Turbines and Electric Vehicles

[de69cuda]

I was thinking that with all the research that Chrysler put into turbines in the 1960's and almost putting them in cars on the show room floors, why do they not grab that research off the shelf and put turbines in their small cars and compete in the electric car market? I know that there are batteries also involved, but the turbines I would think would be a great choice for this application. Thoughts?

 

[67Dart273]

What is there to think about?

If turbines were efficient for on the road cars, we'd be using them

If electric cars made sense we'd be using them.

Use your head. You don't need a doctorate of doctoring, a phys ed of physics, to figure this out, it's called bullshit in and bullshit out.

If you can't carry around enough crap to carry around enough crap to get the crap from point a to point b then you can't get it from here to there, and that my friend, is exactly what is wrong with "electric" cars, and they ain't "clean" either, why?

Because "electricity" in most of the world ain't "clean" it comes from crap from coal, look at the air in China.........it's dirty, and that comes from coal plants

(Then you add little doo dads like ya need heat in winter and A/C in summer and that Great Big steereo n pwr steerin' n stuff n yer 'con'my goes right out thu' window)

Any questions?

 

[de69cuda]

I totally agree that electric cars are not "green" - it takes a lot of fossil fuels to make them, ship them, etc. that there is nothing green about them. Wind turbines that we have here in California in the Altamont Pass take so much fossil fuels to get them there and installed, it will take to the end of their lifespan to make a positive for the environment. By the time you make the parts, assemble them overseas, ship them over here, take multiple semi's to get them to their destination, have a crane erect them - there is so much fossil fuels already spent it's rediculious!

I was thinking why are car companies - Chrysler in particular - using turbines to change the cars instead of internal compustion engines? The boat racers went from internal combustion engines to jets becuase there are less internal parts to them - less to carry from one race to the next, etc. They were swapping engines when one blows anyway, so what's the difference swapping out a turbine jet engine vs. a rotary internal combustion engine.
Turbines may have a higher output temperature that Chrysler was worried about at the time, but with today's technology, that could be solved easily - I would think.

I was thinking a turbine engine would be less costly to make and take up less room in a car. Weight - I have no idea. Just spin up a turbine to turn a generator and charge the batteries, and turn it off when it's done. It may be able to charge in less time due to higher RPMs?