TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

A Model S with UNLIMITED range?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Limitless lnst, Feb 27, 2017.

  1. Limitless lnst

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Location:
    Caloundra, Queensland
    Imagine having ZERO range anxiety!

    This is your opportunity to influence the future direction of EV’s.

    There is a technology in the final stages of development, that as part of its technology 'suite' utilizes superconductors, which requires liquid nitrogen to function.

    The overall cost of the vehicles will be well below the cost of a current Model S, as the technology generates power on demand (up to 1MW) and as a result doesn’t require batteries or an inverter.

    There are two ways to supply the required liquid nitrogen:

    1. Recycle the liquid nitrogen (this will add $1,000 to the cost of the vehicle).

    2. Fill up a dewar (a specialized container for storing liquid nitrogen) on a regular basis, at a cost estimated to be $10 per week ($520 per year), from the equivalent of a 'gas station'.

    To have your say, on the future direction of EV’s, please complete a ONE QUESTION survey, based on the above, by clicking here: Liquid Nitrogen Options Survey
     
    • Disagree x 5
    • Funny x 1
  2. Lon12

    Lon12 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2015
    Messages:
    396
    Location:
    Calgary, AB, Canada
    I'm sorry, but I don't have any range anxiety with my Model S. Have you driven one?
     
    • Helpful x 1
    • Like x 1
  3. R.S

    R.S Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    Munich, Bavaria, Germany
    You'd still need the inverter, even if this were true. A super conductor would supply DC, while the motor needs 3phase AC. And anything from speed to torque control, needs the inverter to modulate voltages and frequencies by using PWM.
     
  4. jsmay311

    jsmay311 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2016
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    Chicago suburbs
    I can't figure out what the scam/joke is here. o_O
     
    • Like x 1
  5. HankLloydRight

    HankLloydRight Fluxing

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2014
    Messages:
    7,526
    Location:
    Connecticut
    The liquid nitrogen powers a dozen alternators.

    Or IOW, here we go again. :rolleyes:
     
    • Informative x 1
    • Like x 1
  6. Limitless lnst

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Location:
    Caloundra, Queensland
    Hi Lon12,

    I've driven a P90D, but now have my heart set on a P100D.

    BTW, with 'recycling' option there is ZERO need to charge your Model S anywhere - so you could treat it purely as convenience factor when you eventually upgrade.
     
  7. Limitless lnst

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Location:
    Caloundra, Queensland
    Hi HankLloydRight,

    I'm not wanting to get into a discussion on the technology, or sell anything, just get an opinion.

    But I can say this much there are no alternators involved in the design or patents.
     
  8. Limitless lnst

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Location:
    Caloundra, Queensland
    Hi ,

    Strangely enough, even though it might seem like a joke the US Patent office didn't think so when they issued patents on the technology.
     
  9. woof

    woof Model X 75D Blue, 6 seats

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,206
    I always found the alternator concept too difficult to rig up physically. Now wind turbines on the roof however...

    But seriously, if there are patents, what are the patent numbers?
     
  10. Limitless lnst

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Location:
    Caloundra, Queensland
    Although I'm referring specifically to the the liquid nitrogen aspect here, I did mention a technology 'suite' that does enable us to directly generate 3phase AC power.

    The technology also generates power on a millisecond by millisecond basis. But I'm saying way more than I would like to AT THIS STAGE.
     
  11. CSFTN

    CSFTN Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2014
    Messages:
    615
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    You understand the laws of thermodynamics, and that any version of a perpetual motion machine is impossible?
     
    • Helpful x 1
  12. Limitless lnst

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Location:
    Caloundra, Queensland
    Hi CSFTN,

    Yes, well aware of the second law of thermodynamics.

    And this is definitely not a perpetual motion machine. The technology will very quickly stop functioning without the liquid nitrogen.

    The patents would not have been issued by the USPTO if they believed it to be a perpetual motion machine.

    The purpose of the post was to simply confirm my thoughts that people would prefer the 'recycling' alternative, not get into a technical discussion.
     
  13. S4WRXTTCS

    S4WRXTTCS Active Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2015
    Messages:
    1,820
    Location:
    Snohomish, WA
    What are the patent numbers?
     
  14. jsmay311

    jsmay311 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2016
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    Chicago suburbs
    Just cuz something has a patent doesn't mean it will work. Hate to break that to ya.

    Regardless, idk wtf we're even talking about here. Apparently it has something to do with magic nitrogen that will maintain ultra-cold temps needed to keep it in liquid form without requiring huge energy inputs to keep it cold, and that magic liquid nitrogen powers an EV with endless energy via a "suite" of "superconductors"?

    WHAT????

    :D
     
    • Helpful x 1
  15. brianman

    brianman Burrito Founder

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    15,955
    1. Effortless, break even in 2 years.
    2. Effort 52x / year, wasted money after 2 years.

    No brainer?
     
  16. Zetopan

    Zetopan Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Messages:
    77
    Location:
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    As physicist Bob Park pointed out some years ago, an average of a half dozen perpetual motion machines get granted patents every year. If anyone is interested, I can supply the patent numbers for several perpetual motion machines that were granted patents over the last couple of decades (I do not have them handy right now, but I could get them together in a day or two).
     
  17. HankLloydRight

    HankLloydRight Fluxing

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2014
    Messages:
    7,526
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Ok, so what energy/device keeps the liquid nitrogen a liquid? Where does that energy come from?
     
    • Helpful x 1
  18. wdolson

    wdolson Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    3,604
    Location:
    Clark Co, WA
    This sounds like bunk. Superconductors are amazing and there are some really trippy things you can do with them, but the ARE NOT a source of energy. Superconductors have no resistance at all which allows perfectly lossless transmission of electricity and there are some interesting effects with magnets which comes out of this, but that doesn't mean you can extract energy out of a superconductor you didn't put into it.

    For any vehicle, you need a source of energy to move the car. Using superconductors in an EV would make the losses between the batteries and the motor almost zero and might enable faster launches. But the superconductors are just replacing the copper wire. You still need a battery or some other energy source, or you just have a very cold brick.

    The liquid nitrogen is necessary because the class of superconductors that came along in the 1980s worked up to that temperature. The first superconductors required liquid helium, which is much, much colder, very close to absolute zero, the coldest temperature possible. It was a big breakthrough at the time, but the tech stopped. The holy grail is to get superconductors that work at room temperature or even warmer, but the tech is at a dead end getting any warmer than liquid nitrogen temperatures. If the superconductors are allowed to warm up past the temperature of liquid nitrogen, they quit superconducting and actually end up being kind of insulators.

    This is like one of those stories someone hears who doesn't quite understand the basis of the story and then they go and repeat it getting some major details wrong.

    Making liquid nitrogen requires a fair bit of energy in and of itself. It isn't tough to make as the atmosphere is 78% nitrogen, the raw material is literally all around you. The air needs some pretty hefty cooling units which take energy to run and then the nitrogen is distilled from the oxygen and other gasses. Then the nitrogen needs to be kept cold, really cold at -320F (-196 C), which is cold enough to do severe damage to living tissue as well as make many things very brittle if exposed to it. A liquid nitrogen leak could be very dangerous because of the extreme cold temperature. Things on the car can become brittle and shatter from the cold and it would be very bad it you got it on your skin.

    The OP still hasn't told us what the energy source is. If they think it's either the N2 or the superconductors, they are misled. Neither can be energy sources.
     
    • Helpful x 1
    • Like x 1
  19. bak_phy

    bak_phy Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2016
    Messages:
    246
    Location:
    New Jersey
    I don't think that keeping the liquid nitrogen cold is much of an issue. It "just" has to be kept under pressure which can't be a big deal as you often see liquid nitrogen containers on the streets of NYC. I think they have something to do with the steam pipes below the streets.

    There used to be some talk of using superconductors as a type of battery. The idea was that you would create a ring and then send a current around it. Since there was no resistance it would keep going until needed. I'm pretty sure nothing ever came of it though and it's definitely not an energy source.
     
  20. UberEV1

    UberEV1 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2014
    Messages:
    304
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Here's what a quick search on Google reveals . . . different, no doubt; workable, probably; commercially practical, not yet:
    Earliest patent is from 1970, so the idea has been around a while. Liquid Nitrogen has been around even longer, so begs the question why this idea didn't fly 47 years ago. Still, an interesting concept.
     

Share This Page