« Honda to Debut Hybrid Sports Car Concept at Geneva | Main | Michigan County Running Trucks on Biodiesel Blends »
Tata Motors Signs Agreement with MDI for Compressed Air Engine
5 February 2007
 |
| The 4-cylinder compressed air engine. Click to enlarge. |
Tata Motors, India’s largest automobile company, has signed an agreement with MDI (Moteur Developpment International) of France for the application in India of MDI’s compressed air engines. MDI has already applied its CAT (Compressed Air Technology) engine in a prototype city car, the MiniCAT.
The agreement between Tata Motors and MDI envisages Tata’s supporting further development and refinement of the technology, and its application and licensing for India.
MDI has for many years been engaged in developing environment-friendly engines. MDI is happy to conclude this agreement with Tata Motors and work together with this important and experienced industrial group to develop a new and cost-saving technology for various applications for the Indian market that meets with severe regulations for environmental protection. We are continuing the development with our own business concept of licensing car manufacturers in other parts of the world where the production is located close to the markets. We have also developed this new technology for other applications where cost competitiveness combined with respect for environmental questions has our priority.
—Guy Negre, founder MDI
The core of MDI’s work is a piston engine powered by the expansion of compressed air. MDI has developed two versions: a single fuel engine that relies solely upon compressed air, and a dual-fuel version that uses compressed air and a combustible fuel. When running under 50 kph (31 mph) in urban areas, the engine runs on air. At speeds greater than 50 kph, the engine switches to fuel mode. In this mode, the on-board compressor also refills the compressed air tanks.
The current production version of the compressed air engine applied in the MiniCat is a four-cylinder, 800cc unit that uses a boxer design. A proprietary connection rod allows the retention of the piston at top dead center during 70° of crankshaft rotation—providing enough time to establish the required pressure in the cylinder.
Tata Motors has more than 4 million Tata vehicles on the road in India, and is the leader in commercial vehicles and the second largest in passenger vehicles. It is also the world’s fifth largest medium and heavy truck manufacturer and the second largest heavy bus manufacturer.
February 5, 2007 in Compressed Air Engines, Engines, India | Permalink | Comments (48) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22062/7789667
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tata Motors Signs Agreement with MDI for Compressed Air Engine:
Comments
Well that's a neat twist on hybrid. I like it. I also wonder if it'll ever be available in Canada.
Posted by: Brad | Feb 5, 2007 9:41:58 AM
Another one is EngineAir from Melbourne-Australia.
So far I have not seen any significant news from that company even though they have a neat rotary engine which I was lucky to see in action a while back.
The problem is that a lot of indipendent "inventors" are actually not savvy business people and treat their inventions like their children rather than a potential money maker...
FS
Posted by: Fred | Feb 5, 2007 10:08:40 AM
Compressed air is hugely inefficient!!
Posted by: DS | Feb 5, 2007 11:24:40 AM
As DS notes the take on compressed air is (usually) poor efficiency.
But almost method has some good application. And there is no reason to think these companies are inept.
Posted by: K | Feb 5, 2007 11:55:38 AM
To be precise, the efficiency from compressor to wheel of the AIRCAR is calculated to be ~40% according to the following report: http://www.efcf.com/reports/E14.pdf
Whereas the efficiency of BEV from battery to wheel is 80%.
Let's say the air compressor is powered by an ICE with efficiency of about 40%, then overall efficiency of the AIRCAR from fuel to wheel is 40% x 40%= 16%. No improvement at all from the ICE, and a lot worse than the Prius at 37% tank to wheel efficiency.
Posted by: Roger Pham | Feb 5, 2007 2:47:29 PM
Is regenerative braking possible? Also, in warm climates, wouldn't compressed-air propulsion offer some "free" air conditioning?
Compressor-to-wheel efficiency isn't the whole story. I think it's wrong to judge the compressed-air car by looking at the motor in isolation. That's kind of like ignoring the heat component in a combined heat and power (CHP) setup.
Posted by: netscrooge | Feb 5, 2007 6:13:15 PM
Regenerative braking is part of the design and they also have some interesting patents for stationary generating of compressed air using renewable, non-polluting resources. The range of the air-only car was the biggest hurdle to overcome, but with the hybrid combustion / air model that problem is solved, altho pollution is re-introduced.
In a hydrogen vehicle the same amount of energy is used compressing the gas, but that energy is completely wasted because the pressure is not exploited in the vehicle, the gas just gets burned. I think many people ignore that energy sink in their calculations of hydrogen powered vehicles.
Posted by: Erick | Feb 5, 2007 6:29:27 PM
Air conditioning and heating are both natural byproducts of the air engine's operation, so yeah... "free" air conditioning.
Posted by: Erick | Feb 5, 2007 6:31:11 PM
Compressed-air car concept is DOA in term of range and cargo room and load capacity. Here's why:
1) A carbon-fiber Quantum H2 storage tank for 5000psi of 160 liter weighs 170-200 lbs can contain 4kg of H2, costing ~$2000. 300 liters' worth of air tanks of the same pressure will weigh almost 400 lbs and costing >$4000.
2) 300 liters of H2 in those tanks will weigh 8 kg (17.6 lbs). Air weighs 17 times as much as H2, so multiply 17.6 lbs by 17 = 299 lbs. Adding the weight of air and the weight of the tanks will give you almost 700 lbs! Didn't realize "light as air" can weigh that much, did you?
3) Range: Look into this pdf report, page 9, (http://www.efcf.com/reports/E13.pdf) will give you the fact that the compressed energy of H2 is but 5% of the total heating value of H2. According to ideal gas law, air and H2 when compressed to the same pressure will have nearly the same mechanical energy. The Ford Airstream hybrid FCV can travel 280 mi using 4.5 kg of H2 at an estimated 50% efficiency. If this car uses only the compression energy of the H2 at 80% efficiency, the calculation will be 280 mi /50% x 5% x 8%= 22.4 mi. That is for a tank of 180 liter. For 300 liter compress air storage as in the original AIRCAR, the total travel distance will be 22.4/180 x 300= 37 miles for the Ford Airstream. This is assuming slow speed travel wherein the expanded cold air from each stage of airmotor has the chance to warm up to nearly ambient temperature (near isothermal expansion) At normal highway cruising speed, expect a range of about 1/2 as much, or ~20 miles. Look in theaircar.com for further details, but beware that the number you see there for the AIRCAR's range is for a much smaller and lighter car of plastic construction, weighing but ~1600lbs, and the number is still very much hype!
Now, can anyone justify having an energy storage weighing ~700 lbs costing ~$4000 and can give you a range of only ~20 miles in a typical compact 5-seat family car, with a fuel-to-wheel efficiency of 16%?
Posted by: Roger Pham | Feb 5, 2007 8:36:57 PM
Roger Pham,
Saying that a compressed-air vehicle has a fuel-to-wheel efficiency of 16% isn't fair. Nobody is suggesting we should build ICE vehicles with compressed-air "transmissions" (ICE -> air tank -> air motor -> wheel).
Some of us are, however, curious if there might be situations where compressed-air propulsion would make economic and environmental sense.
Compressed-air vehicles are extremely flexible. The energy to compress the air could come from any number of sources. As we move into/through peak oil, supply disruptions will become more and more of a problem, especially for the poorest of the world's citizens.
The entire world does not travel by 5-seat family cars.
Posted by: netscrooge | Feb 5, 2007 10:01:28 PM
Roger -- Thanks for all those numbers and analysis.
I wish that the numbers were not so discourageing because I love the air-car concept. The only hope that I now see is for some breakthrough to greatly lower the cost of the tank. A twenty mile range on a $400. tank would look great to me.
Posted by: Rick | Feb 5, 2007 10:52:28 PM
the air engine is just plain silly b/c of air storage problems.
Tata probably invested b/c they are interested in the fueled engine. Such an engine could possibly operate without fuel injectors (b/c it is an external combustion engine instead of internal) and other expensive electronic parts, allowing them to produce a cheaper engine for a market that is extremely cost sensitive. Such an engine would require little to no air storage and may have easily controlled pollution characteristics.
Posted by: Shaun | Feb 5, 2007 11:13:18 PM
There's certainly a serious efficiency and range concern, but compressed air cars do have some potential areas of advantage over BEVs. The compressed air tanks are simpler and cheaper than batteries and likely have much longer cycle lifetimes and lower self discharge rates. The tanks can also be refilled very quickly compared to most batteries. These could be advantages in very cost conscious markets, like India.
Posted by: Paul Dietz | Feb 6, 2007 4:46:47 AM
What I like about this aircar is all the work they put into designing an engine that gets the most out of the compressed air. Years ago I heard about another type of air powered car. It had a better idea for storing energy but the prototype they built still had limited range because they used a cheap but inefficient WWII surplus winch motor. See the link-
http://www.washington.edu/alumni/columns/dec97/car1.html -If we could combine the best of both maybe we'd have something.
Posted by: ai_vin | Feb 6, 2007 9:26:10 AM
Pure compressed-air vehicles suffer from five problems:
1 - low well-to-wheels efficiency
2 - very limited range
3 - large, expensive pneumatic accumulators
4 - high risk of uncontrolled energy release in a crash
5 - high noise levels
For these reasons, they are probably a dead end as prime mover technology.
The one area where pneumatics could prove useful in a passenger car is in reducing the lag characteristic of turbocharged gasoline engines at low RPM. In that scenario, a compressor (e.g. two-stage centrifugal) attached to the transmission via a wet clutch and planetary gears would recuperate kinetic energy during braking and hill descents. The engine clutch should be disengaged while the tank is filled up. The already present intercooler would be "hijacked" using a set of bypass valves, to increase the air mass stored and, to reduce process temperature levels. When the vehicle needs to accelerate again, it initially receives its fresh charges from this already pressurized tank until it is empty.
The required size of this tank would still be significant, e.g. 40 liters, at 10 bar absolute and 200 degC, since only the first compression stage would be cooled. At this intermediate pressure level, there would be no need to resort to expensive composite constructions. Also, since we're just talking about air not combustible fuel, it might be acceptable to regulators to integrate the tank directly into the chassis to save weight.
With the parameters given, the full tank would contain about 0.3 kg of air. Note that the engine must be fed air at e.g. 2 bar absolute, so a regulated throttle is needed, which cools the air back down. To prevent excessive condensation or ice formation between the throttle and compressor wheel of the turbocharger, the storage tank would have to be insulated and the air stored inside used in short order or else blown off. In other words, the tank will be empty immediately after a cold engine start.
After the first braking maneuver from ~60 kph, the stored air mass would be enough to operate a 2L inline 4 at 1800 RPM and wide open throttle at a boost pressure of 1 bar for ~4.5 seconds. This would permit a lot of low-end torque even as the turboshaft spins up, so the vehicle dynamics would approximate those of a supercharged engine as the driver accelerates quickly up to urban cruise speed. Turbo lag is the primary reason for low customer acceptance of fuel-saving downsizing concepts for gasoline engines.
You could reasonably argue that the same effect, with much higher efficiency, could be obtained with a mild hybrid setup comprising a motor-generator, power converter and traction battery or ultracapacitor bank. However, the pneumatic one outlined above could be a lot cheaper.
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | Feb 6, 2007 9:37:50 AM
If compressed air is so inefficient then why is it so widely used in industry? As for the MDI engine I see an air motor that is more complicated than neccesary.
Posted by: tom deplume | Feb 6, 2007 12:25:11 PM
Actually this looks like an application of the scuderi Patent which is an internal combustion compressed air engine with phenomenal implications for efficiency see: http://www.theautochannel.com/link.html?http://www.scuderigroup.com/technology/animations/split_sideview.html
for more details on the actual engine. It has the design possibilities to double engine efficiency be it gasoline or diesel and reduce air pollution by 80%.
Posted by: John Donaldson | Feb 6, 2007 12:42:16 PM
Rafael,
Very promising idea! The problem with centrifugal comprssor is the non-linear response of pressure with rpm, but, by coupling the compressors with the transmission, the car can downshift as it slows down, hence maintaining near-constant rpm at the compressor. A simple clutch that simultaneously declutches the engine while engages the compressors is all you would need to have. A car with a CVT would be even better. Centrifugal compressor should be relatively cheaper than electric motor/generator. Each of centrifugal compressor should generate up to 5:1 pressure ratio, which, when taking into account diabatic compression, then the compression ratio from each stage should be ~3:1, and with intercooling between the stage, should easily allow for over 10 bars of compressed air.
Engine shut-off feature should be offered with a starter-generator hefty enough to restart the engine and match its rpm to the transmission when engine re-engagement is needed (ie. micro hybrid)
A complete quantitative cost/benefit analysis should be the next step to compare this with full electric hybrid.
Netscrooge,
I'm not suggesting ICE coupled with pneumatic transmissin. The ICE is only used at the air-station to compress the air into large storage tanks to recharge the AIRCAR.
Shaun,
The airmotor is only good with pre-compressed air, as its inherent design is for air pressure of up to 300 bars, via 3-4 stages of expansion with inter-reheating. Hey, the airmotor can work with steam from a boiler as well, with reheating stages.
If you wanna use combustion engine, might as well go with the Scuderi concept which separates the compression cylinder to the combustion cylinder to allow for pneumatic hybrid arrangement.
Posted by: Roger Pham | Feb 6, 2007 1:32:40 PM
Compressed air locomotive engines were used in the past, most recently in coal mines, where they were safer then electric due to absence of electric sparks. Nice site for the history (including compressed air bicycle):
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/TRANSPORT/comprair/comprair.htm
Posted by: Andrey | Feb 6, 2007 8:54:01 PM
So, has anyone heard any news from/about these guys?
www.engineair.com.au
Fred
Posted by: Fred | Feb 8, 2007 1:03:00 PM
Hi, does any one know any additional information on the Massive Yet Tiney engine from Angel Labs? Would it fall into the Green Car or engine catagory? It is an engine that is supposed to be able to replace truck and automobile engines but it is many times smaller. The size of the engine that replaces a car engine will be the size of a coffee can. The engine is supposed to run best on soybean oil but it can run on comressed air as well. They have a video showing the engine running on compressed air. The engine supposedly will get some where between 100 to 150 mpg on the soybean oil. Here is a link to one of the sites it can be found on:
http://www.angellabsllc.com/index.html
Is this an engine that could hold lots of possibilities or would it be bought out by big business and then shelved in some big warehouse?
marck
Posted by: Marck | Feb 24, 2007 8:32:01 AM
Everyone is forgetting to quantify the big picture of the air engine vs the liquid fuel engine. The Air Engine with all of it efficiency addressess the pollution problem, especially in densly populated areas. The medical cost benefits from this fact alone is a huge improvement. Additional, the cost of the efficiency is still lower than any combustion engine. Don't forget we have many modes of transportation that are not very efficient, but we are using them anyway at a high cost to the environment and people. So, I would say the trade offs offer more for our future that combustion engine.
Posted by: Tony | Feb 24, 2007 9:09:02 PM
price
Posted by: girish vilekar | Mar 1, 2007 2:48:14 AM
hi
i am ashish
i am engineering student
i have some concepet for four wheeler car and it's degine and engine
so if u intrest that so plz contect me in my mail id that's is ashrewart2yahoo.com
Posted by: ashish pandey | Mar 8, 2007 11:30:03 PM
ok sir
i am 3 rd year student and my aim is not doing jo i am intrested in business ,i have not yet money that i will start business so i contect to u if u intrested my plan so plz sir call me. and lokk my concepet
thank you
Posted by: ashish pandey | Mar 8, 2007 11:34:15 PM
When I told my wife she was quite enthusiastic, and asked if it'll come with attachments for making whipped cream and steamed milk.
Posted by: Eric | Mar 20, 2007 7:31:33 AM
my favorite thing about the MDI AirCar, is the claim that it has a negative pollution effect, because the air needs to be filtered to prevent damage to the tank and engine.
If they were used as service/business use vehicles(taxis and smaller) and 2+ car households replaced their short trip car with one of these, think of the reduction in pollution.
and you can compress the gas with wind, solar, and tidal power.
anyone got thoughts on the turbine generator described in "The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps"(chapter 1)
Posted by: harris | Mar 23, 2007 3:16:16 PM
wel this is very inspiring technology but according to me it won't be possible to run an engine only on the basis of compressed air, there must be be somewhat content of charge also.
lets see where the technology reaches...!!1 All the best.
Posted by: swapnil | Apr 13, 2007 9:57:28 PM
Bought 1000 shares at under $18/share of TTM today as Tata Motors stands to benefit from the investment of this technology, or possibly becomes a good acquisition target. Will see where it goes from here. Hoping for a small pop after the June Popular Mechanics article, but moreover holding it a year and watching for an emotional market response. Trying not to hype this stock, but I am somewhat exhuberent about this pseudo-green technology considering I don't like how gas/electric hybrids have been over-hyped in America as a real alternative. I guess baby steps...
Posted by: mike | May 16, 2007 5:15:56 PM
I can just imagine where a motor like this can be in other applications especialy where a motor is stationary such as water pumps,and running air conditioners for homes.or even taking the place of a air conditioner . I as a consumer would really appreciate something in this nature. If a car like this would be illegal in the united states.
Posted by: joe | Jun 1, 2007 9:30:09 AM
Sounds like a good solution for India which needs low cost clean vehicles in its highly congested urban settings. Its storage capacity should cover most commutes there. Its ultimate power source could be renewables or atomic or coal plants placed far from the cities which can far more easily handle pollution than ICE vehicles can and at a lot less expence to consumers. Air quality is a huge factor in India and china and such cars and EVs could go a long way in improving their economic and personal physical health. India and china are different markets from our own. They can live with some of the inconveniences these vehicles would provide as they wait for the technology to improve. If the fuel recharge cost and vehicle cost are low they should do well there.
Posted by: Dave | Jun 13, 2007 12:38:05 AM
When will these air compressed engines be in production? I understand that there are still some bugs to get rid of but i would also like to play around with it.
Posted by: Adam | Jul 9, 2007 6:13:24 PM
Neat idea for the World Can a heater work in one?
Posted by: MIKE | Oct 2, 2007 2:57:30 AM
K:
The report you cite actually gives the efficiency of a multi-stage air motor as 83%. That's really not bad at all.
For a Battery EV a realistic figure is about 70% for the most advanced equipment available.
The report has the compressor efficiency at 51%. Combined efficiency would then be 43%. That's still very good compared with other alternatives, if the analysis is true.
Posted by: Lyle | Nov 4, 2007 11:24:06 AM
dear sir
i creat a idia in air engine
my addreses
anoop pb
pp purayil
muvattupuzha
ernakulam
mobile:9946334545
Posted by: anoop pb | Nov 16, 2007 11:55:49 PM
I have being checking on air engine and looks like a good idea to me. But why do you say the air eingine is not eficient if the measurements have been done and it takes 2.00 USD to travel like 200 km (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_car). Tell me which gasoline vehicle does that??? A 50cc scooter? Maybe. Driving on hydrogen fuel cell car it gives 100km per kg of hydrogen, the hydrogen today costs around 2.00 USD per kg at the factory when produced from natural gas. Should we verify this cost of $1.00 per 100 km of air car is really true? I would not invest on Tata unless I have proved this. People will not buy a different car if they will not obtain personal benefit, and poor indian or chinese worker isn't really worried about air polution, it is the government who have to force use of air cars in that countries.
The MDI engine looks to me very complicated, I would not invest a cent on that company, I would better invest on Engineair, Di Pietro's engine looks more promising.
Posted by: Nikolai | Nov 21, 2007 9:12:47 PM
Beg to differ with the naysayers, espciially the calculator named Erick who makes some very large errors in his work coming up with costs of $4,000 for a tank of compressed air. He needs to spend more time researching this on the web. The tank of compressed air would cost $2 worth of electricity. He seems to be an H2 advocate, not sure. H2 is not a solution because getting the H2 requires energy. It's simply a pollution displacer as in, we run our electric cars so we don't pollute in LA, but we get our electricity from coal plants in Wyoming.
Now switching back to the air compressed engine. They've been testing in India, and they plan to roll out cars in India in 2008. There is no logic to Erick's calculations, with all due respect, as to the masses and distances he speaks of. Does he not think that gasoline tanks in internal combustion engine cars is heavy? Actually, gasoline weighs more than compressed air, and ironically, a compressed air tank weighs only as much as the air that's in it. Just because it's compressed does not make it weigh more. Supposedly, the MDI solution can travel 200 Km on one tank of air. That doesn't seem too bad to me. As for the cars needing to be light weight...all cars need to be light weight, but with miniature explosions going on in your engine and super amounts of heat, an all aluminum engine is only possible with a compressed air engine. This is an engineer's dream come true since 90% of the energy produced in the burning of gasoline is used to heat up the engine not to move the car. So, the efficiencies of an air car are multi-pronged.
I understand the disbelief people have in not wanting to realize a way to actually run cars effectively without a reliance on oil, but guess what...this is the future.
Posted by: Steve M | Dec 1, 2007 3:14:36 AM
Great comments on MDI engine and fuel system. MDI has captured a hurricane in his engine. MDI and Tata Motors
agreement to improve MDI engine and fuel system will be a big plus. We will have to wait on what Tata Motors has planned for the MDI.
Posted by: Steven L. | Dec 8, 2007 7:50:55 PM
Why would a car like this be illegal in the United States?
Posted by: Drew | Dec 23, 2007 6:58:11 PM
We have seen a lot these "signing agreements" for nearly a decade now, but no cars. Videos touted on the internet as being the prototype "ready for production next year" are nearly 10 years old. What is going on?
MDI is financing itself by selling "licenses" all over the world to different buyers for approximately $350,000 USD. This is an unusual way to raise money. The licensee has to agree to a number of payments later on, and MDI says they will build a "turnkey factory" in the licensee's "territory" for about 1 milions dollars US.
In each instance, such as the Mexican and South African signing ceremonies, we are shown the same photos and videos and told the car will be on the market "next year". But next year keeps getting put off. To date, no factories have been built, and no cars have reached the market. The website for the South African company no longer exists down and I can find no trace of the "licensee" on the Internet (she used to work for a mega-car dealer, apparently).
The licensee thing is interesting, as it avoids scrutiny from investment authorities such as the Securities and Exchange Commission here in the USA. There is a group of "investors" in California trying to form a company to buy a "license", but they have not successfully raised the capital yet. There are no licenses sold yet in the USA, but apparently a lot in other countries including an alarming number in Mexico.
To certify a car for use in the USA (other than as an NEV) would require millions and millions of dollars in crash testing and EPA certification. So the idea of becoming the next Preston Tucker for a million dollars does not seem feasible, at least in the USA.
Tata motors appears to be one of the few "real" car companies to sign a license agreement with MDI. Tata, as you may know, is one of the prospective bidders on the Jaguar/Range Rover line and has an established track record in India.
So perhaps Tata sees something in this technology or perhaps they figure for $350,000 they have nothing to lose, or perhaps maybe Indians are not as smart as we thought they were.
They are bidding on Jaguar, after all....
Oddly enough, the Official Tata Motors website makes no mention of the MDI partnership or anything else relating to compressed air vehicles.
The proof is in the pudding. There have been a lot of folks out there claiming to have the next big thing, only to fizzle out. The unusual financing arrangment of MDI does make one scratch their heads. They are selling licenses, for the most part, to unsophisiticated
Time will tell. But thermodynamics and basic physics is stacked against compressed air technology. 4000 psi tanks will take considerable energy to refill, and the range issue makes flooded-cell electric cars look like long-range vehicles.
And if the idea was truly great, there would be legions of copiers already rushing competing vehicles to market. That is the real kicker.
Oh yes, I forgot, the same old saw - the oil companies and GM are "suppressing the technology"
If you believe that, I have a license in a compressed air car to sell you....
Posted by: Robert Bell | Jan 3, 2008 9:43:53 AM
I think some pepople are being too tough on MDI, and their compressed air engines. I thin thats how the world's soon going to figure out the best in alternative fuels technology, as this is something the world needs in very near future.(or otherwise world will be damaged beyond repair. Algore does give all of us sleepless nights)
Posted by: Tahir Mukhtar | Jan 10, 2008 8:33:30 AM
Both the air car and engineair sound like potential technologies that should actually work and be beneficial if the R&D continues. I would guess it needs many more minds than its founders to reach its potential. Though I would prefer to use the engineair motor, if Tata offered the air car in the US I'd seriously consider buying even this 1st generation of air vehicles. More importantly, if there were air car clubs. (like the ev clubs) I'd be there in a minute. I believe that's where the genius of development will start from.
Posted by: Ben Brown | Jan 31, 2008 4:46:33 AM
I believe the DMM would be a good choice for the air engine, if used together, my new compressed air generator
Details about how the actual engine will be are not published, on DMM Site.
I will provide details on how the engine should be.
Posted by: Odilon De Moura | Feb 7, 2008 1:00:03 PM
A Good move by TATA.
There obligation on CO2 Emissions passed onto the Energy Companies.
Everytime the compressed air needs refilled the generators spike the power stations, inturn their emissions go up.
Wonder who will pay for the energy increase!!!!
Smart move for TATA, just a headache for power boys.
Posted by: Ian Houston | Feb 21, 2008 9:35:12 AM
For more information on the Air Car, check out catvolution.com or mdi.lu
Posted by: Paul | Feb 25, 2008 12:52:10 PM
Good Morning. . . I am so very interested in this new technology of cars, however I'm don't understand why no one is using the energy from the wheels in motion to reproduce the air with on-board compressors or on-board generators. I'd like your feedback on this, as I am very interested in owning a car like this and/or becoming a dealer of this outstanding cars! Keep up the good work.
Posted by: David Guerin | Mar 9, 2008 9:07:50 AM
We have an improved version of several Air Related components such as a more efficient engine, and auxillaries such as auxilliary multifuel on-board hi efficiency engine, for a air/combustion hybrid, and finally more efficient compressors. Sannerprojects, Inc (USA) JRIAM1945@aol.com. Works well with geothermal and solar concentrator systems.
Posted by: Jriam1945@aol.com | Apr 22, 2008 10:07:03 PM
I can see the advert..
"Buy our air-powered car - it'll blow you away!"
;o)
Posted by: Stan Wellaway | Apr 23, 2008 7:31:58 AM
