9 ms·
> It just has too work, there is no place for a list of "buts" Of course there is! Here are some example buts for ICEs: Gasoline is a dense energy source, b
by Cushman 14y ago
> It just has too work, there is no place for a list of "buts"
Of course there is! Here are some example buts for ICEs:
Gasoline is a dense energy source, but...
it stinks.
it's toxic.
it's too noisy.
its price is too determined by foreign politics.
it puts high stress and heat on the car, requiring constant maintenance.
it's not shelf stable.
its performance is dependent on altitude.
- __--__ 14y agoNone of which matters a bit if you just want to take the thing on a 200 mile road trip. People do care about the things on that list, but they care about being able to get where they're going more.
- forgottenpaswrd 14y agoIt is a source of energy that not every country has enough. Most countries in the world have different sources of energy(from coal to wood, going through nuclear). The countries that do not have enough of it have to invent stupid excuses for invading the countries that do have, incurring in high costs while killing millions, because if not transportation halts and the economy nukes. It is a highly pollutant for cities, specially diesel particles that are carcinogenic, while on electric generation plants you could use particle filters that are very efficient and cheap, and also far from where most people lives. It is very complex and things breaks a lot. You need to change the oil frequently, drive belts and also the brakes while with regenerative braking they last forever.
- MikeCapone 14y agoAnd the list goes on! But from an engineering point of view, I just don't find ICEs elegant. Too many moving pieces, and all that for about 30% efficiency (the remaining 70% is lost as waste heat). Good thing gasoline is so energy-dense, because when you're wasting 70% of your energy, you need that.
- bkanber 14y ago30% is roughly the peak efficiency of an ICE. Average efficiency throughout a driving cycle is more like 17%.
- Arelius 14y agoIt turns out, however that when you're talking about transportation, energy density is much more important than efficiency generally speaking.
- sliverstorm 14y agoICEs are, at their core, plenty elegant. The trouble is efficiency and low emissions are not their strong points. I would argue that efficiency and low emissions do not preclude something from being elegant. Steam plants can also be elegant, and they can be extremely efficient and low-emissions, but a steam plant cannot be bolted onto a motor car or a small aeroplane for which a turbine would be inappropriate. All forms of heat engines have their upsides and downsides. Anyway, at the end of the day, consumers don't care one iota about engineering elegance.
- dredmorbius 14y agoThe biggest ongoing problem is going to be CO2 emissions. Given few alternatives to ICEs (EVs and hybrid vehicles are available, but unsubsidized TCO remains higher, and even accounting for carbon costs may be higher, I'd have to research that), we're going to have liquid-fueled vehicles for a long time. The real question is where that fuel will be sourced.
- sliverstorm 14y agoCO2 emissions is coupled to gasoline, not ICEs. Hydrogen ICEs do not give off CO2.
- danielweber 14y agoThe emissions are going to come from wherever the energy is made. I'd like to see efforts at using energy sources to manufacture gasoline from environmental sources of carbon, making the fuel carbon-neutral. How does that compare to electric vehicles?
- sliverstorm 14y agoOk, fine, if you burn coal to produce hydrogen, yes. Hydrogen fuel then indirectly produces CO2. There have been efforts to do this; basically any form of biodiesel that is produced by bacteria can probably be considered carbon-neutral.
- dredmorbius 14y agoBut for all of that, liquid hydrocarbons offer among the best weight/volume energy storage capacity available to us. The alternatives: EVs, LNG, hydrogen, compressed air, flywheels, etc., just don't hack it. For an efficiency perspective, the next best bet is human-powered vehicles, but these aren't an option for all people. Transit and dense infrastructures are your next best bet. While I see us moving from fossil fuel, I still see liquid fuels playing an important role in mechanized transit (ground, water, air) for as long as we're technologically capable of doing so.
- teeja 14y agoI share your dislike of ICEs but you are being far too kind with that 30%. At best 20% is (high-end) typical. Which means that for every 5 gallons of fuel you feed it, it throws away 4. That is SUCH poor engineering that it's verging on insane that we've embraced these stinking, finicky beasts long enough to destroy most of the planet's (easy) fossil fuel reserves.
- thrownaway2424 14y agoIt sounded like the guy from the Times would have welcomed as much "waste heat" as he could get his hands on.
- wikwocket 14y agoSpoken like an engineer: your points are technically quite correct, and yet, often irrelevant to the consumer! For the average consumer of automobile technology, these are non-issues. Logistical and pricing issues are moderated and subsidized by governments and car manufacturers. From the consumer's point of view, you go to a gas station once a week, and the car "just works." As superior as an electric system may be technically, economically, environmentally, etc, if you want it to take off, the UI and logistics need to be smoothed over until you get a similar level of "it just works" which matches the consumer's experience with gasoline.
- marcell 14y agoIrrelevant to the consumer? Hardly: > it stinks. > it's toxic. > it's too noisy. These three points affect anyone who lives near heavy automobile traffic. Just because it's an externality doesn't mean it doesn't exist! > its price is too determined by foreign politics. When gasoline prices doubled from $2/gallon to $4/gallon, people certainly thought that was relevant. The price spike is partly responsible for the rise in hybrid vehicles. > it puts high stress and heat on the car, requiring constant maintenance. Oil changes every 5k miles and major services every 15k don't qualify as "just works" in my book. > it's not shelf stable. I'll grant you this one is irrelevant to consumers.
- lisper 14y ago> this one is irrelevant to consumers. Not if I want to put my car in long-term storage. Then this, too, becomes quite relevant.
- icelancer 14y agoCan we stop acting like this is a problem when $5 chemicals off the shelf at your local auto parts store fixes this problem?
- simlevesque 14y agoYes we can.
- lurkinggrue 14y agoI do like the idea of Electric car as a fuel abstraction layer. Say a proper hybrid where it is fully electric motors but could be run completely on a fuel generator that could be any sorts of fuel.
- sliverstorm 14y agoAll but two of these things have ceased to be a problem for many years. Gasoline cars of today are extremely reliable and generally very quiet. The primary source of wear is road abuse on the chassis, given you keep up on oil, and any engine requires lubrication. The primary source of noise on the freeway is wind and road noise. Many of the other issues with gasoline- smell, toxicity, stability- have been largely addressed by the distribution infrastructure. Oh, by the way, gasoline isn't all that toxic. It is more hazardous for its volatility rather than any poisonous properties for humans. Last thought- one of the two things that are still an obstacle (performance at extreme altitude) is firstly always going to be an obstacle for any type of combustion engine and secondly addressable with a turbocharger if you care enough.
- sreitshamer 14y agoJust in case someone thinks drinking gasoline is OK to ingest after reading your comment: "Inhaling or swallowing large amounts of gasoline can cause death." http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=467&tid=83 http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=467&tid=83
- sliverstorm 14y agoInhaling or swallowing large amounts of water can also cause death. :)
- Synthetase 14y agoI challenge you to drink a glass of gasoline.
- sliverstorm 14y agoAnything for meaningless internet points! ;)
- jlgreco 14y agoHow long do I have to keep it down? ;)
- dhughes 14y agoAn (really?) "ICE" aka internal combustion engine isn't limited to gasoline it can also burn alcohol, natural gas, propane and I'm sure many other less smelly fuels. Diesel is another but it's a bit smelly although I was behind a Mercedes diesel SUV and didn't realize it until I read the rear badge, no smell at all. Although bio-diesel or even straight vegetable oil can be burned since Rudolph Diesel intended the diesel engine to run on peanut oil so farmers could afford the fuel.
- mgarfias 14y agoSome of us like the noise.
- usaphp 14y agoToxic? You should see how the batteries for electric cars are made, they are much more toxic than gas...
- dclowd9901 14y agoThe "buts" that come with the ICEs don't tend to directly contradict the baseline purpose of the car, though.
- namdnay 14y agoI agree with the gist, but a modern car's performance won't degrade with altitude: the ECU controls the engine's air intake pressure, so you might get a bit of extra wear on the forced induction system from the extra compression needed, but I don't think you'll see a perforamcne drop.