I would suggest you Americans stop wasting money on a outdated tech , Hydrogen and get behind new battery tech or we are going to leave you in the dust with this tech .

Same people that brought the world wi-fi are working on new battery tech and are the same people that have the new patient fro the new battery tech

Tech don't matter if the original power source is a coal fired electric plant. The energy companies are having a profit orgy with green tech!

Only in your silly country and only because you Americans have never used your vote properly .

You care to much about the dollar.

Mention money and you can see the cogs turning and the lights start flashing even if the lights that flash are RED and come with a warning sign saying DANGER DANGER DO NOT DO THIS

I feel sorry for you as you will fall behind very quickly if you don't get Onboard the Global warming Train .

Hydrogen is fast becoming a useless tech on Earth , it only has a place in Space and even then only when you are far enough out that the sun does not provide enough light to be use full.

Solar and wind are already proving it works and once new battery tech starts to come on line Hydrogen is dead on Earth .

The same judgements Ford and GM made with there businesses seems to be the same type of attitude that is making the decisions on Hydrogen plan old stubbornness and your going to lose .

Stop listening to the capitalists they don't have the country or planet in there decision making only profit .

Actually it's not even profit but just greed and as ford and gm found out it doesn't work when your government had to bail them out .

---

I would suggest you Americans stop wasting money on a outdated tech , Hydrogen and get behind new battery tech or we are going to leave you in the dust with this tech .

Americans aren't championing hydrogen cars. Toyota, a Japanese company is.

Same people that brought the world wi-fi are working on new battery tech and are the same people that have the new patient fro the new battery tech

Funny. You might want to tell that to the Hawaiians. They invented the first WiFi network, ALOHAnet back in 1971.

you mean wireless network

Wi-Fi was invented here . and the inventers took a lot of company's to court to get there Royalties some billion dollars or so

And I think it's was 1995- 1998 it was invented

---

The C.S.I.R.O is a Australian government laboratory and they invented WI-FI

John Sullivan is credited with it's invention .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_O%27Sullivan_(engineer)

---

The C.S.I.R.O are the ones behind the new battery tech you will see in the next 2 years .

---

The C.S.I.R.O are the ones behind the new battery tech you will see in the next 2 years .

Sounds great.
Is it also scalable?
There are several countries that sometimes have excessive energy.
Here our hydro power companies weeps when they have to let water run out from filled dams without the possibility to utilize it, mainly in the spring .

Is the CSIRO a patent troll? US debate turns feral

https://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/12/is-the-csiro-a-patent-troll-us-debate-turns-feral/

Some people think so.


But I remain unconvinced that the organisation did $430 million worth of development work, or that the global tech vendors which implemented the standard unfairly took advantage of the CSIRO’s work to an amount of that value. In addition, it seems relatively logical that the CSIRO’s methods would, in time, have been discovered elsewhere, as an organic progression of the standard

The Americans just have there nose out of joint because they got caught out using the tech without permission

Apple ,Blueberry ,Dell , Toshiba , Nokia , Sony all used it without permission and had to psy up they should have paid 2x the amount they where paid

And it's a bit rich to say

in time, have been discovered elsewhere, as an organic progression of the standard.

considering there country grant Patients genetic food . I didn't know those company invented the corn genome

oh yeh they didn't they only change I gene and that justifies a patient when you can do the same thing naturally and have done so for 10,000 years cultivating crops so the same argument it would be a natural progression of
cultivating crops .

---

I feel sorry for you as you will fall behind very quickly if you don't get Onboard the Global warming Train .

The "Global warming Train" is Panama Papers owned by the big oil companies. It is unfortunate that you don't understand that "green tech" is pump out more CO2 tech. What you didn't see is big oil saw a huge shock some years back when China went to 1 child, they would not have an ever increasing number of customers. As big oil must obey the Wall Street credo to increase sales revenue quarter over quarter, and suddenly they would not have more oil hungry customers, they had to manufacture new demand. What better way than to invent an entirely new market segment, "green tech." If you peruse the annual reports of big oil you will see that each admits owning some green tech companies. Big oil has done this for years and years, anytime someone invented some gizmo to increase fuel mileage an oil company bought the tech and made sure it was never made. No reason to suspect "green" will be or is any different. Get used to being a slave to the American capitalist, they move faster than you can.

---

you mean wireless network

What do you think "Wi-Fi" is? It's a wireless network. The term Wi-Fi merely refers to a set of standards and protocols, i.e. 802.11, to guarantee interoperability.

Wi-Fi was invented here . and the inventers took a lot of company's to court to get there Royalties some billion dollars or so

CSIRO were granted a key patent (technology) used in Wi-Fi. This doesn't translate into "inventing" Wi-Fi itself. Even winning the patent itself, and successfully litigating use of the patented technology, doesn't directly translate into inventing Wi-Fi.

Ozzfan you do know how they came to do it don't you , it's not just a standard

In 1977 John O'Sullivan co-authored a paper in the Journal of the Optical Society of America titled "Image sharpness, Fourier optics, and redundant-spacing interferometry"[1] with J. P. Hamaker, and J. E. Noordam. In this paper, they presented a technique for sharpening and improving picture clarity in radio astronomy images.

In the early 1990s, O'Sullivan led a team at the CSIRO which patented in 1996 the use of a related technique for reducing multipath interference of radio signals transmitted for computer networking. This technology is a part of all recent WiFi implementations.[5] As of April 2012, the CSIRO has earned over $430 million in royalties and settlements arising from the use of this patent as part of the 802.11 standards with as much as a billion dollars expected after further lawsuits against other parties.[6][7]

notice when he wrote his first paper 1977 and it's called Fourier optics, and redundant-spacing interferometryit's where the FI in Wi-Fi comes from they are different and seeing as he was not looking at the internet there where trying to clean the signals up in there telescopes.

Get the facts mate you yanks still don't like it when others beat you to tech the same shite has happen with the Cocklear implant we where using it 10 years before you would even let it into your country .

I can still remember the stupid excuses that where being used by American as to why they should not let there children have it and they where and are idiotic and stupid if you don't invent it , it must be crap .

B/S grow up and stop getting your noses out of joint because your not a smart as you think you are

---

Instead of this constant "country bashing" perhaps we could get back on topic.

Hopefully discussing the rights and wrongs of electric cars, was it not.

And please, I don't have trouble reading so large bold letters still count as shouting, and we really don't want shouting here now do we.



Thank you.

---

Ozzfan you do know how they came to do it don't you , it's not just a standard

Yes, I'm quite aware of how they came to it, and yes, Wi-Fi is just a standard. Without the standard, there would be no interoperability, but it is still just a standard, and a part of that standard uses the CSIRO patented technology for which they are now litigating everyone on the planet. Sounds like a great way to piss people off and make other companies not want to work with you ever again.

notice when he wrote his first paper 1977 and it's called Fourier optics, and redundant-spacing interferometryit's where the FI in Wi-Fi comes from

The Fi in Wi-Fi doesn't mean anything. Go ahead, look it up. We'll all wait for you to catch up.

Get the facts mate you yanks still don't like it when others beat you to tech the same shite has happen with the Cocklear implant we where using it 10 years before you would even let it into your country .

I can still remember the stupid excuses that where being used by American as to why they should not let there children have it and they where and are idiotic and stupid if you don't invent it , it must be crap .

B/S grow up and stop getting your noses out of joint because your not a smart as you think you are

Blah blah blah I hate Americans blah blah blah Australia is great blah blah blah angry blah blah blah everyone else is dumb. Blah.

Does that sum it up?

As this has turned into an argument about Wi-Fi I think a short lock is in order for people to consider exactly what they wish the thread to be about.

---

As I believe alternative technology is a must for the future, I will now unlock this thread.

Please can people stay on topic and stop the personal disagreements on-line. If you wish to debate other topics do so privately.

Thank you.

---

Back on topic, and please keep it there, this is about cars and associated technology.

So to continue why I think, at least for now, hybrid technology is the better choice.

F1 has also pushed forward with a new technology called Turbulent Jet ignition. With this a very small portion of the fuel is ignited in a separate chamber and then fired through a nozzle into the main chamber. This creates turbulence within the cylinder which burns the fuel faster and hotter. You therefore get better fuel economy and a cleaner exhaust.

Turbulent Jet ignition pushes engine combustion efficiency

It can also be used with other fuels such as methane and hydrogen.

F1 has also pushed forward with a new technology called Turbulent Jet ignition. With this a very small portion of the fuel is ignited in a separate chamber and then fired through a nozzle into the main chamber. This creates turbulence within the cylinder which burns the fuel faster and hotter. You therefore get better fuel economy and a cleaner exhaust.

Sounds a bit like diesel tech that has been used on all types of diesel engines for quite a long time already

---

Life is what you make of it :-)

When i'm good i'm very good , but when i'm bad i'm shi#eloads better ;-) In't I " buttercups " p.m.s.l at authoritie !!;-)

In light of the emissions scandal and the mileage scandal do you think any claim of the greenness of some car, or technology, can be trusted?

---

Well, the emissions scandal was for diesels, which I have never bought, and the mileage was on cars not sold in the US or Europe. I refer to independent magazines for performance and economy. Where possible when they do comparison tests so as far as possible conditions are the same for all cars tested.

But there have been some speculative claims, that a small European sized family car, using an F1 type power plant, with similar performance to models on sale now, could be doing over 120 mpg (Imperial Gallons). And with a cleaner exhaust.

You therefore get better fuel economy and a cleaner exhaust.

You are limited to the Btu content of the fuel which for gasoline is 120,000 Btu per US gallon or about 150,000 Btu per imperial Gallon. Your goal is to extract as much of this as possible with your combustion technique and then have a Carnot cycle that operates between as wide a temperature range as possible to create efficiencies approaching 40%. The rest is waste heat.

The resultant motive energy must be enough to push a car with small frontal area and small coefficient of drag through a mile at an acceptable speed.

You therefore get better fuel economy and a cleaner exhaust.

You are limited to the Btu content of the fuel which for gasoline is 120,000 Btu per US gallon or about 150,000 Btu per imperial Gallon. Your goal is to extract as much of this as possible with your combustion technique and then have a Carnot cycle that operates between as wide a temperature range as possible to create efficiencies approaching 40%. The rest is waste heat.

The current F1 power units are at, or very close to 50% efficient.