from the don't-forget-the-cover-sheet-for-that-tps-report dept.
In 2019, we took a look at an interesting new advanced ignition system from Transient Plasma Systems. It replaces the conventional spark plugs in a vehicle's engine with an ignition module that uses very short duration (nanosecond) pulses of plasma to ignite the fuel/air mixture within the cylinder. Back then, the technology was still being bench-tested, but now it's almost ready for production after validation testing has confirmed its potential to increase fuel efficiency by up to 20 percent when fitted to an existing engine.
"We're showing that the technology has ticked off all the things that an advanced ignition system would need to do to go to market," said Dan Singleton, founder and CEO of TPS.
At this point, some of you are probably wondering why anyone is even bothering to develop new internal combustion engine technology—after all, isn't our future electric? But with the best will in the world, it's going to be many years before countries like the US stop selling new internal combustion-powered vehicles and longer still until they're no longer allowed on our roads.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:01AM (5 children)
Give us the low-down on the difference between this thing and direct injection.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:55AM (1 child)
This is a new kind of ignition system and spark plug. It is completely unrelated to direct injection, which is a method of getting fuel into the combustion chamber.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by albelard on Thursday June 09 2022, @08:51AM
So it will make no difference for a properly designed internal combustion engine, a diesel? "We make our own "plasma", by compression!"
(Score: 5, Funny) by janrinok on Thursday June 09 2022, @09:24AM (1 child)
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/06/pulsed-plasma-ignition-that-boosts-fuel-efficiency-has-passed-testing/ [arstechnica.com]
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/06/swapping-spark-plugs-for-nanopulses-could-boost-engine-efficiency-by-20/ [arstechnica.com]
We did - you have to click your mouse.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 10 2022, @03:12AM
Janrinok don't do humor, and doesn't understand internal combustion engines. So sad.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday June 09 2022, @08:12PM
It's for people who don't understand the difference between percent and percentage points. 20% increase in ignition efficiency, 0.001% increase in overall car efficiency.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:06AM (24 children)
20% increase? This would imply that 20% of the fuel isn't being burned in the pre-intervention engine, and I'm sure there are plenty of engines out there doing that, but you SMELL them - no catalyst in the world is going to post-burn 20% of your fuel for long without completely incinerating itself.
For modern engines using high energy coils on decent spark plugs, there might be something less than 5% efficiency to be gained by better ignition, I suspect more like 2-3%.
Then, there's the "Splitfire effect". Some years ago, debate raged about the efficacy of Splitfire brand / unique design spark plugs. After a few years, the consensus was: yes, new Splitfire spark plugs do give you a 2-3% boost in performance compared to dingy old regular spark plugs, but then, new regular spark plugs ALSO give you a 2-3% boost in performance compared to dingy old Splitfires.
If the racers of the world could gain 20% horsepower in their engine with better ignition systems, they would have been doing it for decades by now. More likely: the plasma ignition system is akin to a self-cleaning spark plug, always operating like a new one.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 5, Interesting) by RS3 on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:16AM (17 children)
It's not about unburned fuel, although that might be a small factor.
If you've ever watched any engine running with no exhaust manifolds, or short pipes only, or even headers, you'll see fire coming out, especially at higher revs / under load. Think about that. It's still burning long after the power stroke, during and after the exhaust stroke.
The point of the plasma ignition is it gets more flame burning faster - so that it's done sooner, more power into the power stroke, less wasted heat, less exhaust valve wear, etc.
I'm embarrassed to admit I've had this idea for a very long time. Ford did research on this in the 1970s, as have many others.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:34AM (8 children)
> so that it's done sooner
I think that's what ignition advance is for...
But don't let me keep you from wishing that "plasma" is magic bullet.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:30AM
This system generates a more precisely timed spark with a much larger flame front than traditional plugs, allowing an earlier advance than was previously possible. More importantly it also reliably ignites leaner mixtures than traditional plugs which matters for modern exhaust recirculation systems. Go read Nooge's stickied post on the Ars article for a rundown.
(Score: 4, Informative) by RS3 on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:38AM (3 children)
I should have been a psychologist. This binary thinking that's becoming so prevalent is fascinating. I never wrote anything about "magic". Plasma ignition is not a panacea. It's just an improvement, and I'm not sure what motivates you to troll the concept of improving something.
Yes, correct, ignition advance is for that purpose. Additionally, if you use plasma ignition, you have to reduce ignition advance curves.
(Score: 4, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @12:22PM (1 child)
Yes, it's an improvement. What I take exception to is the 20% figure. 20% takes a 150hp engine to 180hp - that's unlikely, on a decently modern engine.
More precisely timed is a true statement, nanoseconds is impressive, but you might want to remember your law of sines. How much improvement can you get in timing at 6000RPM? That's 720 degrees of displacement 100 times a second, 7.2 degrees per second. Say current systems are only accurate to one millisecond (they're a bit better than that, but just as a baseline assume +/- 1ms jitter vs ideal timing), that's +/- 0.0072 degrees room for improvement. You're not getting 20% from 0.0072 degrees.
More reliable ignition has been a dance of cost/benefit for 50+ years. Modern engines put coil on plug, no wire loss and very energetic sparks. Sure, there's still room for improvement, but 20%, even when combined with 0.0072 degrees improved timing offset?
By the way, sparks are plasma. Various spark plugs through the years have "improved the spark distribution" with various multiple electrode schemes. Mostly, fresh clean plugs (of simple design) with sharp points perform better than dirty old worn plugs with rounded tips, by something less than 5% unless the old plugs are really bad. Platinum electrodes try to address this sharp issue with really small electrode tips.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @01:59PM
No point in arguing with someone who 'cites' Arstechnica comments.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:16PM
>> This binary thinking that's becoming so prevalent is fascinating. I never wrote anything about "magic".
All you binary people think you can just magically change your gender. Sorry, snowflake, it ain't so.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:09PM
Separate from the claims this company makes:
Ignition advance: You can only advance until the flame front hits the piston while it's moving up.
Combustion takes a finite amount of time. You may not have enough.
If you can reduce that time, that helps extract more power and gives more margin for imperfection in timing and mixture.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:31PM (1 child)
The ignition advance is a horrible compromise for getting more of the combustion into the power stroke. If you start the advance far enough ahead to ensure complete burn before the exhaust stroke, then you run into pre-detonation and end up using some of the energy to reduce power output and stress the engine components.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday June 09 2022, @07:41PM
Yes, exactly, and that's why most engines have had "knock sensors" (contact microphone) since, I don't know, 1980s for sure. There are routines and parameter tables in the PCM (ECU, engine computer) that take the knock sensor output and retard the spark timing based on many factors including RPM, throttle position, MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure- somewhat a measure of engine load), temperature, etc.
Yes, I've done a fair bit of hotrodding and tuning over the years, including some fairly deep parameter tuning in PCMs.
BTW, I'm not sure I'd call ignition advance a horrible compromise. As someone else commented, flame front might be limited by the speed of sound? But point is, it takes some amount of time for the flame to spread, and as most "tuners" know, advancing ignition timing can reap a huge amount of improved efficiency, throttle response, etc. - up to a point of course, and then you get rapid decline in the good stuff, and you'll hear spark knock.
What I haven't seen, but would incorporate if I designed an ECU, is spark knock learning- IE, I'd build a dynamically updated (learning) table of maximum ignition advance for the many parameters, rather than listen and retard the timing.
I'm working on a problem with my current vehicle- Chevy Astro 4.3L V6. Watching engine analyzer while driving: I've seen 70 degrees of knock retard happen! That's insanely aggressive and unnecessary. I'm still investigating it. My hunch is the high-impedance (100k) PCM input from the knock sensor (ceramic piezo) is picking up ignition noise, as the wire is stupidly NOT shielded.
Point is all of this is: people may not generally know how much compromise goes into car / engine designs, and how much room there is for improvement.
(Score: 2) by lentilla on Thursday June 09 2022, @11:10AM
Just imagine an additional set of those plasma babies riding on top of the pistons! Wham-o!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @12:07PM (6 children)
My 2002 Mercedes runs two spark plugs per cylinder - better, faster ignition.
My 1980 Honda Civic had a three barrel carb, two normal set to run lean and one tiny one that ran rich feeding a tiny pre-ignition chamber right at the spark plug - rich mixture ignited reliably, rest of the chamber burned fast and lean.
There have been variations through the decades. I doubt that 20% is an improvement over the best tech out there today, it sounds more like an improvement over your basic Briggs & Stratton 4 cycle lawn mower engine.
They've known about it since long before the 1970s. The added cost might have been a couple hundred dollars per engine, which is more significant than a few percent power/efficiency gain. If they could have turned a 180hp Miata engine into a 216hp Miata engine just with a revision to the ignition system, even if it did cost a couple hundred bucks, it would have been done by now.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:12PM (5 children)
Similar discussion on green site, someone mentioned current Mazda with something and I commented on Honda CVCC.
You're super smart technical person, but perhaps you're not as much of a hotrodder as some? I'm a bit of one, did more of it eons ago. You might be surprised at how much hidden power is in some (many / most?) engines. No question cars are getting more and more efficient. I'm stunned at the HP / CI (KW / CC) they're getting from average "grocery-go-getter" engines. I'm all for it.
You go ahead and be a skeptic, it's okay. You'll see how much the plasma ignition makes a difference. As I commented elsewhere, it'll take a lot of other tunings to get the most out of it. I can't tell you all the reasons it hasn't been done before, but some are just in the electronics: they could not have done it cheaply in the 1970s and up, until recently. It requires some very fast switching power transistors. We had some good ones in the 1970s and 80s, but not like now, and they were very expensive.
Also, there will be a ton of radiated radio interference, so FCC would have required lots of shielding, which is possible, but again, much added expense. Now with individual plug ignitors, it's much more doable.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @08:42PM (3 children)
>You'll see how much the plasma ignition makes a difference.
Well, I certainly saw how much difference the Splitfire spark plugs (larger, hotter spark for better ignition) made in the early 1990s. Never heard of Splitfires? Not surprising, after a few years all the hype melted away and they were eventually charged with deceptive marketing practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SplitFire_spark_plug [wikipedia.org]
As a tech guy, I can't stop pointing out: regular old spark plugs make plasma. Not as much as the "current invention", but enough to get the job done.
As a mild hot rodder, I turbocharged my rated 116hp at the crank Miata to 200hp at the rear wheels with ~12psi of boost, an ECU replacement and various other mods. So configured, that engine required a smaller than usual spark plug gap (0.025" instead of 0.040") to reliably spark through the more dense charge in the piston - I could have upgraded the stock ignition system to something with a bit more juice to make the plugs work at 0.040" gap, but as they say: the juice wasn't worth the squeeze, it ran fine on the stock ignition for 110,000 miles and made more power than the tires could handle in 1st and most of 2nd gear. Last year I swapped the turbocharged iron block 1.6 inline 4 for an aluminum block 3.0 V6 with coil-on-plug ignition. Don't feel the need to turbocharge this one, or go for a fancier ignition system.
When the plugs are in good shape, a modern auto engine will idle so smoothly you question whether it's even running at all. When they're a bit off, you can feel the occasional misfire at idle. I do believe that this "new plasma" system (really the same old plasma that's been used in gasoline engines since they had coils and distributor caps) has the potential to stay cleaner longer, possibly indefinitely, and do a very good job of consistently igniting the air/fuel at the optimal time. It will make improvements in some scenarios. 20% - vs the Briggs & Stratton in my lawnmower, maybe. vs. the more modern Duratec V6 in my Miata, especially with good plugs? Doubtful they can get 20%, no matter what all they tweak to "take advantage" of the improved spark reliability.
Spark is plasma, plasma is spark.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday June 09 2022, @10:18PM (2 children)
Yup, being a somewhat piston-brain, I've heard of splitfires and many others. Even tried them, when I bought some on clearance, including in my lawn mower. There are some great youtube vids where they run some pretty solidly scientific tests on many types of spark plugs, oils, etc.
Yup, sparks are plasma. Never said differently. I did not write the story. Try to remember who you are arguing with. :)
So with your (super cool) Miata mods, (did I mention- super awesome?) you might enjoy learning about Paschen and his curve. 1889 no less! Oh, I'll just hand it to you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschen's_law [wikipedia.org] Basically, more pressure = more voltage needed for spark to jump same gap. Or, for same voltage but more pressure, need smaller gap.
V6 Miata! You're even cooler than I knew.
So the term "misfire" is quite a misnomer in my book. What it really means, much of the time, is a partial burn- partial fire, rather than a total zero burn that the term itself means.
There's so so much more, and I'd tell you more but there's only so much I'm willing to expose publicly. I don't know of a DM on this system...
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @10:39PM (1 child)
Didn't know Paschen by name, but the basic physics and common knowledge in turbo charging circles is pretty solid: more boost (pressure at spark time) gives a higher breakdown voltage per unit distance, so your choices are: less distance or more voltage or no spark.
Even a partial bad burn is enough to unbalance an engine at idle such that you can feel it. First time I ever didn't feel an engine at idle was that 1991 Miata with the ECU controlled fuel injection and ignition... That's something that carburetors and distributors can't usually pull off.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday June 09 2022, @11:51PM
Yeah, but the takeaway is: the one spark did something, and for (too) many reasons, burn was incomplete. Maybe if we keep hitting it, very fast, more burning will happen.
Again with my comment above- people on these forums seem to tend toward binary thinking (maybe because it's a "digital" place? :). We're not trying for perfection; rather, anything that's better.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @08:45PM
Oooh, for more fun, here's the same story from 11 years ago:
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1066982_forget-spark-plugs-plasma-based-ignition-makes-engines-more-efficient [greencarreports.com]
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:58AM (3 children)
Nobody is claiming '20% more horsepower', not even Ars' clickbait headline. The claim is improved efficiency, not increased power density. There is a difference.
There is more than one way to lose efficiency than incomplete combustion. Heat loss is a big one and is unavoidable if you are burning a richer mixture than you want due to ignition system limitations. The major benefit of this system is that you can burn a leaner mixture than with traditional plugs, which matters at lower power settings.
The company claims a 6% improvement for a 2.5 L Toyota Camry engine, just with timing changes and opening the EGR valve more.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:53AM
It's difficult to predict how much more efficiency we'll see with plasma ignition. Research, tuning, testing, refinements, etc., will result in many improvements. It may engender a host of changes in A/F ratio, cam timing, compression ratio, on and on.
Thanks, I didn't know about the EGR valve. I was hoping we could do away with them. So does that mean they're getting higher NOx? You would expect it, but they should be able to do leaner mixtures, which should reduce NOx.
Not sure if they're doing it in production engines yet, but racers / hotrodders often coat pistons with an insulative coating. It helps keep the rings cooler, and helps keep some of the heat energy in the power stroke. Seems like it should improve combustion too. I know they're using ceramic wool combustion chamber inserts (surrounds) in oil burning heating systems. It causes the flame to burn much brighter (you can't look at it very long without strong shaded glasses) and more completely- there's much less soot when they get cleaned.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @12:28PM (1 child)
All else being equal, 20% improved efficiency in an engine means 20% more power output from that engine (for the same fuel input). If this efficiency only comes at low power output, then yes: peak power will not be affected.
6% on a Camry is getting closer to reality. Those same timing and EGR changes could be applied if one had confidence in a conventional spark system performing reliably. Sparks are plasma, after all.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @05:18PM
All else being equal, yes.
Conventional spark systems aren't reliable with lean mixtures. Multi-spark systems have better reliability but the one in TFA takes it a step further by spreading the arcs out across the entire face of the plug. If the mixture is capable of supporting combustion then that should be enough. The flat flame front and precise timing should have some benefit at high RPM as well, but probably not very much.
I agree that the marketing is stupid, but I feel that way about marketing in general.
Also, sorry for being harsh before. That wasn't called for.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday June 09 2022, @11:33AM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:30PM
F1 is a couple of decades behind the CVCC engine in my 1980 Honda Civic 1300 - it did the same thing with a pre-ignition chamber,
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:57AM
WHY OH WHY DID BOBBY HAVE TO DIE
MY PRECIOUS FRIEND AND CONFIDANT.
HE WAS BROUGHT INTO THE WORLD TO BRING ME JOY
AND NOW ALL I SEE IS ONE STRINGY EYEBALL STARING UP AT ME FROM A MOUNTAIN OF SEMEN AS IF TO ASK WHY
WHY?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ChrisMaple on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:05AM (19 children)
If/when electric vehicles are so superior that gasoline powered vehicles can't be profitably sold, in about 15 years there will be so few on the road that the business of selling gasoline will collapse. Then there will be so few in use that the pollution they make will be negligible. Legally forbidding their use would serve no purpose beyond political grandstanding.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:12AM (10 children)
> in about 15 years
Dream on. ICE cars & light trucks built today will be on the road for ~20 years...and there will be plenty of ICE powered cars built in the rest of this decade. Many of them will also last for 20 years, so take your dream out to 2050 or so.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday June 09 2022, @12:09PM (1 child)
For me, the big problem is the near halt in research on better and more efficient gasoline engines (at least in the US). Honda showed some of what can be done with their Civic VX [caranddriver.com] which for a family member was able to maintain 50 MPG with their type of driving (would be 4.7 liters per 100 km) with a lightweight vehicle that could go 500 miles on a single tank of gas (at that fuel economy).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:05PM
On a longish rural drive (100km to 150km) in Europe with a speed limit of 80 kmh (50 mph) I'll routinely do 4.4 or 4.5 litres per 100 km (or so it tells me) in an 8 year old Honda Jazz/Fit. However, much of the time my journeys are much shorter, so fuel use is higher.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:29PM (7 children)
Uh huh. No matter how efficient ICEs are, none of us can run any of them unless we get oil which has been refined into gasoline. That is the Achilles heel.
Some of my earliest memories are of the family car being stranded on the side of the road because it ran out of gas, or of having to wait in lines miles long to get gas at the station. That was during the oil shocks in the 70's.
Then in college Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and the price of gas shot through the roof. Same thing happened a few years later when Bush Jr. and Darth Cheney invaded Iraq. Then a few years ago a hurricane took out refineries for the Northeast US and there were lines at gas stations again.
I vowed after the last crisis to get off that stupid fossil fuel merry-go-round once and for all. And we did. Now this latest mess with Russia invading Ukraine has spiked gas prices again, but this time none of it affects me at all. We have solar panels on our roof that supply more than our power needs, from all of our household HVAC, water heating, laundry, showers, etc to charging our car.
It feels fucking fantastic.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @07:44PM
It was a combination of things like:
People returning to work/vacations/etc after COVID fears retreated.
Biden's openly hostile policies towards the oil industry scaring away investment and feeding speculators
The war with Ukraine coming right at the time the other 2 were already spiking prices.
(Score: 2) by legont on Friday June 10 2022, @01:07AM (4 children)
Bro, originally gas was a toxic waste of producing diesel. Cars were invented to get rid of this shit efficiently. Where are ships in your great view of things? Nuclear?
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday June 10 2022, @02:52PM (3 children)
You're missing the point. Do you have an oil well in your back yard that supplies the fuel for your car? If you don't, then you are relying upon a supply chain that can charge you whatever they want to charge you, or even refuse to sell you any fuel at all.
If you have an electric car or a plug-in hybrid and solar panels on your roof, then you essentially do have an oil well on your roof that takes care of your transportation needs. No more sending money to crazed Middle Eastern theocrats.
It's a beautiful thing.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 10 2022, @07:51PM
The great majority of our oil comes from crazed Canadian theocrats.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by legont on Friday June 10 2022, @09:32PM (1 child)
You are missing the point. Making, delivering and eventually recycling solar panels takes oil. It's more oil than gas directly into your tank. Your energy slavery just gets more complicated, that's it.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25 2022, @04:53AM
Do tell, I'm all ears.
I'll give you it will take some oil in a period of transition, as in less oil (but still some is) needed as the time passes and technology advances, but I don't think I saw oil as a prerequisite for obtaining silicon, dope it and form it into panels or grind the old panels into siliceous sand and recycle the materials.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 10 2022, @08:06AM
Not necessarily true about needing petroleum for base source for the fuel.
For the petrol/gasoline there is the possibility of ABE fermentation focusing on the Butanol.
For diesel there is biodiesel or syn-diesel (basically cracked / reformed biodiesel to meet diesel fuel specs)
(Score: 2) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:40AM
If I understand right, this technology can be retrofitted without replacing or heavily modifying the engine, so it could be used on the immense inventory of gasoline-powered cars. That inventory is going to be around for decades after people all start preferring electric cars for new purchases.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @05:58AM (2 children)
internal combustion engines will always play a role for emergency vehicles, and probably armies as well.
they will only be gotten rid of completely if the oil/fuel infrastructure is not maintainable once everyone else moves to electric/hydrogen.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:32PM (1 child)
Of course, in the same way that people keep candles around in case the power goes out, or old wagons and horses in case something happens to the ICE supply chain.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25 2022, @04:56AM
Why? An emergency LED lamp goes on for about 5h on 3xAAA batteries.
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:53AM
In the real world, this is a guarantee that it will happen.
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 3, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Thursday June 09 2022, @11:40AM
> profitably sold
Depends on whether you include full lifecycle costs, including the cost arising from Carbon Dioxide emissions and resultant impacts. There are some who would argue that when those costs are included, electric vehicles are already cheaper.
> If/when electric vehicles are so superior
One might argue that without some incentive to invest in electric, the risk profile and R&D costs make it a prohibitive technology. It is precisely because "Legally forbidding their use" is on the cards that the major vehicle manufacturers are investing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:44PM
There is a company claiming to be able to do atmospheric CO2 recovery/storage and then use that for making synthetic fuel, but I can't find the URL for them now. I did find this article that mentions what I believe is a different process as the #1 option: https://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/biofuels/8-synthetic-fuels.htm [howstuffworks.com]
The funny thing is most of the complaints about this idea are that "it takes tons of energy to do it." I don't understand why they aren't making the leap to use all the "excess wind/solar power that would be great if we could just find a way to store it somehow" as the "somehow" to use/store all that excess renewable energy. It seems to me this would be a huge win on multiple fronts...IF it can be done at scale to replace a large portion of our diesel and/or gasoline supply.
(Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Friday June 10 2022, @01:03AM
There's a fidgety bit of economics that to fight here.
As EV adoption increases, Gasoline demand should fall. That reduces gasoline prices, making gasoline vehicles cheaper to operate. Buyers will want that, and Manufacturers will meet that demand. Without an external factor keeping the cost of operating a gasoline vehicle high I would predict a very long tail on vehicles gasoline demand.
To avoid this, you create that external factor, make gasoline more expensive. This carries political risk. No candidate wants to stand accused of gouging poor people, the people most likely to drive older gas-powered vehicles, on the price of fuel. Specifically, quotes like this are very bad on election day.
Ouch. She probably won't even primary again.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @04:24AM (1 child)
The tyranny of brainwashed masses don't want you on their roads because "the science" says so. At one time, eugenics was science, and before that phrenology was science. Thank God the eugenicists and phrenologists didn't have the support of government and the fourth estate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @09:08AM
Eugenics is still science. It's just guided evolution after all. The problem is with who gets to set the guidelines.
(Score: 2) by istartedi on Thursday June 09 2022, @05:37AM
I've heard that some of the last steam locomotives are fantastic marvels of power and efficiency.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Thursday June 09 2022, @06:49AM (5 children)
I am quite sure I read about a lean burn engine with plasma plugs in the late '70s in Popular Science.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @10:53AM (2 children)
What confuses me is that a spark is a plasma generator. So how is this different? If the picture is representative, it looks like you get a lot more sparks per pulse, which would raise the ignition efficiency; it's the same reason spark plugs have forked conductors to add a few more points about which to generate additional places for sparks to jump.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @05:55PM (1 child)
It's a multi-spark ignition system with a ring ground. The name is just marketing fluff.
Conventional forked and v-tip spark plugs don't (or shouldn't) produce multiple sparks per stroke, rather they have a backup gap for when the primary gap becomes worn or fouled. This improves plug lifetime and reduces cleaning requirements but doesn't otherwise improve performance.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @11:14PM
Thanks for the info. I had always thought it was to generate multiple sparks per pulse, but I suppose once the ionization path was established, that would be the lowest path of resistance. I should have been thinking of it more like lightning.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 09 2022, @12:11PM
I drove a lean burn engine (with regular plugs) from 1985 until 1992. It was manufactured in 1980 and designed in the mid 70s. 30mpg around town, 30mpg at 70mph highway cruise, 35mpg at 40mph cruise.
1345cc Honda CVCC engine, also available in a stroked 1455cc variant, sold in the Honda Civic 1300 and 1500 models in the late 1970s / early 80s.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Hartree on Thursday June 09 2022, @09:09PM
In the mid 1980s I drove a 76 LeBaron with the 318 Electronic Lean Burn Engine. Worst car engine performance I ever dealt with short of being completely broken. I replaced the electronics module, distributor rebuilt the carb, was assured by an experienced mechanic that the timing chain was shot due to how the spark timing jumped around (it wasn't. It was tight and solid as I already suspected) and many other attempted fixes.
Finally, as a last shot, i stripped out the engine controller and put in a point type distributor from a previous year 318. It was like having a new engine. It ran solidly until it died from a main bearing failure. I was able to compensate for the lean charge within the adjust range of the distributor and it "just worked" (tm).
This is why you need to work out the bugs before you field a new technology.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @11:48AM (1 child)
And what will the replacement and maintenance costs of this be?
Sounds promising if it can be swapped out easily like a light buld and cost as much.
Unfortunately, cars are becoming horribly complicated and the cost of a little plastic part has the gringo price tag.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @02:49PM
Andy Granatelli's Tune Up Masters can now change your Plasma Plugs for the low cost of $29,995.00.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09 2022, @01:21PM
"But with the best will in the world, it's going to be many years before countries like the US stop selling new internal combustion-powered vehicles and longer still until they're no longer allowed on our roads."
"Our roads" mean they are also mine and others'. Many people do not want what you want. You don't speak for everyone. YOU can drive what YOU want on OUR roads. See how that works, little dictator?
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Thursday June 09 2022, @01:39PM
reminds me of my old rx-7 which had 2 spark plugs per rotor. the Wankel rotary is so bad at burning fuel they needed two plugs. combustion chamber is long and thin and burns very unevenly and incompletely. it would be cool to have a surface of the combustion chamber able to create a 2D field of plasma with a given distribution over the 2D area and through time. complete magic technology of course, but it would make the wankel so much more efficient and powerful.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Thursday June 09 2022, @03:23PM
Two spark plugs per combustion chamber already shortens and improves combustion. This is already done where vehicle cost supports the expense, and has been since at least the early 70s.
Firing multiple ignition pulses already does this. (MSD multi-spark ignition for the win - really helped my high school hot rod)
The glowing air in a spark plug spark is plasma already.
Unshrouding the spark helps. Aircraft plugs can have electrodes come from the sides.
Using higher frequency and altered electrodes to make a plasma curtain as with the eye-of-storm sharper image toys could increase the flame start surface area.
These folks claim to do both.
Both of those would help, and allow for more reliable combustion under worse conditions. If they can get that to work reliably, and work for 50k+ miles then that does have potential. Reduced emissions, better gas mileage, more power or a mix are on the table. The question is how much improvement at what cost (to dollars and reliability).