Bayer process" is designed to remove impurities and could be skipped, so calcination (extreme heating) would convert the hydroxide to pure aluminum oxide. From there the "Hall-Héroult process" produces aluminum metal via electrolysis.

perhaps have to solve the corrosive and hazard processes...flying a fire bomb? hmm, will pass, thank you

@@Johnny-dp5mu There are already certified electric aircraft (e.g. the Pipistrel Alpha) on the market, flying with lithium(!) ion batteries, which is a much greater fire hazard. Aluminium chemistry is a lot safer. Take a look at the rechargeable Al-ion battery from Stanford (with graphite cathode and AlCl3 electrolyte): you can cut into them with scissors and nothing burns. Furthermore, dendrite formation and heating are much less of an issue. The main challenge with aluminium is anode corrosion ("passivation layer"), but this affects battery efficiency (not safety!) and it doesn't seem unsolvable either, e.g. by using some of the new non-aquaeous electrolytes / deep eutectic solvents (e.g. aluminium chloride - urea). Safety is actually a big pro! And the cheap and abundant materials!

@Allen Loser Not sure what you're trying to say. I only mentioned the Pipistrel Alpha Electro because another commentator (@Johnny) was expressing safety concerns, so I was just pointing out that electric flight is already a real thing in certified aircraft (which says a lot, considering that aviation authorities like FAA, EASA or CASA/Australia tend to be rather on the paronoid side of safety), not to mention many other electric aircraft that are going through this process as we speak. I didn't say anything about efficiency. No idea what you're comparing against. Piston engine airplanes? Jets? Electric cars? Whether something is good for the job will largely depend on the mission. The Pipistrel Alpha is quite okay for flight schools (pattern training). Cross-country flying? Ehm.. no. And when you talk about "get(ing) off the ground": then you haven't seen the inefficiency of all those new eVTOLs yet. That's by necessity, because vertical take-off requires a thrust-to-weight ratio >=1.0, whereas fixed-wing concepts are quite happy with something as little as 0.2 (even the huge Airbus A380 has a thrust-to-weight ratio of only 0.227!). Take-off ALWAYS requires more energy than cruise flight. This is true for ALL propulsion methods and not specific for electric aircraft. BUT: the Pipistrel Alpha even supports recuperation during decent (generator effect through windmilling), much like regenerative breaking in cars. Show me any other (=non-electric) aircraft propulsion method that can do that! Btw: cruise speed is published as 108 kt (not 85) and there are several test flight videos confirming that. So again: where were you going with that, i.e. what are you actually trying to say?

@Allen Loser Btw: the potential for increased range and endurance was the very reason for my initial comment. Aluminium can give up three electrons; with lithium it's just one. The specific energy (Wh/kg) could be MUCH higher with aluminium batteries. Ultimately, gravimetric specific energy will dictate how quickly electric aviation will be more successful. One of the challenges with aluminium is that it (=the anode) tends to corrode quite quickly (=building a "passivation" layer of aluminium oxide). The aluminium air battery by nature is no solution for many charge cycle. Many chemistries are even for single use only ("primary cells"). The better solution with aluminium are probably aluminium ION (not "air") batteries in an oxygen and water-free environment, using non-aqueous electrolytes, such as deep eutectic solvents and ionic liquids (e.g. AlCl3-urea / butyl-methyl-imidazolium-AlCl4). Both Stanford university and an australian company have recently shown promising results. Another cool thing: the material are much cheaper than with lithium chemistry. No fancy rare metals required.

And it needs to be melted down once depleted. Not exactly good for the environment.

@@profounddamas he’s clearly done a lot of research on the topic, and he’s compiled it in a very digestible video, which takes massive work. Hence great report.

I too am hoping for a 450+ mile range Model Y but I have been listening to reports that they will likely make the battery packs smaller while adjusting the range minimally to increase profits 😣

@@myfiller269 That's a good point. I own some Tesla shares, but I am glad to see Ford make a big investment in EV to force Tesla to compete on price. It's all coming down to battery factories.

@@myfiller269 Or more likely to reduce costs while increasing range a bit while also making the vehicle weigh less for better performance handling wise. But can also draw the power off the battery at a MUCH higher rate meaning you can use higher horsepower electric motors/controllers without overheating. I believe Tesla is projecting that they will be able to push hundreds of more horsepower out of the same motors they are presently using.

Well, they haven't so far. Electric cars ruled the road... 120 years ago. With almost 2-1 ratio. But gasoline and diesel-powered won. I'm all for other tech, but I have to take off the rose colored glasses.

yes

I think he flipped his conversion.

I had to stop and run the conversion when I heard that too. Don't think so buddy.

Ricky, please let us know what you really meant...

D'oh!!! yeah he did ... unit conversion fail!

There's no such thing as a perfect electric car, as they run on your local grid power source. For example: nuclear generated electricity, rainforest tree-burning generated electricity, and surprisingly the least offensive option, COAL generated electricity. The electricity used to charge these batteries doesn't just come from some mystery place nobody really sees, it comes from your local electric company, just like the power in your home. Food for thought.

@@GetOuttaTheJohnBoy Oh stop, your giving the snowflake bad dreams 😄 OK let me add one more. Definition of Bio-source energy: Cut down trees to burn in a Bio-source Power Plant add chopped up old tires to make wet wood burn hotter. Just don't tell anybody what the fuel source is and you have a snowflake dream come true.

@@paulcoenen7918 I kinda already said that, but good one, anyway.

Hey Carl, despite the bitchy nature of the Leftists who are incapable of thinking for themselves, and thus swallow the narrative they're given, the Chinese will be doing as they always do, developing nothing. They decided long ago it is easier and cheaper to steal needed tech rather than invest in doing research themselves. Who outside of China uses Chinese computer chips? NOBODY! Hopefully the Left will wake up one day and realize we're going to be using petroleum products, anyway; so why not use our own instead of paying Russian market price for oil? Name-calling seems to make the Left feel better about themselves, and their Trailer Parks.

@@GetOuttaTheJohnBoyI am seeing it as trailer park leftists are the muscle....it is the limousine leftists that are the concern. Power . Over . You . Regardless...your on point. Great post.

Exactly, people Think IT is a question of either, but don't realise this is an ideal Range extender. You keep a smaller Li-ion battery for most of your diving and only Mount the Al-air battery when you need the range.

They tried market this about 30 years ago. Aluminum fuel cells have existed for a long time, they are simply just to expensive to use and buy because aluminum is expencive....

Yes.....the perfect “hybrid”. AL back up when Li battery low or when charging is unavailable - i.e. remote areas or in a blackout

remember the more complex the system the more that can and will go wrong, and be more costly, eventually fail to be viable...most engineering and research will continue until a combination works

This sort of info was hard to find. We need large scale plants where it happens to drive down cost. Also a standardized pack would help

@@TwoBitDaVinci yes but there might be a lower bound, that is as much as we want to drive down the energy we can reduce it up to x energy per kg of aluminum regardless of the procedure.

Yes. And If range is 1000 miles then user can have second pack sitting at home getting charged slowly for many days via solar - this could actually remove charging costs completely. Imagine vehicle costing zero dollars for fuel and comes with two packs when you purchase it

True, it won't cost the same.... it will cost LESS once full production efficiencies are achieved. They worked hard on the Producability of the 4680!

They tried to market this about 30 years ago and it failed because aluminum is way to expensive to be used in this manner.

@@erickessler6094 No, it will always cost more. It takes more electricity to make the aluminum than would be required to charge a Li-ion battery for the same range. So the electricity cost alone makes the Al-air battery more expensive. When you add on the cost of assembling, transporting, and installing the Al-air battery, it costs way more.

I think batteries will always be of lithium, you hear every week that researchers have found a wonderful battery that is made of different materials, these are scams, the team of researchers wants people to "invest" there it is! they just want people's money

@@Zo-hc2fn "Prototypes are easy [mass] production is hard" Elon Musk

I can't approve this enough!

Ok I guess you meant 600 miles is nearly 1 thousand km

@@murphyxd5795 I guess the same...

This is the comment I was looking for…

O yes I realized it was inverted

That stopped the video for me to see if anyone else caught that. I'm glad I'm not the only one.

@@SeanHollingsworth Same here, I went "whoa whoa whoa", stopped video and calculated aprox 375 mile range extension. Still a good result. Coupling Li with the aluminum battery should greatly reduce cost and environmental impact.

Yeah, misprint. Should be 1600km and 1000m.

All of my AA batteries have been rechargeable for about 7 years now. I'm just now getting to the point where I should probably replace a few of them.

Yeah, but it would be regular AA batteries that lasted a year before you needed to replace them.

@@valderon3692 Do you know how to dispose of rechargeable batteries correctly? does anyone?

@@valderon3692 That's not a regular AA battery, your batteries are rechargeable...they are special, just like you.

@@LG123ABC if a regular AA battery could power a cell phone for one year...we would be using regular AA batteries...don't you think?

The amount of air it needs to breath is tiny compared to the amount humans use. Or internal combustion engines!

If you live on a hill and work at the bottom, you can roll to work in a barrel and then climb up after your shift.

@@CrissaKentavr ICE still more efficient.