Real car that runs on saltwater

[angrychair]

A real car that is street-legal and has been road tested by Top Gear that runs on saltwater...yes saltwater.
Created by a technology company that is not a car manufacturer but is licensing it to a "major car manufacturer" starting in 2017. 0-60 in 4 seconds and great handling.

http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20161010-driving-the-saltwater-sports-car

[VMA131Marine]

1. True, but misleading

You can't just fill up with buckets of seawater. The car has a flow battery and the "saltwater" is the electrolyte. Instead of recharging the car from the grid you refill with electrolytes (there are two), but these take energy to make so there is no free lunch.

[angrychair]

3. I don't disagree

But the "mph" is significantly better than current battery technology or fossil fuels it would seem. I would love to see the efficiencies to compare.
All things being equal, it is a significant step forward for a lot less than a Tesla.

[Volaris]

31. Yes, but if the energy for electrolyte solution production

Comes from a bank of solar panels instead of a coal plant, you're closer to zero. Yeah it might be less efficient on the production end, but that's the draw of solar..The Sun is STILL going to come back up tomorrow. Build a big enough collection array, and eventually you'll get the energy you need, regardless of how energy inefficient the process otherwise is.

[nationalize the fed]

37. Here's a wind powered hydrogen station in Yorkshire

You can drive throughout Denmark on hydrogen made from renewable energy. You'd think that would be big news...

[Volaris]

38. It would be if this country were run by sane people,

And not oil company executives.

[jberryhill]

2. Here we go again

I thought these goofy claims only came up when gas prices rose.

[angrychair]

4. Not a "goofy claim"

Its based on real science. It's a real car that has been test driven and vetted. Please read the article.

[jberryhill]

10. It does not "run on saltwater"

It's called a redox battery.

But couching this OLD technology in different terms makes it sound new.

The car does not consume seawater as fuel.

[LanternWaste]

5. In 1968 the quark was considered a goofy claim as well

In 1968 the quark was considered a goofy claim as well, thinking patrons in general rather than the specific. But, we all know better than the research, regardless of gas prices.

Ahhhh.... the genius of internet geniuses.

[jberryhill]

9. This is a redox battery - it has existed for ages

The car does not "run on saltwater". It is an oxidation/reduction reaction moderated by a membrane and is as old as the hills.

No, you know precisely NOTHING about the actual research.

It's a battery.

[jberryhill]

14. Try this research on for size....

Here's your "inventor":

https://www.thelocal.ch/20131015/solar-cell-con-man-ordered-to-repay-heirs

Solar cell con man ordered to repay heirs

A 47-year-old man from the canton of Aargau, found guilty of duping a wealthy Zurich woman into investing 44 million francs in a solar cell "invention", is appealing a court order to pay the money back.

The impostor pretended to have revolutionized the alternative energy market and even exhibited a sports car at the Geneva Motor Show in 2010 to showcase the technology, the newspaper reported online on Tuesday.

--------

Okay, but this time Mr. la Vecchia is being straight up. Got it.

[angrychair]

23. Relax

I posted the story because I thought it was interesting. The car in question exist and is drivable. It went through the process to be certified road legal in the EU and was examined and test driven on the English version of Top Gear.

I am not a car expert or alternative fuel expert. I am aware of the science behind the effort and know it is possible and better than many alternatives.

Sorry, I know it is not the perfect unicorn but is still a better option.

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. If you aware of the science, can you explain it? The BBC failed.

If they've got "two 159-litre tanks, each filled with a different electrolytic liquid­ – one with a positive charge and one with a negative charge", you'd have a huge capacitor, and at that size, major implications about how it behaves and the electric field around it. "The liquid is vapourised and released, harmlessly, we’re told, as ‘water dust’" - what the hell does that mean? It literally sounds like a joke. If it's dust, then it's not water (and probably not harmless).

So can you explain this, in some way that makes it sound credible?

[Xithras]

41. It's a metallic salt, not "saltwater" as most people think of it.

When lay people think of salts, they think of harmless table salts or seawater. In chemistry, a salt is what you get when you neutralize an acid and a base, and it can contain all sorts of nasty ions capable of melting the skin off your hands...and of carrying an electric charge.

Based on their engines name, it's probably safe to say that their "breakthrough" is based on some nano polymer flow battery improvements that made the rounds in tech news circles last year. If so, then we're probably talking about metallic salts embedded into polymers. Cool, but not as environmentally friendly as the "saltwater" that most lay readers would assume they were talking about. And their comment about the expended electrolyte blowing away as dust sets off my bullshit detectors. Metallic salts, released into the environment in sufficient quantities, would be enormously harmful.

[muriel_volestrangler]

42. But they said it's 2 liquids, kept in separate tanks, one positively and one negatively charged

which implies a significant imbalance of positive and negative ions between the 2 (and that's a lot of liquid). I'm glad someone else thinks the 'dust' sounds like either bullshit or danger.

[edhopper]

15. Not quite

Poposed in 1964 by Gell-Man and confirmed by 70. That is pretty quick as science goes.

And they were never goofy, just unconfirmed.

[lapfog_1]

8. life imitates art (or comedy)

[phylny]

32. FIRST THING I thought of! LOL n/t

[lapfog_1]

34. If you like that one, try this one

39:04 in and there is a great commentary on why a water fueled car is bad for the world.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

36. It seems the charged liquid concept has potential (get it?) but I wouldn't trust that inventor.

Fast refueling time is worth something.

Much depends on economics, economies of scale, and infrastructure (refueling stations).

Electric charging stations are low cost infrastructure. Refuelling stations that recharge electrolyte liquids but provide fast fill-ups are a much more involved and expensive build-out.

[dembotoz]

40. could see it for applications where the reload would not be an issue

postal vehicles
ups truck for local deliveries

farm vehicles
industrial vehicles