new rotory car confirmed for mazda for tokyo auto show
 

sorry rotor heads that are expecting a new rx7.

Mazda Motor Corp. has a hybrid minivan with a rotary engine fueled by gasoline or hydrogen.

but....
RX-8 Hydrogen RE -- This is the latest in a series of hydrogen-fueled, rotary engine-powered RX-8s from Mazda. The hydrogen system is essentially the same as that shown at the 2004 Tokyo show. This year's car can run on either gasoline or hydrogen. Two hydrogen tanks together provide a cruising range of 62 miles. If they run empty, the car automatically switches to gasoline and can go for another 341 miles. Mazda will lease it to selected customers in 2006.

Senku -- This concept shows a possible evolution of the RX-8. Designed as a sports car for mature drivers, it features oversized "flying wing" doors that slide to the rear. It would be powered by a hybrid system based on a direct-injection rotary engine.

http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=103360

Rotary Minivan... :O

And Rx8 can have a cruise range of 341 miles on gas???? I can't even get 300..... or close.

You didn't know you are suppose to be coasting downhill with the engine off? :rolleyes:

see the other on going threads about this for more info and discussion

Does anyone know if there is any talk of using Methane (Compressed Natural Gas) instead of hydrogen? Still a fossil fuel, but should burn a lot cleaner, and is a lot easier to get.

Doesn't it also make like 40% of the power that gasoline does? Honda built a nice clean burning natural gas engine a while back, but it made like zero power. I think it would be a good start, but not for a sports car I don't think. How is the gas mileage with natural gas, what about prices? We need a fuel guru :D

Cleaner burning than Hydrogen? I didn't think that was possible.

I think he meant than gasoline, I think hydrogen probably cleans burner than anything.

Ya I meant cleaner burning then gasoline.

I know there would be a power loss w/ CNG, but for just cruising it might be nice to switch from the expensive stuff to the less expensive stuff.. ;)

I've driven one of the CNG Honda Civics.. personally it felt like driving any other 4 banger Civic.. very binary gas pedal.. push down (all the way) and it goes.. let go and it slows down.. :)

[of course the weight of CNG + Gasoline would probably destroy the RX-8's balance)

Everyone wonders why alternative fuels don't take off? Its because none of the alternatives have the same energy content per gallon as petrol. Hydrogen produced less than a 10th the energy of the same volume of gasoline, even compressed at 10,000 psi. Compressed natural gas is less than a 4th the energy of gasoline. Liquified natural gas is about 66%. The best is biodiesel, which can hit about 90% of a regular diesel fuel.

And the hydrogen fuel issue is pretty ridiculous, considering the primary way to make hyrdogen is through electrolysis of water, which just shifts the problem to powerplants. The other issue is that while gasoline will just catch fire on its surface, hydrogen will completely ignite.

http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/altfuel/fuel_comp.html

methane steam shifting is another method http://www.unb.ca/che/che5134/smr.htm and one i have taken a liking to in the last few days actually

more articles- http://www.google.com/search?hs=wkR&...t+&btnG=Search

Actually, I think the hydrogen yield will be excellent, once they figure out the right way to do it. Right now they're doing hydrogen engines the crappy way, where the byproduct is water. I want the *good* way, where the byproduct is helium. ;)

This is so clearly the biggest issue that I'm agog that they're doing any of this. The whole thing is such an utter crock.

Aw, come on, you don't want to drive the Hindenburg? :D

Well yeah, I can't argue with a Mr.Fusion drive that runs on banana peels and beer.

Even if/when break-even is achieved, it would still be a nightmare to consider what would happen in an accident. I sure wouldn't want to be irradiated with triton every time an engine blows.

thermal depolymerization
 

While not fusion, look up thermal depolymerization. Basically, it is a process that re-creates the high heat and temps that made crude oil in the 1st place.
In one side of the garbage plant goes trash, the other side out comes Texas Light Crude, refined metals, and water.

Only drawback: I calculated the numbers out given information by the patent holder, the US would have to produce 10-20 times more trash than we do now to have all of our crude oil supplied in this way.

yep just check out changing world technologies http://www.changingworldtech.com/. dan the trash is already there in the landfills. hell im sure just mining Jersey could supply us for many many years;)

Can't mine Jersey landfills. Too contaminated with dead Mob bodies. :D

And hydrogen is safer than gasoline in that it escapes UP rather than hug the ground like gasoline does. So if it does ignite, its burning above your head rather than around your torso.

yep and if i hear one more uninformed hindenberg comment i might bang my head against this keyboard.

Did you bang your head against the keyboard when you read my last post in this thread? :p I am really excited with all these new technologies, I just wanna see one begin to enter mass use.

just continuing our theme from yesterday aoshi

I don't think anyone quite made that comment, but lets be honest; hydrogen is more dangerous than other flammable gases because:

-hydrogren migrates through small openings very quicky
-the minimum ignition temperature for flammable mixtures of hydrogen is extremely low

Other problems: if you fight a hydrogen fire without shutting off the flow of gas, the nearly invisible flame can go out, but then reignite causing an explosion.

I'm not saying that it can't be handled safely; it is on large scales all the time. But its not benign either.

i wa smainly getting a dig in on aoshi continuing something from yesterday but- what you mention is true up until this very very light material simply disipates which is what it does and very quickly. your "other problem" can be said of any fuel fire- if you dont shut off the source of the leak when you put it out in can re-ignite. but with hydrogen it is less likely to happen because as you say it migrates thru very small openings very quickly dissipating it to the point that rapid sustained re-ignition is unlikely. also with the advent of some new ways to hold the hydrogen in a solid rather than a compressed tank there will be minimal amounts to disipate.

^^Personal attack! Ban him!^^ :rolleyes: :p
Zoom, I'd like to hear your take on the Hindenberg, I've heard quite a few different "stories" as to what caused/created the explosion. I've never been able to talk to anyone whos actually knows what they might be talking about though, if anyone has well informed opinions, I'd love to hear them. It's sort of on topic...I guess.

what was the topic of this thread?:D there are other hydrogen / hindenberg threads on the forum already some of which i have commented int. check them out:)

You're going to make me search? :rolleyes: Fair enough :)

http://www.autoweek.com/images/news/103360

dam this audi concept has rx-8 written all over it! bumper, lower sills (side skirts).
looks like a tubby rx-8 hatchback :D