fuel cell, schmeul cell...give me a hydrogen turbine

15, 20, 30 years ago, turbine engines were considered non-cost-efective for use in cars. Today people fly RC airplanes propelled by jet engines. The mini jet engines cost somewhere between $3k and $8k. That is: cheap enough so rich flolks can afford to crash them.

Yeah, there is that little matter of them still being heat engines and therefor limitted by classic thermodynamic inneficiencies. (33 % for all combustion engines) Fuel cells take the high ground here with 60% or 80% or something.)

But, come on: how about a tachometer that goes to 70,000 rpm? How would you feel in a fuel cell car when the guy next to you at the red light is reving his engine to 50 grand? How would you feel on the freeway when you hear the high frequency doppler effect as you're passed by a hydrogen turbine car?

It could happen. Check Ebay for turbines. I've seen some that could easily be dropped under the hood. They have starters and gear reduction; and I'm sure they could be plumbed to burn hydrogen without too much modification.

turbo is so yesterday; turbine is the way of the future!

Wasnt there a bike that had one of those engines? I think Jay Leno owns one

Wasnt there a bike that had one of those engines? I think Jay Leno owns one
There is a company that makes those for whomever can afford one. I believe Jay Leno has 2.

It's a good idea, but turbine engines aren't good for rapid increase and reduction in power, rpms, and load. So they were never viable for earlier cars. But NOW, a small turbine could be used to generate electricity for a vehicle's electric drive wheels. The load would be fairly level on the turbine, even under max acceleration.

But given the fuel cells' efficiency, and the fact it makes only water and heat as exhaust, I'd expect that may be the next generation.

Since this IS a car forum do any of you guys remember the Chrysler turbine cars?

Not personally, but I've read about them.

"But given the fuel cells' efficiency, and the fact it makes CO2 and water as exhaust, I'd expect that may be the next generation."

Burn H2 and you get hot water vapor; no C02. The exhaust of a fuel cell is just water vapor; no C02 there either. There is no carbon in the imputs. Trace atmospheric CO2 would not be involved in the hydrogen reaction.

Thanks for straightening me out there; I fixed the original mistake.

and I'm sure they could be plumbed to burn hydrogen without too much modification.

that sounds extremely dangerous. i think in order to make such a system, you would need make extensive modifications to ensure the safety of the occupants. Whereas in a hydrogen fuel cell, such safety issues aren't as extreme.

The whole problem with hydrogen is that it costs like $1.20 of energy to produce $1.00 of it. SOME form of energy is needed to produce another. In our town they discussed building an electric generating facility powered by natural gas. Problem was that it took more natural gas than the electric output units would cost. http://www.animationlibrary.com/Animation11/Transportation/Auto_Parts/Engine_3.gif