• news
  • FRIDAY OCTOBER 8 2004 12:08 AM

Alternative Fuel Source, on a Budget.

Submitted by DireChocobo

Edited by Shal

A physics teacher, and his students at Central High School in Arizona, have developed a self-sustaining system, used to fuel a hydrogen powered internal combustion engine.

The truck is hydrogen-powered and creates its own fuel from solar energy and water, a technical feat that rivals the advanced technology being researched by major auto companies and universities. The four-cylinder engine is tuned to run on hydrogen, which is produced by a hand-built electrolysis system mounted in the bed.

Teacher Cory Waxman and his students took four years to build the experiment, believed to be the only self-sustaining hydrogen vehicle that uses a conventional internal-combustion engine.

"Nobody has ever made a car that runs on sunlight and water," Waxman said. "There are other cars that run on hydrogen, but they don't make their own fuel."

Built for less than $10,000, the project has caught the attention of experts in alternative-fuel research.



Funded through private donations, these students have devised a system that auto makers, and other professionals have claimed would take another 20 years to be feasible.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Next

Comments
DireChocobo

DireChocobo

Fairburn, GA
July 2004

OCT 08, 2004 09:57 AM

Shalome said:

Cyberaktif said:

What is amazing about the news of some high school kids in Arizona building a car that runs on sun and water isn't the fact that the car runs on sun and water. What is amazing is that kids in this Arizonian high school have a teacher that cares enough to help them with a project like this. What is amazing is that the school didn't shut the project down and redirect funds to their football team. What is amazing is that their parents supported the project and let them work on something that most parents would consider a nonsensical waste of time that would be better spent filling out university apps to whatever university the parent went to. What is amazing is that these are high school kids, with no formal training, and so what if it isn't some revolutionary breakthrough - these are kids! Kids built this! If only more high schools supported projects like this, we might see students wanting to go to school for more than a brainwashing session and a place to hookup with friends.



I agree with these sentiments wholeheartedly. It's pretty fucking amazing in that context.



I agree as well. It would be nice if more schools took a hint from this, and followed suit. I know my H.S. was a worthless piece of crap, that currently has no chance to do anything even remotely close to this.

Snottlebocket

Snottlebocket

Netherlands
March 2004

OCT 08, 2004 11:02 AM

witchhunter said:

Truthfatal said:
I look forward to the day that the world runs out of oil.



More than likely you won't see it.

Unless you live to be VERY old.



not really, they're expecting that to happen in the next sixty years, a hundred max so its not that far off.

Ampersandwich

Ampersandwich

New York, NY
March 2004

OCT 08, 2004 11:29 AM

The only thing of any value my school science class did was teach me the words "bunsen burner" and prove that anything in formaldihyde is gonna smell on your clothes for at least the rest of the day.

I think the kids did a good thing, I think the media is scratching for a story.

Ta da!


PiratePete

PiratePete

Murrieta, CA
September 2004

OCT 08, 2004 11:40 AM

I currently have the most efficient, and environmentaly sound vehicle ever concieved, it's so efficiant that it pays for it's self a hundred times over when you concider its cost as well. Sure it may not have the top speed of some other applications, but the more it gets used the more efficiant it will become. All it needs is oxygen, water, and bannanas.



RIDE ON!!!!

...- .. -.- .. -. --. ... .- -- ..- .-. .- .. mad

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

OCT 08, 2004 11:50 AM

Snottlebocket said:

witchhunter said:

Truthfatal said:
I look forward to the day that the world runs out of oil.



More than likely you won't see it.

Unless you live to be VERY old.



not really, they're expecting that to happen in the next sixty years, a hundred max so its not that far off.


The thing that people always say is that "We will never run out of oil." Sounds ridiculous but it is pretty much true.

The only problem is that it makes no difference. The world does no have to run out of oil, it only has to run against a technological wall in extracting it from the ground.
In other words, if it takes more than 1 barrel of oil to extract 1 barrel of oil from the ground, we haven't run out of it, it is just no longer viable as an energy resource.

Then everything goes to hell, and mad max style raiders start cropping up to steal gasoline since it is now more expensive than gold love

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

OCT 08, 2004 12:00 PM

Also:

Kengineer said:
Etching a multi-gate cell to collect a broad spectrum, and therefore raise efficiencies into the thirties, is challenging and weill never be cheap. Never.



Says you, different manufacturing techniques are being developed all the time, and sometime in the future someone could develop a technique to make multi-gate's cheap and efficient using for example self-assembling encoded nano-structures or some such thing.

Just because it is hard to do with the level of basic scientific knowledge that humans have amassed so far, does not mean it is impossible.
Nobody expected man to create nuclear fission during the period in which he believed that fire came from wood, he would not even understand the simplest concept of the atomic model. robot

Helter

Helter

Chester, PA
OLD SKOOL

OCT 08, 2004 12:10 PM

baudot said:

Argument: You can't get enough energy out of a solar cel to pay back it's manufacture cost. In terms of energy and economics, it's a losing battle.
Simple refutation: Trees. They've been doing it since before humanity existed. Our solar cell technology may still be t3h suX0r, but to insist that the laws of physics prove that it can never be good when there's a counter example right in front of you is silly.



Except that *wasn't* the argument, not even close. The argument was that efficient solar cells will never be cheap. He simply made an aside about the fact that *MOST* solar cells will never produce enough energy to justify their creation. There was nothing about that never happening.
As for trees, trees are hardly an example of an efficient solar conversion. I don't know the numbers off the top of my head, but I think that we've already bested trees by a good deal in terms of how effecient our solar cells are.

waldo

waldo

I'm lost
June 2004

OCT 08, 2004 12:50 PM

Helter said:
As for trees, trees are hardly an example of an efficient solar conversion. I don't know the numbers off the top of my head, but I think that we've already bested trees by a good deal in terms of how effecient our solar cells are.


Missed the point. The point about trees is that they are efficient enough to build themselves.

waldo

waldo

I'm lost
June 2004

OCT 08, 2004 12:50 PM

sorry, multiple.


[Edited on Oct 08, 2004 12:52PM]

waldo

waldo

I'm lost
June 2004

OCT 08, 2004 12:50 PM

argh...

[Edited on Oct 08, 2004 12:52PM]

waldo

waldo

I'm lost
June 2004

OCT 08, 2004 12:50 PM

and there goes any chance of having my argument taken seriously smile

[Edited on Oct 08, 2004 12:53PM]

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

OCT 08, 2004 01:02 PM

Kengineer said:
2) "Inexpensive solar cells tat operate above an abysmal 30%" should be along shortly after fusion (never). The efficiencies we get now are miraculous. Each gate only works on one wavelength of light. Etching a multi-gate cell to collect a broad spectrum, and therefore raise efficiencies into the thirties, is challenging and weill never be cheap. Never.

In fact, most solar cell consume far more energy in their manufacture than they will ever produce in their lifetimes. Empirically speaking, solar cells are bad for the environment.



this is completely false.

modern solar cells pay back their energy consumption in a short period of time - between 1 to 4 years (depending on how much energy the cell is used to convert). even in the 1980s with less efficient technology, a solar cell would repay its energy within 5-10 years.

just go search for "energy payback solar cell". the payback debate was put to rest decades ago. solar energy continues to be the cleanest form of energy in the world.

the disadvantage of solar is that it's only really useful for stationary applications, like a home or an office building. for transportation, you can't really load up your car with enough panels. that's where research into other fuels or exploiting photosynthesis may prove itself.

X

X

Lansing, MI
February 2003

OCT 08, 2004 01:13 PM

s5 said:
the disadvantage of solar is that it's only really useful for stationary applications, like a home or an office building. for transportation, you can't really load up your car with enough panels. that's where research into other fuels or exploiting photosynthesis may prove itself.



i wonder if lots of solar panels were placed on the roof of the house and the hydrogen making equipment in the garague if it would porduce enough hydrogen to drive a resonable distance daily.

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

OCT 08, 2004 01:21 PM

you'd probably be better off storing the energy in batteries.

circus_fuck

circus_fuck

New York, NY
May 2004

OCT 08, 2004 01:30 PM

ive got a magic cardboard car that runs on imagination...

and love


bitches


Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Next

featured interviews