h a l f b a k e r yWe got your practicality ... right here.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Truly sustainable transportation is possible, but I have no
idea
how feasible it is. I believe the best way is through air
travel.
Air travel, though it requires a relatively small strip of
pavement to land on and air traffic control, is otherwise
free
from external infastructure -
much unlike the road and rail
construction and maintanance of auto and train systems.
Airplanes, helecopters, hovercraft and zeppelins, blimps or
whatever people call them nowadays can now able be
powered by renewable energy - either by powering electric
motors from solar panels imbedded into the surface of the
craft, extracting powering elements directly from the air
while
traveling, or through (renewable) fuel cells onboard. I
think
zeppelins seem to be the most promising. It's huge surface
area would be ideal for mounting solar arrays.
Theoretically
the boyancy of it's helium neccesitates less need for power
(however, what kind of effect helium extraction and refining
have on the environment?). Though they may not fly as fast
as
some planes, zeppelins still travel much faster than road
speed
limits and slow railways. Unlike most planes, zeppelins don't
require airstrips.
I think the biggest hurtle with any new system would be
making it cost effective. To date renewable energy and
flight
have been a luxury of the wealthy. If manufactorers were
able to make renewable airtravel available to the masses at a
reasonable price, and the space for aircraft landings made
smaller, then people would really take notice. Another
cost
inhibition is the fact the pilot licensing is very expensive.
Anyway, this is just an idea I've had brewing for a while now.
Any thoughts?
Catapult to woik
http://www.halfbake...atapult_20to_20Work
and everyplace else [thumbwax, Jul 02 2002, last modified Oct 04 2004]
Iceland moves to hydrogen economy
http://news.bbc.co....1727000/1727312.stm
A rather better idea for sustainable and clean transportation (though not as good as Catapult to Work, of course). [DrBob, Jul 02 2002, last modified Oct 04 2004]
Hullaballoon
http://www.halfbake...m/idea/Hullaballoon
[calum, Jul 02 2002]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
Zeppelin require huge hanger to house them and fill them with helium. Many times larger than an airplane with the same lifting power. And the hanger costs far more than air strip. |
|
| |
Moving air waste a lot of energy to move thing forward. If you think SUV are bad, the most effecient aircraft engine have even lower mileage per gallon of fuel. That is price you pay for speed. |
|
| |
Yes, I know the Solar powered Pathfinder plane, that seems like the direction you want to go. But even with lightest and strongest material you can find, it will take a lot more innovation in air-vehicle design to carry a human around using only renewable energy. |
|
| |
(The NY Times recently ran an excellent article explaining in detail why zepellins never realized their promise of safe, low cost transportation - no one has ever figured out an effective way to keep them from bobbing up when they eventually release their cargo.) |
|
| |
Did you calculate the amount of horseshit generated by people banging on about sustainable transportation? |
|
| |
The best prospect for sustainable transportation has to be electric vehicles powered by electricity generated by wind power, solar power, tidal power, hydro power, etc. Either that, or walking. |
|
| |
Bing, comparing a jet engine to an SUV in terms of miles per gallon isn't a very good analogy - you need to think of it in terms of gallons used per passenger mile (how much gas does it take, on a per-passenger basis, to move one mile). In those terms, a Boeing 747 (currently the largest passenger jet) is much more efficient than most vehicles on the road today. The numbers below assume just a driver, since that is most common. You'll see that the 747 wins by a large margin over the SUV and even beats out the Honda Insight. Start carpooling and the insight wins out, but who wants to make a coast-to-coast run at 60 mph in a cramped little gas-electric hybrid when the jet will get you there so much faster? |
|
| |
Range: 7260 miles
Gallons used: 57,285
Passengers: approx. 500
500 x 7260 = 3,630,000 passenger miles
57,285 G / 3,630,000 P.M. = 0.0158 G/P.M. |
|
| |
1 G / 22 P.M. = .045 G/P.M. |
|
| |
Efficient car: (Honda Insight) |
|
| |
Passengers: driver only (will hold 4, but not comfortably) |
|
| |
1 G / 60 P.M. = .016 G/P.M. |
|
| |
air-traffic-control? we have a problem with it in UK already, imagine if _everyone_ had a plane/blimp etc |
|
| |
Honda Sucks....
Thank You! |
|
| |