We have been experimenting with steam power at my university for the last month or so- due to a federal grant awarded to a graduate student in regards to the economic feasibility of making steam powered personal transportation.

The main engineering drawbacks for steam have never really changed- wieght- carrying water and the boilder neccesary for producing power, and then safety of those pressurized vessels (I am in class for welding pressurized vessels this semester as well as my usual engineering courses ).

During our research, we believe, due to strides in metalurgy and other materials development- and the idea that using the steam power to charge batteries, instead of providing direct locomotion, has come full circle to the point that most of us believe it can be done now.

The choices of fuel seem to be either hydrogen or hydrozine. These fuels can be made from water, with an amazingly small "carbon footprint" using either nuclear or other alternative energy sources. The industrial developement is now in place to make large scale production economically feasible as well ( meaning the fuel- not neccesarily the car or bike itself)

At this time, my class is debating actually building a steam powered- wait for it- MOTORCYCLE basedon an 1896 design, of all things- modernized a bit, if you can believe.

Our road blocks are not the same as those mentioned above- our concerns now are

1) Maintenance- you need to watch the systems closely, drain the pressure off each night, and always use distilled water
2) Ease of use- so far, our design takes about a half hour to build up steam and pressure to the point it can be used. Even though you can leave immediately, due to the battery/electric motor design, it still takes some time for the steam engine to recover and start charging again. those that want to just jump in thier car and drive 100 miles will have to pre-plan thier trips better. Get-away cars are best advised to leave the car all the way pressurzied.

All that being said- I thought I would take this to a political debate board, since this will have political ramifications, almost immediately.

1) Do you think the US buying public is distressed enough over fuel prices to make such a drastic transportation change?

2) Do you think the US and foriegn car manufacturers would be able to make the switch in an economically feasible manner for all customers? Or do you think new corporations will have to be formed in order to make this switch?

3) do you think there would be political hurdles to jump in regards to getting DOT approval for such vehicles?

4) Would you buy one- knowing that a mid sized car would get well over 150mpg?

Edited to add:

here is a link to the original "roper"

http://www.motorcyclemuseum.org/classics/bike.asp?id=3

1) Do you think the US buying public is distressed enough over fuel prices to make such a drastic transportation change?
Perhaps not quite yet. Besides, we've become lazy enough, that the maintenance and inconvenience factors listed may make it a no-sale.

2) Do you think the US and foriegn car manufacturers would be able to make the switch in an economically feasible manner for all customers? Or do you think new corporations will have to be formed in order to make this switch?
Well, some governments already have subsidies, tax credits, etc., for innovation in getting away from fossil fuels. Seems the rest would have to come from new companies to design and manufacture the products.

3) do you think there would be political hurdles to jump in regards to getting DOT approval for such vehicles?
I'm sure there would be, just as there would for any new vehicle that's intended to run on the road.

4) Would you buy one- knowing that a mid sized car would get well over 150mpg?
Maybe. Maybe not. It would depend a whole lot how expensive the vehicles are, the maintenance and other requirements, etc. Part of the problem as usual, is that the initial outlay is likely to be expensive, because of the new design requirements, and the fact that you want the steam to be used to charge a fuel cell system. As you know, those batteries are not cheap, and they require their own maintenance and replacement schedules.

A possibly much cheaper alternative, is one I saw in the NYT just this morning. It appears that two guys have come up with a compact, fairly cheap way to make 100% ethanol in your own back yard. A machine that can turn raw, inedible sugar from Central America into ethanol for use in cars. The MicroFuelr currently runs about $10,000, but they think that with subsidies and credits will cost half that. The fuel itself can be made for about $1 a gallon.

Now, there are some hurdles there as well, since currently 100% ethanol fueled vehicles are approved only for off-road, and racing car type scenarios. On the other hand, very little if any modification to a current internal combusion engine is needed for a MicroFueler fuel.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/technolo...amp;oref=slogin

Either way, it's going to be an interesting discussion as the cost of gas keeps climbing. Thanks, CR.

1) Do you think the US buying public is distressed enough over fuel prices to make such a drastic transportation change?

I doubt it. This quote from Wikipedia explains why:
Link.

People don't believe in alternative energy. Its as if the whole world is waiting for some one else to go first.


2) Do you think the US and foriegn car manufacturers would be able to make the switch in an economically feasible manner for all customers? Or do you think new corporations will have to be formed in order to make this switch?

I think the latter will start to happen, and then the new companies will be absorbed by the older ones. Essentially this has already been happening with electrical cars.


3) do you think there would be political hurdles to jump in regards to getting DOT approval for such vehicles?

No idea


4) Would you buy one- knowing that a mid sized car would get well over 150mpg?

If I could afford it, I would buy the most econmically viable design. If this were it then yes, I'd buy it.


My father taught me about steam cars when I was a boy. He has books which detail steam car prototypes which out performed petrol engines cars in almost every way. I distinctly remember one which was built in Australia in the 1960's or possibly 1970's. It could reach fantastic speeds and was based on the Maserati Bora. Shell bought the mans design and then nothing was ever heard of it again.

1) Do you think the US buying public is distressed enough over fuel prices to make such a drastic transportation change?

The last oil crisis brought in the little Hondas, so yeah, this time around alternative designs are in demand. I have a pressure cooker that takes about 10 minutes to build a head of steam. It's made of a cast aluminum alloy and has a very safe design. Include the hybrid braking technology in automotive design, and you've got yourself a decent car.

2) Do you think the US and foriegn car manufacturers would be able to make the switch in an economically feasible manner for all customers? Or do you think new corporations will have to be formed in order to make this switch?

Chevy just came out with a full-sized hybrid SUV. Ford has had a prototype hydrogen internal combustion engine for years, which needed supercharging with blowers. It's all in motivation to make things happen.

3) do you think there would be political hurdles to jump in regards to getting DOT approval for such vehicles?

I think this is done at the state level. Look at what California has done for vehicle emissions standards. I do think we need to get rid of Republican control at the national level. But that's just me, and perhaps the majority of voting citizens.

4) Would you buy one- knowing that a mid sized car would get well over 150mpg?

If I were still commuting, I would. That's over three times as much mpg than I get with a 650cc single-lung motorcycle.

Heh, you'd only need a two-gallon gas tank to make the typical driving range of today's vehicles. Make it 2.5 gallons for a reserve. Oh hell, bump it up to three gallons.

Also with all the torque of steam engines, think about how this will change the trucking industry and lower the costs of anything that needs to be transported. That includes just about everything.

Cheap electricity is the key for cracking water. Think solar and geothermal.

It wasn't that long ago that people heated their houses with boilers in the basement, fired by coal. With new designs, we could generate our own juice too. Maybe we could crack our own water with geothermal? Corporate and educational campuses could.

The best thing is that cars would have steam whistles, wooo-woooo!

FYI- three cylinder or four cylinder ECE (external combustion engines) are the most efficient- you can get that 98% number out of them.

What I am having an ENORMOUSLY hard time finding is a viable NON model locomotive engine to fit my needs- they only sell plans and blueprints, BTW- no one actually makes it- I wil lhave to machine it up from scratch. And, in a motorcycle- appearance and aesthetics are very, very important- and so far, all the steam engines I have looked at looked like Cheetahs butt.

I am betting in one year I have one. I am hoping for the equivilent of over 200mpg+ with an equivilent HP of a modern superbike- but wieght will be a factor, and how much of the water I can re-condense, not to mention cramming it all into a MC chassis!

I don't believe that we've reached that point and I'm not certain where that point is. Is it at $6 or $10 a gallon? I believe that we can hit the breaking point, but the American people at large, can put up with a lot.



I believe they can, though they need the appropriate framework to achieve that goal. Establishing a futures market in clean air and the environment would be a great start, not to mention putting into place, carbon capping and trading.



The political hurdles right now are huge. The biggest impediment is cost and quite frankly, the majority of people are not too keen on emptying their wallets for restrictive regulations and green vehicles. Part of the problem has to do with our mindset. It takes a long term view regarding cost and benefit. We pay for it now, or we will pay more later. The benefit is obviously larger than the cost, we just can't get past the high cost. I would buy a mid-sized car that would be more efficient. Our newest vehicle is over a year old, I believe that our next one will be a hybrid or a smaller vehicle.

I don't know, I think this one looks quite cool... I particularly like the train style drive rod!

Mine is truly hybird, using the steam to power a generator. And, it can't look like cheetah's booty- remember?

I am machining up some "jugs" this summer to start my project, and I am even getting some small re-imbursement for my time ( no where NEAR hourly rate- but hey- the metal and the electricity to do it is covered)

The real problem is how badly steam power has fallen behind in innovation, due to lack of marketability for so many years. Steam power is completely viable- but it has not translated into industrial capacity production since the Stanley steamer.

I will be experimenting with high- pressure vessels this summer as well, similar to the pressure seen in other storage mediums, such as CO2 or compressed oxygen.

the main thing that killed steam engines back in 1910, from what my research and my co-researchers have found- is simple materials tech- that is all. There just wasn't the materials or ability to machine to tolerance in the early 1900s that we have today.

There are some HUGE hurdles for me to jump on this one- and the expense is actually not that high- it is the brain sweat that makes it an issue.

Since it is a hybird- I have to cram alot into a very small space. I have to have a boiler, an engine, a generator, an electric motor and battery cells. I have to store water and fuel. I have given up on using hydrogen, and will use gasoline, and convert later if the design is succesful.

I live for this kind of challenge, it keeps me up at night thinking about it, and I daydream about it constantly.

I have basicaly put in my engineering parameters of what a 'win" is here- and defined what I want to do with this bike. It will be dual sport- for around the world adventure touring.


I am hoping folks like Authormusician buy into this idea, big time- I believe that is the market that will scoop it up, if it is feasible- as long as it is under the 10k dollar price tag.

To me, the biggest hurdle to marketability is buy-in cost. A "litre bike" runs very close or slightly over 10k dollars. Same with a 1000cc (litre bike) "dual sport"- such as the Suzuki V-strom or Triumph Tiger or Buell Ulysses.

I believe if the buy-in cost is similar- then the design is feasible.

If it is under 20k, that still makes it cheaper than your average non-sportster harley-davidson.

If fuel mileage is over the 100pmg mark, you make it under that "magic" 20k price, the maintanence is not more than the new Ducati (legendary for complex maintanence, the new 1098 and hyper-motard models specifically marketed as 'less maintanence)- that seems to be the buyer threshold for maintanance cost as well.

Also I will be doing a paralell bit of consulting on a car designed along the same lines, and will be doing 90% of the 'grunt" work on that- welding etc.

I have read about a micro steam turbine auto prototype on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wastewatts/ that makes instantaneous steam and excellent power conversion. The main problem with a steam car is that water freezes and would only be practical in tropical regions. If you think about a conventional automobile engine it is in fact a boiler and makes steam almost instantly. Most of the energy produced by gas or diesel is waste heat that could be easily turned into steam to operate a turbine that in turn operates a generator to run an electric motor. By regulating the water flow through the engine to optimum engine temperature the excess heat could be removed and turned into steam on a flash steam from the exhaust. Run the steam through a turbo charger connected to a generator and you have a hybrid. Engine size could be minimized and fuel consumption reduced by 90% in the tropics or for summer use only.

I envy your class work as I'm experiencing boiler problems myself right now. Last year I built an alternative energy steam plant to power my solar battery bank. I built my own boiler from a steam cleaner coil connected to a 9 gal. stainless steel steam tank from a scrap yard. There wasn't enough surface area to create steam efficiently and as a result I used copper tubing coils connected to this boiler. My heat is a free source of used motor oil, I built two burners, from a design found on the link I provided above, one under the steam coil and one under the tank. Now I have copper tube coils directly above the burners that make flash steam capable of running my 3HP homemade steam engine. I built the engine using a combination of junk parts including a 4 inch dual action air piston, the control valve for the air system and a two cycle engine with the same stroke. I simply had a machine shop connect the air piston shaft to the piston and it works like a charm. I use it to turn a 24VDC permanent magnet motor that is connected to the battery bank, I use a bridge diode so the electricity only travels to the battery and not turn the motor. The damned copper tubes keep melting when the water flow isn't regulated correctly so I need to replace them with stainless steel.

Edited to add: you and your class may find this link interesting http://www.otherpower.com/steamengine.shtml

We have prototypes of hydrogen powered cars – so I see no need for a steam conversion. Just burn the H2. The problem is, as you surely know, we do not have the electricity to make hydrogen fuel economically and will not have any time soon.

To the best of my knowledge the only one nuke plant out of a dozen applications has been approved by the Dem Congress. You are dreaming if you think we will ever have even enough power for our normal needs of lights and AC etc. In addition projects like Cape Wind here in MA are held up for 7 years by morons like Teddy Kennedy. Coal gasification is an option – and we have the coal but the upcoming “carbon tax” has most of that on hold waiting, as usual, for the Congress.

We are in deep trouble and nothing is changing. We are married to oil and we cannot even drill for more or build critical refineries. The outlook is bleak and out elected officials concentrate on the pork rather then doing out business.

The likely outcome on transportation issues will be that most lower income Americans will offset fuel cost by buying fair weather motorcycles, mopeds and similar forms of transportation. New technology is just too high cost for the majority of Americans with the economy as it is and major purchases will be determined by sticker price/economy goal and that means smaller automobiles for the less fortunate. Those who can afford hybrids will buy them and as they become used cars then lower income people will find them advantageous to buy over used gas guzzlers.

Americans love large cars and a hybrid gasoline/steam car that performs like autos as we know them today would be popular if they could be developed to run on say 50% improvement in gas millage. Steam power produced as I mentioned in my last post could allow such an alternative with less expense than the current trend of hybrids. Using all the energy of the gas including the "heat waste" could allow continued use of larger vehicles that operate more efficiently. Perhaps the heat energy from a gas/diesel engine could be used in other ways to generate power, many gasses expand with heat and cool rapidly to be recycled over and over as in a refrigerator, these gasses could be used to compress air. Take a look at this prototype http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive...rs/4217016.html and consider the power of a small gas engine doing part of the compressing along with the waste heat energy along with braking power being converted into compressed air. The use of flywheels to add surge of power for start offs from the red light could see a power equal to an engine ten times larger. Or, water could be used if an efficient condenser could be devised to allow recycling the same water over and over with a refrigerant in the water to protect it from freezing.

So far, what I have found- is that steam engines went static as far as research goes right at the end of the advent of the stanley steamer. No one has tried to go forward with the exception of nuke powered ships- which are 99% efficient! BTW- that means only 1% away from a perpetual motion machine.

If I can get a steam engine that is developed as a modern ICE (internal combustion engine) - I think I may be on to something/

Right now- the only steam engines being made are by hobbyists - period- and they are far more concerned with being period correct instead of the newest design.

I am not sure I am up to being the designer of new -uber-efficient small and powerful steam motors- but I am looking for science journals and engineering papers still!

1) No.

2) No.

3) Yes.

4) No.

The solution, as I see it, is in several parts:

Create restricitons on foreign sale of coal, oil, shale, and other energy resources. Domestic prices should be determined by actual cost of procurement and a rsbl profit by national PSC, not the market. When all of our projected energy needs are met for a given year, the balance of the supply can be sold overseas at market prices. If Exxon, etc., want to quit doing bus here as a result, we can start our own national energy company. The emergence of China and India are going to kill all fuel costs because of their increased demand. Coal prices are now going up, too:

"That flow is part of a vast reorganization of the global coal trade that is making the United States a major exporter for the first time in years and helping to drive up domestic prices of the one fossil fuel it has in abundance.

Coal has long been a inexpensive and plentiful fuel source for utilities and their customers, helping to keep electric bills in the United States relatively low. But rising worldwide demand is turning U.S. coal into another hot global commodity, with domestic buyers having to compete with buyers from countries like Germany and Japan."

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/13049...seas/index.html



We then build enough breeder reactors to retire all coal and fossil fuel power plants, leaving only hydro and nuke elec power for all utilities. The reactors would be owned by the US govt, utilties, oil cos. in a public/private partnership. They would be built in clusters in the western plains, away from people and ports and would be guarded by the US Army.

We would use our abudant coal resources as a source for conversion into diesel fuel, which process already exists in several forms. Our newfound nuclear independence means we will have enough electricty to make this happen. This fuel can be distributed using our existing fuel infrastructure.

While I think global warming is hooey, in deference to it, GM should license it's "Volt" plug-in hybrid tech to Ford and Chrysler and the Big Two plus One should build only cars and trucks using a small diesel powered generating motor, using the coal-diesel fuel, and electric motors and Lith-ion storage batts from the Volt system. This will cut way, way down on greenhouse emissions and such vehicles will get great fuel mileage.

Our oil and oil shale can be used to run existing cars until they crap out, to make plastics and other chemicals, with supply controlled by the PSC described above.

Problem solved.

While this is all very grandiose, I admit, now that China and India are sucking up the world's resouces, they are going to kill our cheap energy. I would so something about it, as our oil and our coal, etc., sits in our soil, and we do not need to get into a bidding war with China over using it.

Some will say this violates the spirit of free enterprise. Yes, it does, but our estwhile prices for energy where based in a time when 2/5s of the world was not using much energy. I am not willing to pay the market price and suffer shortages under these conditions, and I doubt most Americans are, either. Also, I am not inclined to give away my car and my freedom to travel. I want to continue living like an American, thank you very much.

1) No, absolutely not. Plus I think the giant brass bell attached to the hoods of these contraptions make them somewhat undesirable.
2) Again, no not really. I suspect most US Car Companies are not even capable of making a cow catcher anymore.
3) These things do explode... and this isn't a poof! little flames. This is FOOM! steam searing all in its path!
4) You couldn't get my Subaru away from me with a 911! You're certainly not going to get me in a car that requires tracks!

LOL @BA- but no, in fact, steam is no more explosive than that stuff that is sitting in the back of your car, waiting for the hollywood "money shot"!

And Quick- GM is "no load of hooey" to an Alaskan- we are getting slammed hard core by this GM stuff.


I mean, damn dude- we have been catching humbolt squid in Alaskan waters- you know how far north those are of thier range now?

It wasn't unusual to find a lost one now and again, moving up the japanese current- but now we are talking being caught with salmon in thier mouths and such- even worse, because those things like DEEP water.

The currents have been having holy heck being played with them- and it is adversely affecting the entire food chain now.

Don't have to be a GM scientist to notice it around here.

You keep losing me CR. If we can use H2 for engine power why burn it to make steam to power a car? Makes no sense. If you are studying engineering do the math.

Um, I am more interested in developing an external combustion engine that maximizes the benefits of external combustion before I am interested in using alternative fuels- let me put it that way- the advantage of a steam engine- is after you maximize the inherent design advantage for efficiency- you can utilize the fact that anything that burns can be used as fuel in an ECE (external combustion energy) - you can use wood, coal, gas, H2, etc- because fuel metering and timing/distribution is not so critical. Follow me here?

Get the right steam motor that is not based on a 1910 design with no developements since 1910, then change fuels if you want!

I don’t think its so much on potentials for work as it deals with other issues. With oil you have not only the fact its a finite resource that I think falls short of being renewable in any convention and its use is slowly returning the earth to high concentrations of CO2 which will have so many forms of impact. So eventually the amount of cash it will take to harvest such, along with growing demand from population increase and so on coupled to environmental impact to harvest such again will basically make it a moot point to do. This issue will become more important as we see with various nations trying to use it basically for whatever reasons such as blackmail ultimately I would think or some other kind of molestation, though this is age old and was a powerful point in WW2. A species of plant went extinct in Japan to make enough oil per plan per mission, and towards the end for Nazi Germany many missions were centered around basically trying to obtain oil and fuel, and I think with desert storm compared to say various genocides or ethnic cleansings its not safe to try and get more of it, or at least that’s my take on it.

I think that bioengineering of various microbes for energy production at say energy plant scale will be useful, say for producing hydrogen. I also think solar power will become more and more useful. Ultimately though it will probably be some kind of a portfolio type speciation event that leads to various winners here and there based on the environment, such as some cities becoming more and more dependent on say a certain fuel type such as biodiesel or what not.

As for transportation, well, it comes down to cost. I imagine that the pain of the economy right now is forcing more alternatives into the spotlight such as walking or using a bike, or hey maybe even mass transport! Though I think the next big thing will be a prius like minivan or what not. I hope at least that more efficient hybrid models become the norm.

The problem with external combustion engines is that they are low torque. In other words, you can't get the acceleration out of them like an internal combustion engine. Ultimately, this is the main reason why steam was never a good candidate for the automobile. Note that the Stirling engine is another type of external combustion engine that doesn't lose it's working fluid as it's used: superior in many ways to the steam engine. However, this engine also suffers from low torque-itis.

I suppose it is possible to use an external combustion engine as a generator and then use a electric motor for the drive system to solve the torque problem. However, this adds a lot of weight dropping the efficiency down to internal combustion levels.

It's all a question of trade-offs. When you push the accelerator, you expect the car to accelerate rather quickly. Steam power just doesn't do this.

However- I have a very, very light wieght electric motorcycle motor that makes 75 hp- instant torque and acceleration! The drawback is range- gotta recharge the batteries. So, an external combustion, or stirling engine (thanks- I had forgoten those as well- very well might be the solution- may owe you a biggie here Logo!) - it can be small, compact, and low hp- but continuous operation, at a constant RPM, to run about a 140amp generator/altenator- that will recharge the batteries at the same rate as drain at road speeds, which need VERY low hp numbers- the higher torque value/hp numbers are for overcoming inertia- you need very little HP to maintain 65mph on a bike on level ground with no head wind. I have ran a Chyrsler 300, and we were able to calculate it only took 15 hp to maintain road speed of 70mph with no headwind- but to get that 0-60 time we needed- had to go with over 400hp!

No because making a vehicle that could actually do that would be prohibitively expensive – no to mention that “burning” things other than H2 to make steam would have emissions that we certainly would not want.

Back to the drawing board CR.

Yes, you could use an electric motor/battery for your initial acceleration and then use a small combustion engine for regular drive. The small engine could be internal combustion -- it doesn't need to be steam. While you can probably make a steam engine be more efficient, the difference in efficiencies between small internal combustion and small steam engines is pretty small. Add to the fact that you can get replacement parts for internal combustion engines, I think that an electric/internal combustion hybrid would be your best candidate.