[–] [deleted] 2 points 45 points (+47|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
12

[–] Number1dududuNumber1 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

One thing that you see occasionally in Aus is gas assisted diesel. They have an LPG tank and an auxiliary set of injectors that pop a tiny bit of LPG into the cylinder. The diesel combusts, then that ignites the LPG which in turn ignites and un-burnt diesel. Up to 20% power increase and torgue as well as a decrease in exhaust emissions compared to a regular diesel.

0
3

[–] 2585140? 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Right, 44 is a little young to be called a fossil.

0
0

[–] mansausage 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The only workaround left is to make cars lighter and engines smaller. So, yeah, if you want to drive a "car" that pushes the limits, be aware that you'll be rolling around in a laying position in something that looks like a dildo.

He is of course right - otherwise the latest "workaround" wouldn't be adding an electric engine to create a hybrid.

5
23

[–] rhy 5 points 23 points (+28|-5) ago 

I love Elon, but this is bullshit. Don't get me wrong, electric is clearly the future. But we could technically be driving MUCH more efficient fossil fuel cars.

2
13

[–] Cynath 2 points 13 points (+15|-2) ago 

We may be nearing the practical limit tho. At what point does it become more cost effective to switch your engineers to electric than to keep pushing the boundaries of an archaic technology?

0
2

[–] Tantalus 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Depends on the subsidies and how many fingers you have in what pies.

0
0

[–] rhy 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Totally agree. Electric wins hands down for hundreds of reasons.

0
9

[–] Northvvait 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

The funny thing is that doing more with fuel is what got VW in trouble to begin with! They engineered an engine that ran on diesel that delivered good power running very lean. The catch is that the higher diesel temperatures and overabundance of air in combustion is what promotes the formation of NOx.

2
3

[–] blockchainlurker 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

Care to explain how you would make an internal combustion engine more efficient than it already is? Only 1 stroke of a 4 stroke engine helps you move forward. The rest is wasted energy adding new air/fuel and expelling the exhaust. While 2 stroke engines give you more power strokes per crank rotation, they don't burn efficiently and waste a ton of fuel. Unless you're talking about completely redesigning how engines function (which at this point makes no sense might as well just go electric) I don't see how you can make them MUCH more efficient.

0
3

[–] TheBrokenWorld 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

He has no idea what he's talking about. And, of course, people upvoat him because they have no idea what he's talking about.

0
0

[–] rhy 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I've seen numerous ICE redesigns that are greatly more efficient recently. Although clearly electric is the future regardless, for hundreds of reasons!

0
2

[–] whynotanon1 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Not really, MUCH is a big stretch. Gas has to obey conservation of mass. If a bunch of gasoline is burnt you can't reduce co2 or no output. It just doesn't work with the chemistry. The thing that has been helping us is lighter cars with smaller engines that burn fuel more completely. These are things that apply to all cars.

The internal combustion fossil fuel engine has been approaching an assymtote for the past decade, but in terms of emission and efficencies.

2
8

[–] ILikeMyDogNotYours 2 points 8 points (+10|-2) ago 

That's what they said about peak oil in 2010.

0
1

[–] mansausage 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Yeah, but we showed them by fracking and turning food crops into fuel. Fuck yeah, take that, hippies!

1
5

[–] Genr8r 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

I Tesla's are great, but I still can't figure out why biodiesel has not caught on.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 5 points (+7|-2) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
10

[–] organicgangbang 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Using corn as a biostock is utterly absurd and anyone who proposes it clearly knows nothing about biology or agriculture. There are several plants that clearly show this. Sugar beets for example produce an average of 714 gallons of fuel per acre, corn produces 354 gallons. Switchgrass produces 1150 gallons per acre. Please don't use the inefficiency of corn as a crop as a reason for why biofuels are impractical, because it's simply false and purposefully misleading.

0
1

[–] Imapopulistnow 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

And yet it is profitable to sell in the marketplace. Such mysteries of life.

0
0

[–] confusiondiffusion 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Biodiesel is made from vegetable oil.

0
1

[–] Earl_Harbinger 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Expensive to convert to usable product (and that's after the expense of sourcing the bio in the first place)

0
0

[–] tehpatriarchy 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I think the main issue is that bio-diesel is competing for the same land that is already used for other purposes such as growing food. On top of that the capture ratio of solar energy into plants is really really low. Like 1%.

Solar panels are an order of magnitude or more higher than that. And electricity can be made in numerous ways such as nuclear.

0
0

[–] Genr8r 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I should have been more clear. I completely agree that ethanol from corn is dumb. I have been intrigued by algae as a potential biodiesel feedstock. Algae addresses most (all?) of the concerns raised above.

As for the cost/complexity of converting veggie oil into ready to use biodiesel... people have been doing it in their backyard for years. Given the apparent awareness of algae as a possible feedstock and the simplicity (relative to petrodiesel production) of creating a market ready product, I am wondering what is missing to bring this to market scale (reasonable cost).

My guess is that it is hard to compete with a heavily subsidized 100 year old global industry.

1
3

[–] risingseraph 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

To the people saying that Elon Musk is wrong and that we can build better ICE, obviously have not seen the market. There are quite a few very stubborn people out there (mainly car enthusiasts) that want loud non efficient engines. The CVT engine is one of the better engines out there that provide good amount of MPG. Yet I see people dogging them because they are not loud. Are they pretty quick? Yes. Are they quiet? Yes. Are they basically gearless? Yes. For these reasons car enthusiasts hate them. But then again these people would talk crap about the Tesla as well. The other thing that has been brought up here before is that the batteries in the Tesla also have to be discarded and despite the Tesla being extremely powerful vehicle all while being electric, getting rid of these batteries is gonna be an issue. I would love nothing more than to have a reliable electric vehicle but right now the price of a Tesla vehicle is 60K and up. Also even though you don't have to deal with oil changes at some point the battery is gonna stop holding a charge. How long before you have to replace it and what is the cost of that? I have recently bought a car and did a ton of research and what I found was that the batteries in electrics and hybrids can be pricy once there is an electric problem and the car companies warranties runs out. So you are paying a premium for the vehicle and then paying a huge premium to replace a battery. What is shameful is that Volkswagon tried to game the system by faking emissions test while the rest of the companies had to find a way to get better fuel mileage while not failing the emissions test. What I find strange though is that Volkswagon really does not have super fast cars any way so them failing the emissions test is so crazy. My thought is VW tried to maintain a heavy luxury type vehicle and have fantastic mpg while having a decent car as far as acceleration and speed out there. The rest of the companies either cut the weight down (people feel heavy is more dependable and luxurious) on their cars or made them slower to allow better fuel efficiency. VW chose neither of those and took shortcuts. Can a better ICE be made sure, will everyone like it? Probably not, there are too many people out there that want loud fast muscle cars and giant SUV'S that sit high to give them the feeling of safety that small cars are not providing. To Tesla ' s credit he made the hatchback/wagon sexy and appealing for people in North America. Most of these types of vehicles that are marketed more in Europe are kept there only because Americans like their high riding SUV's. Anyway seems like some people are looking forward to not driving anyway so maybe the gears and sound of the car will not matter in a couple of years since most people will not be actually driving these cars since they will be automated anyway.

0
2

[–] Maxcactus 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

He is right. The experts in this field are cheating, so it is like an admission that they can not compete.

0
1

[–] mansausage 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Of course gasoline and Diesel engines can't compete in efficiency, as you can't prevent them from getting hot - and that heat is energy that does nothing for you. Unless it's really cold and you need that heat. Then Elon is gonna run into trouble.

The admission has been around for years. Hybrids. Car makers would not add electric engines if they could just easily improve their engines.

0
1

[–] m4tthew 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Or that MPG are important to buyers and Volkswagen, known for having vehicles with good emissions standards, doesn't want to lose business to competitors.

0
0

[–] allenlee 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Smart move Elon, but this is nonsense.

load more comments ▼ (6 remaining)