If Combustion Engines Have A Future, What Is It?

[@chrismorris6982]

I like how the whiteboard takes up the whole screen, no need for wasted space here. Quality, underrated program!

[@sixunity1171]

every pixel is important here

[@ivanbrasla]

"Underrated" 2.91M subscribers lol

[@sanchitrawat8051]

@@ivanbrasla Considering some car reviewers' channels which have way more subscribers, it's pretty underrated

[@arpitkhole7100]

Just looking at that whiteboard is pleasing

[@CorneliusJefferson]

Right? His whiteboard skills are top tier

[@abrahamking3950]

Agreed!

[@bumbr07]

could you image some PPT instead..omg

[@steveschu]

Indeed

[@deanking6405]

Wish my profs had the whiteboard skills he has tbh

[@hakankarakurt1100]

Man I like this guy. I’ve gone through my last 7 years or so with him. Through college and now master’s. Hey Jason if you read this know that I sincerely thank you for your work. Being a mechanical engineer myself, I love how you teach without losing relevance even if you don’t use much math/calculus. Please never get rid of that whiteboard. I would nominate you for one of my new gen top gear trio. That’s pretty much the highest car-guy honor I know...

[@Hillwatch]

I second this nomination

[@Crunch_dGH]

Burn = resource forever gone from multiple uses. Electric = > 90% recyclable battery materials, plus several sustainable non-polluting alternative sources. So, just curious, can opposing piston engines be scaled up to drive ocean-going shippers? Then again, what justifies the burning, that makes “efficiency” go infinitely negative?

[@Anohaxer]

@@Crunch_dGH Practical considerations. Ocean-going shippers can't reasonably use electricity, the mass-power density is too low. Besides, the lithium required is uneconomical. If we take something like the CMA CGM Benjamin Franklin, that carries 16 000 m³ of fuel oil. This is a modern, large container ship carrying 18 kTEU, with a 63 MW turbocharged diesel engine. As a diesel engine, it is multi-fuel, and can burn anything from heavy fuel oil to methanol to LNG or even hydrogen. As a neat solution for the sake of comparison, we can take standard European automotive diesel fuel, with a density of 845 kg/m³ and 43 MJ/kg of specific energy. Taking into account the fact that marine two-stroke diesel engines such as the one on the Benjamin Franklin have an efficiency around 50%, we can calculate that the useful energy stored on the Benjamin Franklin in the form of diesel oil is 16000 m³ · 845 kg/m³ · 43 MJ/kg *0.5 = 291 TJ, for a weight 13 520 tonnes. To store that same amount in lithium-ion, which we optimistically give a specific energy of 1080 kJ/kg (300 Wh/kg, realistically current consumer technology hits around 265 Wh/kg or a bit under 1 MJ/kg), with 100% charge/discharge efficiency (realistically 80-90%), it will take 296 444 tonnes of lithium-ion batteries to give that same energy. Now, that's 13 520 tonnes versus 296 444 tonnes. But perhaps we are willing to go with the larger tonnage, since it's green. There are, however, several issues with this. Firstly, the need for space. Converting this to an equivalent of cargo containers required to carry the batteries, each heavy tested 20-foot container can carry a maximum net load of 28 tonnes. That gives us a 9 623 TEU equivalent space, over half of the cargo capacity on the Benjamin Franklin, simply for batteries, by volume. By a more reasonable calculation, we havea density of around 2.5 MJ/l for pure lithium-ion batteries, which means 116 400 m³ of volume, or optimistically 2 700 TEU, still 15% of the cargo volume and many, many times the current fuel tank volume. The second issue I see is the economics. With current (quite low) battery prices, those 296 444 tonnes of batteries are $10.67B USD. Nearly eleven billion dollars. Total construction contracts on ships of these sizes are usually in the $2-3B USD range, with ship materials accounting for maybe $300M USD and the rest being labour, design, and profit. For the energy supply materials alone to be four to six times that is unacceptable. From a purely theoretical, ideal standpoint, storing one MJ of energy takes around 20 g of elemental lithium metal as part of that kilogram of battery (yes, seriously, 2% by weight). That's 5 280 tonnes purely in lithium metal, or $227M USD at current market price. That alone is worth all the steel in a ship of this size. The third issue is that a ship of this size is not enough. The deadweight tonnage of the Benjamin Franklin is 185 000 DWT. That's effectively the maximum permissible weight capacity of the ship, including all cargo, fuel oil, the mass of the ship itself, fresh water, ballast water, provisions, possible passengers and crew. She will never surpass this weight without finding herself at the bottom of the sea. She can't lift 296 444 tonnes of batteries. In fact, 296 444 tonnes of batteries is well over twice the weight of the ship itself, the pure empty displacement. This is one of the largest cargo ships ever put to sea. She couldn't carry the batteries required to fuel herself, or even half of that. It doesn't really matter whether you can make more efficient diesel engines fit large marine vessels. Because you can never make all-electric power systems fit large, long-range marine vessels. This is why we use diesel engines, because diesel is the most efficient, environmentally-friendly choice, and as it is multi-fuel, it can be easily fueled with renewable fuels, such as Neste Renewable Diesel. This is by far the better solution to marine vessels. There is no competition, in a free market, electric marine propulsion will not take off until lithium is as common as sand and batteries can store at least ten times what they store currently.

[@joshuagibson2520]

I can never decide if he's 25 or 45.

[@BigCat553]

He is 300 years old, duh. That is why he knows so much...

[@davidwong825]

He is an alchemist...only role playing as an engineer 😄

[@JoshuaTootell]

Seeing as how he has a Miata, be could also be 65.

[@SolaricAngel116]

@@JoshuaTootell Or 85.

[@siimu111]

Asking: "How old are you? Jason: "yes"

[@DanielJaegerFilms]

It’s interesting to think a gasoline engine is actually working hard at idle. Never thought about it that way before.

[@bigman7293]

Oh yeah, high vacuum and the engine is trying to suck air in when it’s very difficult

[@thepurdychannel8866]

What about a diesel engine

[@grandrapids57]

true although it also can depend on the style of comparison..At idle it is using rather little fuel. An instant fuel usage gauge will show, like on my car, 35mpg at 40mph, but 3mpg under full throttle.

[@thepurdychannel8866]

@@grandrapids57 wow

[@spamcan9208]

@@thepurdychannel8866 they don't have a throttle plate to close for a piston to pull a vacuum against afaik.

[@kristapsvalainis1671]

I've heard about running an old car until it dies being more environmentally friendly than buying a new e/v. Is this actually true? Would love to see Engineering Explained guy going over the statistics of this issue

[@louiscardinale1701]

Jason, I watched an episode of Autoline last year where discussed about plasma ignition. Any thoughts?

[@creatineenjoyer7345]

Depends if its an old v8 it will continue polluting. If its an old 4 cylinder, keep it till it dies. Also not all new cars take so much carbon to produce. Simple cars like VW Up or Smart ForTwo dont create huge carbon footprint during production

[@kristapsvalainis1671]

@@creatineenjoyer7345 I live in Europe, V8s aren't particularly popular, to the point that I don't know anyone who has owned a V8 car. And while a VW Up doesn't create huge emmisions in the manufacturing process, it's a very tiny and impractical car, so immediately doesn't fit my use cases

[@EngineeringExplained]

Answered here (starts at 9 mins 30 secs), however a video dedicated to the subject could be interesting! kzbin.info/www/bejne/bIPLpZyGmsuJsK8

[@arog7493]

I'm fairly certain that question was answered in one of his videos in the EV series he made a while ago. Feel like I can remember that at least.

[@utharaptortrex]

An HCCI engine seems like a good solution for an ultra efficient, low emitions range extender hybrid. When you need the engine, it just starts up, goes to it's most efficent rpm and stays there until the battery is charged and then shuts off. No need for great timming control since it stays at a constant rpm and load.

[@windshield11]

Yep, you can use a CVT and one of those.. ez fixed rpm

[@cbracing808]

Yup, pretty sure that's what mazda uses already.

[@ritwikreddy5670]

HCCI is mostly used in industrial applications with a constant rpm.

[@madisonrollings1845]

@@ritwikreddy5670 What is a hybrid but a mobile industrial generator?

[@jeffbeasley8235]

Engine speed is one factor in determining actuator positions in an engine, but there are so many other inputs and outputs in a modern combustion engine, it will make your head spin. For HCCI to work well, you really need an exact charge temperature when the charge is reaching TDC. That is a function of ambient temperature, ambient pressure, coolant temperature, valve lift and timing (dynamic compression ratio and valve overlap), amount of air going into the cylinder (it is not trivial to get a constant load, especially if you're allowed to be at different altitudes), amount of fuel injected... If you want to turbocharge to get more efficiency or better consistency of load at various altitudes, now you have even more things to control that all affect your charge temperature, valve overlap now has an even more massive impact on in-cylinder temps too, and those cylinder temps affect your combustion timing, which affect your exhaust temps, which feed back into the in-cylinder temps. If you want to make HCCI really work properly, you'd need a stationary engine that never changes in altitude, in a temperature and humidity controlled room, that never has to warm up, and is calibrated perfectly for those conditions. There's a reason that the closest thing to this in a road car of any kind is Mazda's SPCCI tech.

[@FELiPES101]

So HCCI and PCCI are more industrial applications where they just run for hours or days at one rpm rather than an automotive applicaition

[@HankBizzle]

Could make for decent generators but not much else.

[@ferrumignis]

@@HankBizzle Fine for a hybrid range extender, or possibly in conjunction with a CVT.

[@stefanguels]

@@HankBizzle That would qualify them for use as range extenders to charge batteries in vehicles with an electric drive train

[@polsal69]

Downside for RCCI engine was that it requires two different fuel systems. It's not that big of a deal as it sounds in America. Poland is third country in the world counting cars with dual fuel systems (around 13% of all cars on the road). Most of them are petrol engines with additional LPG (liquefied petroleum gas, autogas) system installed. People install it because of cost efficiency (LPG has different taxes). Engine consume around 25% more fuel (1.25L of gas instead of 1L of petrol), but gas is 50% cheaper then petrol. Whole installation costs around 800 USD and you can save this amount of money under 2 years. I drive Jeep XJ with 4.0L engine and LPG installation. It has 330k kilometers on the clock and works like a charm. Car has standard 70L petrol tank and 70L gas tank in the trunk (that can be filled up to 54L only because of safety regulations). Engine can work on both, normally it starts on petrol and switch to gas when it heats up to 40 degrees Celsius required to efficiently vaporize liquid gas in the system. Dual fuel is not that big of a drawback :)

[@peterm3861]

I've always liked you Polish guys with your LPG conversions, very smart i think. Greets from Germany :)

[@Phenx]

Not only Poland but in Brazil also there is a lot of cars running on LPG, cool to know that are other countries that also use it in cars

[@volodumurkalunyak4651]

In Poland you can have LPG/GAS car that run's fine using only gas and no LPG and runs fine using LPG and no gas. RCCI works different, it requres BOTH gas and diesel fuel to run.

[@polsal69]

@@volodumurkalunyak4651 absolutely right. In fact, you can't start cold engine on LPG, so you need to have at least a little bit of petrol for first few minutes of operation. But you are correct, car is driving on one of 2 in the same time. My point was that as it was explained in the video as it would be a big drawback, more complexity of the fuel system, more inconvinient for people to fill up 2 tabks on petrol station. Both points are true, but from owner experience, it's doable :) 13% of car owners in Poland are proof that it's also doable on bigger scale.

[@Cabalerio]

In Poland we use diesel cars with LPG that is injected in to the intake, so the 'future' technology is actually old. 🙂

[@peterm3861]

Is this technology under development currently to be used in future engines or is it available as a aftermarket system for older cars? Greets from Germany :)

[@Cabalerio]

They said that at 120km/h it burns 3l of diesel and 1.5l of LPG. Probably in Germany you would like to use CNG instead of LPG, but I think there is no difference from installation standpoint.

[@peterm3861]

@@Cabalerio Sounds very interesting. So LPG is injected in addition to the diesel? No we also have LPG here, I think more than CNG... But who knows how long they will continue the tax advantages on LPG. If they stop it one day it wouldn't make sense anymore to use LPG. They did the same with E85 a few years ago... Tax advantages were stopped and there was no E85 anymore

[@BigUriel]

@@peterm3861 LPG/CNG and Diesel hybrid systems have been around for decades. It's just not very common. The engine runs on Diesel at low loads and then as load increases LPG/CNG is added to the intake. A small amount of Diesel continues to be injected to initiate the combustion, otherwise the LPG/CNG on its own will either not burn at all or knock.

[@alexs3187]

Yeah I heard about this technology about 15 years ago. I didn’t think many people did it. I think some people in Australia had their 4x4s converted for it. LPG really died down there in the last decade.

[@FSXgta]

Im almost always accelerating at full throttle. Because over here in europe we have cars that barely have enough power to start rolling

[@kevinmills5293]

Ain’t that the truth.

[@niklasstrassl7909]

60hp gang

[@Re_Kitty]

God no, 150ps minimum

[@kevinmills5293]

@@Re_Kitty I’ve a 155ps (allegedly) Puma and I still have to change down to get up the hills on some motorways.

[@ΘάνατοςΧορτοφάγος]

I drove 1108cc for 10 years 👌

[@setharcher5869]

Two similar subjects I'd be interested in: 1) if 93 octane were the standard instead of 87, how much more efficient could the average vehicle be? 2) If engines were designed for e85, how efficient could they be?

[@neutronpcxt372]

1) Not a significant difference, but enough not to be negligible. 2) They would become more efficient/kWh, but far less efficient/fuel consumed, since ethanol has lower energy density than gasoline.

[@JSBHP2017]

I'm studying automotive engineering and one of my professors who is researching about combustion engines and varieties of fuel for the last 30+ years said, that it's not the engine thats bad for us, it's the fuel we're using and there's no point in raging and killing off something that works so well and maintains so many jobs all over the world.

[@andrasbiro3007]

Except electric motors are far superior. And keeping jobs is no reason to keep an inferior technology, or we would still riding horses.

[@christopherayala4619]

Facts

[@streamin16]

Would love your take on the metallurgy required for these engines and how that holds back commercialization. My understanding is that the flame fronts of SI and CI engines are relatively gentle on the cylinders, pistons, heads, and valves whereas the explosions happening inside the latter 3 engines can wreck havoc on those surfaces.

[@thefirstjackdeals]

"Pretty much useless if you can't get full load out of the engine" *cries in Atkinson cycle*

[@MrBenHaynes]

I think the gains that Toyota see in their mild hybrid vehicles Atkinson cycle range compared to straight Otto cycle is remarkable. ~50% less fuel usage and better drivability. Excellent efficiency gains for very little extra outlay.

[@thefirstjackdeals]

@@MrBenHaynes All true, but I think you misunderstand what I meant. Atkinson cycle engines have only 60% the maximum full load hp of a similarly sized otto cycle engine. I was just chuckling to myself when he said pretty much useless at 40% full load when the Atkinson cycle at 100% load is only producing 60% of the hp

[@matt_b...]

I just want to point out: 2.91 ...MILLION...subscribers. Jason, not too shabby. You may want to consider this whole KZbin thing full time! 😉

[@ivanbrasla]

Not sure if /s or not, but i think he already does. There is a video where he talks about this i'm sure

[@TheGIGACapitalist]

With battery demand far exceeding supply, even at such low EV adoption rates, the clear solution is using an ICE as a range extender rather than having everyone haul around 500 miles worth of batteries when the vast majority of people need less than a quarter of that for daily use.

[@rolliebca]

The Super Capitalist - I agree 100% at least until battery technology and production can catch up. Seems to me it should be doable to get an arrangement that could approach 100 mpg equivalent with today's technology.

[@aquamaggerasim4993]

ICEs like Rotary Engines haven’t been developed enough but they have great potential!

[@Arcadia1997]

Exactly! We can have ICEs run constantly at their peak efficiency, and maybe even use super capacitors instead of batteries to store the power.

[@TheGIGACapitalist]

@@aquamaggerasim4993 I really like rotaries for PHEVs. It seems like all their weak points are countered by the strengths of PHEVs and you can also get a great sounding engine in a small form factor.

[@nobodynobody3903]

@@TheGIGACapitalist rotary and plugin sounds like a great idea🤔 but rotaries need to become a bit more fuel efficient first i guess

[@QueensGTO_Viper]

um, have you seen Mad Max? The future of ICEs is awesome

[@tommylyeah]

Marvelous Guzzleine!

[@jaydunbar7538]

@@SentientSingularity "goes bad" sure, but will still run for at least a decade. Maybe not good, and may make the vehicle look like a mosquito fogger, but in the apocalypse I doubt either will matter. Then of course any gasoline engine can run on alcohol, and that was getting made long before the industrial revolution and will continue being made till the sun explodes and takes us all out.

[@sdc303]

Oh yeah!

[@christopherayala4619]

Facts

[@charlesschulz8416]

Barter town was powered by pigshit🤣

[@Phil2stroke]

honestly i’ve been told so many times that carburetor’s were going to disappear one day its 2021 you can still buy a motorcycle with one lol gasoline will stick around longer than people think

[@Xander1Sheridan]

it will not go away until we can have mini nuclear plants running our vehicles.

[@jtm9945]

If it gets banned then yes it will go away soon.

[@chitlitlah]

They've been illegal on cars for over three decades and it's getting hard to find new motorcycles with carburetors these days. Even some dirt bikes have fuel injection. Carburetors won't completely disappear as long as small engines such as in lawn mowers are ICEs, but they have pretty much disappeared from the streets.

[@cpufreak101]

@@chitlitlah I do know small engine as a whole may be vanishing though in favor of battery electric tools. even Lawnmowers now can be had with batteries that last them several hours, and they tend to be easier for the end user (IE, no having to pull start. just turn it on and go). where I live I very much see such a transition happening.

[@chitlitlah]

@@cpufreak101 Yeah. I bought a two-stroke weed wacker, but since I only used it about once a year, the fuel went bad and it stopped running well after a few uses. I probably could've fixed it, but instead I bought an electric one and haven't had that issue. It can sit for several years and then be ready to go as long as the battery is charged. Same with an electric chainsaw I had until it got stolen. My lawnmower is still an ICE though, as I use it more often, but they're getting less common as battery tech gets better. Anyway, point is carburetors are still around but not very common. Internal combustion engines will be around for a few more decades at least, especially in automobiles, but they're slowly going away as well. I hope they don't go away completely because electric vehicles aren't nearly as fun.

[@Danger_mouse]

What this video shows more than anything, is just how clever the team at Mazda have been with their HCCI Skyactiv engine. The guys that spent years making triangular fires go around in circles have made a usable, real world efficient engine and put it into production. 👍

[@SamuelsShea]

Would love to see a video on Porsche's eFuel endeavor.

[@bentullett6068]

I have noticed that it's not just Porsche being interested in this either as there are loads of companies joining in with the Siemens carbon capturing project like Porsche have as the byproducts of carbon captur is the synthetic fuel and hydrogen. There have been other experiments where both hydrogen and and a green fuel has been created by sunlight.

[@daszieher]

This is going to be hotter than hydrogen.

[@kamenriderblade2099]

Carbon Capture & Synthetic Fuels is the future of ICE on the Fuel End of the Equation.

[@daszieher]

@@kamenriderblade2099 good thing about that: most efuels coming up are fully backwards compatible, so no issues like pure ethanol.

[@christopherayala4619]

Yes he should make that vid

[@hugieflhr03]

You need to do a video on electric car batteries and what happens when they are no longer useful. What hazards they pose and what can be recycled.

[@EngineeringExplained]

Here ya go! kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z567hICtj7qcebc

[@vitaly6312]

I know this is an engineering monologue/lesson, but habitat destruction is how we’ve gotten into into this climate change fiasco, along with rising emissions. Yes we can (and should) lower emissions responsibly. Responsibly meaning through innovation instead of laws like California. What we aren’t addressing is habitat restoration - for example, the tall grass prairie was once nearly 200 million acres in the Midwest. Grasslands are the worlds greatest carbon sinks, more so than forests even. We’ve destroyed them to be farmlands for corn, wheat, and soy monocrops that do not take carbon out of the air, do not do a good job at retaining water, and require inputs from petroleum based fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides, and other inputs. We should certainly work on bettering efficiency on electric and ICE engines, as well as figure out actually green fuels like nuclear. We cannot do one and not the other - that’s like scooping water out of a boat with a hole in it. You’ve gotta patch the hole.

[@ZOrdZ]

As always a great video. How about making one about large marine engines with supposedly 50% + efficiency?

[@jamesvandamme7786]

I'd like to see a discussion of EV vs. hi-efficiency range extended hybrid vs. ICE vs. hydrogen FC.

[@jamesvandamme7786]

@@phamnuwen9442 ... but then there's the complexity, the loss of space due to the battery, and the extra expense. I wonder how it compares over a number of years? A mild hybrid makes no sense for the driving I do, which is mostly rural.

[@pauldavies7469]

What about the possibility of synthetic fuels? They're definitely worth considering far more than they currently are

[@jamesvandamme7786]

​@@pauldavies7469 Unless they're carbon neutral and get heavily subsidized, cost is higher than fossil oil. They make ethanol in Brazil where there's lots of sugar cane. If somebody came up with a cheap fuel cell that ran on liquid synth fuel that would kill ICE. Gaseous hydrogen won't cut it. The best current idea I've seen is the Mazda MX-30 which has a small (cheap) battery and a range extender. They use a rotary engine, which is smaller and cheaper than pistons. Running at constant RPM, it will have better efficiency. If it's only used for long trips, the longevity problems don't matter.

[@pauldavies7469]

@@jamesvandamme7786 see Porsche's E-Fuels. They are carbon neutral. Like literally everything including EVs, cost will come down over time though yes at the start they will be expensive but that's no reason not to do it and use them. Fossil fuels need to go but there are alternatives! Love your idea of putting EVs against hybrids and Hydrogen powered vehicles

[@RahulPatel-fp3ju]

Honestly I don't think ICEs are going anywhere. Perhaps more time will be invested into hydrogen combustion or synthetic fuels.

[@chappy2121]

Itl be a combination of them i think. Other industries are far more damaging than average joes car. Unless they're trying to stop people from going to work? Have a look at Refrigerant gases for example, absolutely horrific the c02 rating on them. I'm a Refrigeration engineer and can save 20 years allowance of c02 for my driving by fixing ONE refrigerant leak

[@ameserich]

Future ICE might be "Opposed Engine" fueled by Hydrogen. Do you have an idea what Opposed Engine is?

[@RahulPatel-fp3ju]

@@ameserich Yes. It's really funny you mentioned that because I have been thinking about an idea for just that - an opposed-piston, hydrogen engine.

[@arthurbenedetti9146]

i worked with fuell cells, its not the future

[@arthurbenedetti9146]

@@RahulPatel-fp3ju you dont use pistons for hydrogen. Hydrogen makes the metal britle, it's really small so it escapes the rings and valve seals and its really light, so even if it has a lot of power per mass it doesn't per volume. It dosent smell and it burns transparent wich makes more probable for accidents. Fuel cells are better for hydrogen but have many problems as well

[@zahari_s_stoyanov]

Here in Europe, people install LPG systems on both Gas and Diesel engines. So if you install that on a diesel, you basically end up with your own RCCI engine :D

[@ianchandley]

LPG and Diesel? You sure? Doesn’t LPG have a lower ignition point than diesel (but similar to gas)? LNG and diesel have similar ignition points and both fuels can be used interchangeably (or mixed) in Diesel engines.

[@enja001]

@@ianchandley lpg injection has been around for diesels for quite some time. Improves engine efficiency

[@enja001]

And by quite some time I mean since day 1

[@gioa.348]

When I saw the bad on CI and it said "Rich A/F" I thought he meant Rich As F*** until he said Rich Air Fuel 🤣

[@andrewhirsch1650]

Dear Explained: carbon fiber blocks will save weight; electronic valves will assist trimming; octane increase helps efficiency. The old gal has many tricks left. Love your vids. I'm an old Quadrajet engineer for GM.

[@marktrued9497]

At 15:15, sums it up neatly. You can jump through all the technical hoops, the mechanical complexity and the associated service costs and failure rates, all to achieve half the efficiency of an EV.

[@morgan5630]

You could solve the multiple fuel issue by having dual nozzles that lock into your filler neck that go into dual tanks, each the correct size so that they empty at the same rate. The nozzle would only go in one way, and thus the general public would be able to fuel up easily.

[@jaydunbar7538]

And would require specialized pumps to be installed, fine for a long term theory but terrible in short term practicality. If that had been brought up decades ago maybe, but at this point no gas station chain is going to invest in that knowing that electric gets better every day.

[@willf2896]

How about charging 100+ million EVs on carbon fueled power plants.

[@MrUnexistential]

You know that the people who buy EVs also support wind, solar, nuclear, and hydroelectric power?

[@mutated__donkey5840]

@@MrUnexistential you know they don't have any power over where there electricity come from?

[@aaasdswagttyjhfjy4008]

@@MrUnexistential In sweden we closed a perfectly running nuclear reactor at new years eve that had 20+ years of life left in it, with the explanation "We built more MW of wind power than the reactor made last year, its fine". So a few weeks after they closed it, we had -10 degrees celsius in the south and -25 in the north of the country, and no wind. They cranked up an old oil power plant and imported polish coal-power. This was all made possible by the same people who thinks the electric cars are the rescue, whatever source you charge them off

[@willf2896]

@@MrUnexistential Not from what I've seen living here in CA, most EVs and Hybrid vehicles have all kinds of stickers plastered on them, most of which who seem to want to ban just about everything. I'm not not knocking the EV trend, but there is no magic bullet.

[@arthemis1039]

As an EV supporter, this is one of my main argument to defend clean and reliable energy sources. Going electric allows to centralise all the emissions to the power plant, which can be replaced by low carbon emission, effectively getting rid of all emissions. That's why I support electric heating vs gas or domestic fuel heating, etc.

[@JakkiPi]

Everyone forgets about airplanes.

[@samwyzegg7935]

And the fact that small planes still use leaded fuel hahaha.

[@TheRealDrJoey]

That was a great moment in King Kong: "There's one thing we haven't thought of--the aeroplane!"

[@UnipornFrumm]

Airplanes have jet engines not piston engines like cars

[@RudyOMP]

@@UnipornFrumm Not all planes have jet engines

[@samwyzegg7935]

@@UnipornFrumm Uh not all planes. Propeller planes have some form of reciprocating engine. There are many configurations like radial, rotary, V, H, and Wenkel. They all of pistons just like car engines. They need leaded fuel so that knocking doesn't occur at the higher elevations with lower atmospheric pressure.

[@scottclute8413]

This man explains all so very well. and quick..

[@jpdj2715]

CI - replace the single injection nozzle by, say, 10 and each blob of fuel coming in, is 1/10th with exponentially larger surface (surface relates to the 2nd power of blob radius and volume with the 3rd power, so surface to volume ratio improves a lot). And, if we want to slow down global heating, then we need more particulate matter in the atmosphere, like we had in the older days.

[@Pedro5antos_]

AWESOME Content!! We can't go "All In" in just one tecnology

[@UnipornFrumm]

Ehm,why not? We are all in in touchscreens for example

[@siraff4461]

@@UnipornFrumm A perfect example of why new tech shouldn't be universally hailed as great simply for it being different. They are terrible to use in almost all cases when you actualyl want to drive the car. Great for marketing but junk once you're past that.

[@Xander1Sheridan]

@@UnipornFrumm no we aren't. Plenty of people still use flip phones and blackberry style phones.

[@UnipornFrumm]

@@Xander1Sheridan verry few

[@AMONALAKH]

@@UnipornFrumm yes we are all in for touch screen on mobile devices. But the mouse and keyboard still lives on for certain applications.

[@Tarkov.]

Darn, I was hoping this would be a look into ethanol fuels.

[@jaydunbar7538]

Worse for the environment then gasoline, but fantastic for boost.

[@dragospahontu]

@@jaydunbar7538 it's better, look at South America

[@jonasstahl9826]

@@dragospahontu What is good on ethanol? Burning food while people starwing to death

[@dragospahontu]

@@jonasstahl9826 there is food for everyone, calm down

[@Defy_Convention]

the switchgrass revolution

[@lexzm]

MotiveDVD did a video series going over the different ways fuel could be mixed with different alcohols and oxidizers to see what produced the most power. Would be interesting to see your take on using alternative fuels. Great content, always learnin!

[@DanielvanKATWIJK]

Hello, So as I understand it, RCCI is what is already used in diesel engines which run on dual fuel gas (LPG) and some diesel to ignite. You find this in Italy and England where they convert diesel to diesel with LPG. Even in Australia, I saw this kind of technique. This for 20 years now. It is easy to install on existing vehicles. I tried an Alfa 159 Station 2.4 liter Diesel equipped that had 20% more power and 35% more torke. Up to 45% less fuel depending on the load.

[@RaynaldoPascaPurnomo]

Like how this channel educated about how does engine works. So we can figure it out about our engine well. Thank you 🙌🏻

[@fortitudevalance8424]

Love your videos no horrendous bg music or cheap nasty effects.

[@BornaBB]

I wouldn't mind fueling up twice for such an efficient engine

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

Especially if they are literally next to each other at the pump.

[@domesticwingman389]

I wouldn't mind too, but remember there are Americans and Karens in the world, so that's unfortunately a no.

[@BornaBB]

@@imnotusingmyrealname4566 Where i come from they are so that wouldn't be a problem

[@cheesemons]

If the same pump island have both fuels then it would be better. Big rigs in the US are already doing it with urea (aka purified piss) and diesel. Shoutout to JJ The Trucker for his information

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@cheesemons In Europe and Australia it's also the case for normal car gas stations.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

Synthetic fuels maybe?

[@Plexipal]

Still burning and burning is what gives off emissions.

[@marfrandema1884]

Prex is right + INEOS told it'll be very very expensive to produce.

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@marfrandema1884 Ineos?

[@imnotusingmyrealname4566]

@@Plexipal Much less though. And how do you expect to get the resources for batteries for literally everything? Cars, trucks, planes, boats, helicopters, and the other gadgets that use batteries? The people that think there's no problem with resources for batteries also though that we would've run out of oil in 2015 of something. Elon's plan to get Lithium out of sand in the backyard of the factory is ridiculous anyway.

[@marfrandema1884]

Yes Mercedes F1 fuel supplier. They said it's not commercially viable, same thing happens with hydrogen.

[@Daniel-OConnell]

There are diesel trucks running on dual fuel with propane (LPG) injected into the manifold and standard common rail direct injection, ratio of propane to diesel fuel is about 4:1 by mass. Evaluation tests indicate increased horsepower output and a substantial reductions in emissions. There is more particulate in modern diesels coming from brakes, tyre wear and road wear than what comes out the exhaust, since the introduction of DPF . SCR Catalytic reduction using Adblue has also brought enormous benefits in reducing NOx emissions and modern diesels are a million miles cleaner than their predecessors. Much depends on the driving cycle of the vehicle and getting up to operating temperature quickly. Very small modern diesels are notoriously difficult to heat in cold climates/weather as the efficiency of modern engines continues to improve dramatically. Love your videos they are always entertaining and informative. I would love to see a video on emissions (HC, CO & NOx) from indirect diesel injection v's direct.

[@SkunZielonyJakMech]

Jason, from what I know pumping losses don't come from "sucking against restriction" but from the fact that piston pumps (hence 'pumping losses') from low pressure area - intake (p = 0.5 bar at part throttle) to high pressure area - exhaust (p > 1 bar). This also explains why turbocharged engines have "negative" pumping losses - because intake pressure > exhaust pressure, hence intake air pushes down the piston with more force than the piston have to push exhaust gas out.

[@jonfklein]

I'm glad you mentioned SPCCI. I'd be interested in finding out how that engine is making out on the market, and what further advances Mazda is making to the technology - perhaps some ideas for future videos.

[@FuncleChuck]

Combustion has a lot of value, but more for running generators than drivetrains

[@ben079329]

Energy density of fossile fuel is absolutely unmatched

[@HARRYAZZHOLE]

Would be the smartest direction. Like almost all trains.

[@solarissv777]

@@ben079329 nuclear fuel would like to object.

[@tylerzesiger7648]

Exactly! Ice should be used as power generators. They can be greatly reduced in size and tuned for maximum efficiency because of a very narrow and consistent rev range.

[@Welcometofacsistube]

Bs

[@xexas3000]

weekend drives. You don't need thousands of low powered combustion comute cars, those comutes can easily be done with electric cars, which are less expensive to run while you keep your cool 'old' combustion cars for those drives on the weekend.

[@CharlieBennici]

Unfortunately, not everyone feels that way :( We are in the minority here

[@marcoimanuel5489]

Those "old" ICE cars still produce emissions which still warms the planet, however with an "ICE" additional tax in place, ICE cars do still have a future

[@chappy2121]

@@marcoimanuel5489 so does growing rice, emissions from data centres, transport, aviation and over population. Refrigeration is also a massive contributer to c02 emissions, I can save my c02 allowance for 20 years motoring in one refrigerant leak

[@xxxxxtrxxx13]

This is clearly the most reasonable view for everyone. If commuter cars become EVs and sports cars remain ICE, nobody will be unhappy and there will be no enviromental damage, considering sports cars are probably 5% of cars, if not even less

[@RobWhittlestone]

Hi Jason - just to explain _why_ NOx is formed: the combustion mixture is fuel and air. Air is 78% nitrogen, only 21% oxygen and 1% other gases. The oxygen burns with the fuel but also combines with the abundant nitrogen to form NOx. The rate of NOx formation generally increases significantly above 2,800°F flame temperature. Lower temperatures lead to less NOx. ATB, Rob in Switzerland

[@SapioiT]

You know what we could really use? Trolley-trucks, and eventually also trolley-cars for the consumers. Maybe even make the usage of the power lines free for a few years, when you start implementing them.

[@matthewspry4217]

Kept an old honda VTEC start it only when I miss the nostalgic benzene smell 😂😂😂

[@chuckschillingvideos]

I'd put money on combustion engines' future way before I'd put it on EVs' future. Everybody is claiming EVs are going to take over but I don't see it. There are too many structural impediments to EV becoming ubiquitous that will never be addressed.

[@LightningxRaiden]

Thank you, I’m glad I’m not the only one who had this understanding

[@UnipornFrumm]

Evs will never become a thing like smartphones never became a thing,i mean who needs a verry powerfull computer in your poket when you can have a pc and wire phone,never run out of battery !

[@chuckschillingvideos]

@@UnipornFrumm You are completely missing the point (intentionally, is my guess). There are millions of drivers who do not live in locations where they can install charging stations nor are they within walking distance of one. Moreover, EVs are terrible choices in extreme heat and cold. Last but not least, their terrible range and lack of instant charging capability means they are highly compromised when it comes to making long trips. EVs are not the magical vehicles you make them out to be.

[@adamhulu6171]

100+year tortoise and hare race. ICE liquid fuels still have physics on their side. Electric cars have politics on their side. You can only cheat nature so long, time will tell if electric tech can catch liquid fuel fast enough.

[@LightningxRaiden]

@@adamhulu6171 exactly, politics won’t save the world.....

[@DryClutch83]

Actually you forgot to mention pre-chamber technology for SI engine and DFI for CI engine. Even synthetic and alternative fuels represet a potential future for ICEs.

[@christopherayala4619]

Facts

[@seanmorrison3744]

Authothermal reformation / thermochemical recuperation seems like a good candidate for reactivity controlled CI, since it sidesteps the two fuel issue. For something like methanol, using waste heat for hydrogen reformation increases the LHV of the fuel going into the engine by around 20%, so even if you did nothing else, that's an effective 5% increase in efficiency. You also have two fuels by default -- the reformed hydrogen, and methanol, so you can adjust the mixture of these to control combustion properties in the chamber. Of course, you can also do this with other fuels as well, but they typically require higher grade waste heat. This kind of technology is probably why Toyota is looking into hydrogen ICEs -- not because we particularly want to fill our cars up with compressed hydrogen, but because it opens the door to other technologies that can boost the efficiency of ICEs, and that can be made carbon neutral or negative. As for whether or not ICEVs have a future, I think it's pretty clear that they do. The issue with BEVs has always been charge time, not range. If they only had 200 miles of range but could be charged to full in 30 seconds, I think that would actually be a more compelling product than a car that has double the range, but takes hours to charge (i.e. what we currently have). The onus is really on BEVs to prove that they can displace regular cars, because, despite their efficiency, the long charge time means that they're a notable downgrade for certain use cases.

[@Mick.357]

A video discussing LiquidPiston’s new spin on the rotary engine would be a great video topic. High power:weight ratio perfect for an onboard generator for a series hybrid or other small motor applications.

[@stevenfarley6909]

Why wouldn’t combustion engines have a future? The future will have more power train options but to say combustion may not have a future is just wrong. I remember people in the 1990s saying that whiteboards will be a thing of the past, but here we are...

[@andrasbiro3007]

Because their exhaust is very harmful, and because electric motors are much better in practically every way. Ass soon as batteries get good enough and cheap enough, ICE is dead. And that's not that far away.

[@christopherayala4619]

Facts

[@christopherayala4619]

Synthetic fuels from Porsche might come in handy

[@snakeeyes9246]

Whiteboards don't destroy the environment. That's the difference.

[@skofijak]

"People aren't gonna want to put two different fuels in their car" - all people in Europe that use LPG goes "what??"

[@tubester4567]

Yeh but most people with LPG run on LPG most of the time and rarely fill the petrol tank. The method in the video requires 2 fuel fill up every time.

[@tomnwoo]

It's ok, no one uses LPG

[@skofijak]

@@tubester4567 some installations use fuel and LPG at the same time, but is like 20% gasoline 80% LPG, or even less fuel. Its when you use direct injection. Maybe in this method you use most gasoline and a bit of oil or something...

[@kapekape7580]

where did opposed piston engines with 55% efficiency go huh?

[@Somethingisntright64]

General Aviation aircraft still using them.

[@daveizdebski]

I have an idea to fix the RCCI engines two fuel issue for the consumer. At the station the nozzle can have 2 pumps connected together. Regular Gas comes out of the left nozzle and Diesel out of the right nozzle. The whole nozzle itself could connect to a gashole that has 2 holes, to take in both the diesel and gas into the 2 separate fuel tanks. The connection process would kind of be like a wall plug but a fuel nozzle.

[@jungjunpark9890]

I can’t believe that this guy is 72 years old

[@sking2173]

He isn’t ...

[@jungjunpark9890]

@@sking2173 it's a running joke that's not running out anytime soon.

[@DriversSide]

Interesting. It's crazy to think we are living in a time that may be the end of the combustion engine as we know it.

[@christopherayala4619]

Ik right smh

[@christopherayala4619]

But Porsche's synthetic fuels might come in handy

[@nathanwabre]

So let’s run the big old SI engines with synthetic fuels

[@christopherayala4619]

Right

[@nathanwabre]

@@christopherayala4619 it’s a little to easy to say that if course... But I’m sick of the approach of over engineering for a problematic fuel instead of choosing a better fuel. I bet Bio renewable CNG and synthetic fuels are great solutions!

[@christopherayala4619]

@@nathanwabre facts

[@aviator-kn8zq]

Porsche invested into synthetic fuels for early testing. ICE ain't going anywhere with regular manufacturers and their all purpose SUV's.

[@chappy2121]

It's crazy that we have all this knowledge about aerodynamics and ICE efficiency and manufacturers are pumping out heavier and heavier less aerodynamic and less efficient SUVS. Cars should be lighter and have far better aero but they're going the other way

[@rbn_hmrs541]

@@chappy2121 because the Soccer Moms want it, in Germany we cal it the Hausfrauenpanzer (Housewife's Tank) because "tHeY aRe So TaLl, I cAn SeE bEtTeR, aNd iTs So SaFe bEcAuSe iTs hEaVy AF aNd ObLiTeRaTeS fOoKiN EvErYtHiNg It CrAsHeS wHiTh"

[@christopherayala4619]

@@rbn_hmrs541 right rofl

[@chappy2121]

@@rbn_hmrs541 brilliant I'll remember that one 🤣🤣🤣

[@canman4058]

In Australia there have been some RCCI engines used in motor homes and towing vehicles that I have worked on. They consisted of a standard diesel with an added LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas is a Propane / Butane mix). The engines ran smoother, used less diesel and/or had more power. As mentioned, the drawback was complexity, additional up front cost, and the extra cost of running 2 fuels. Overall it did not save the owners much money.

[@bubaganoush55]

Awesome summary - thanks ! 👍

[@eoghanobrien6980]

Would be curious to see your view on synthetic fuels, they could be the emissions friendly answer for those of us who love the driving experience of a petrol (gasoline) engine. None of the infrastructure or range drawbacks of electric either.

[@christopherayala4619]

True

[@manuelfvdias]

I wonder why when talking about efficiency in electric cars i never saw anyone considering the cost of manufacturing the car, e.g.: it takes at least 30 times more copper to produce, it takes much more rare materials, and they cost much more to recicle the batterys (if meanwhile they can find a safe way to do it). Why is that? What do you think?

[@grekiki]

Manufacturing is a constant cost which is expected to drop a lot in the future, so it is not a big deal if they currently use somewhat more resources. For example let's suppose that less than 1% of all electric cars that will be made until 2030 were made before 2020. It doesn't really matter if they use 2-3 times more resources than what the technology will allow in the future. And since batteries are progressing at the significantly higher rate than Ice vehicle efficiencies you'd expect that electric cars will use less resources than ICE vehicles. Is recycling really a challenge? Just make it mandatory for the manufacturer. They can then price the car with the cost of it.

[@kamenriderblade2099]

Plug-In Hybrids are the best of Both Worlds IMO. I've check various studies and having a bit of both, especially one axle powered by ICE and the other axle powered by Battery + EM (Electric Motor) can give you the best results, especially on cost factors to end consumers.

[@papasmith7648]

@@grekiki if you make make recycling mandatory for the manufacturer then it will make EVs even more expensive.

[@ΘάνατοςΧορτοφάγος]

Cradle to cradle, EV beats ICE everytime

[@kamenriderblade2099]

@@ΘάνατοςΧορτοφάγος except in cost, convenience, & vehicle weight. That's why I still prefer Plug-In Hybrids.

[@PwnstarUK]

have you seen the opposed-piston 2 stroke engines formula 1 are considering ?

[@Assimilator1]

Like a small scale Deltic engine!? ;)

[@williammcwhorter6405]

Since Amazon appears to have put in a very large order for CNG/LNG-powered heavy trucks, I'm curious how that technology stacks up against diesel. And of course, you already did that excellent video on the pitfalls of towing with battery electric, so thank you for that!

[@brianwild7088]

Was told by a Diesel engineer that a) the particulates are somewhere around 20 microns which makes them heavier than air so they fall to the ground. b) NoX gas is a very unstable gas which has a life of about a half of a day compared to carbon dioxide which has a life of 300 years. So I still think diesel is the way to go.

[@lanelyons9303]

yes that is very much true. atleast the unburnt fuel part is.

[@kouji71]

I feel like controlling HCCI to avoid knock could be a very good use case for machine learning.

[@SOHCGT96]

The problem is you only have indirect control over it. Since nothing is triggering the combustion event except fixed mechanical events it takes really precise cylinder temperature control. But what COULD end up actually making it practical is freevalve style systems where you have full valve event control. If you have a very high static compression ratio, valve events can be used to bleed off a little bit of cylinder pressure and ultimately give you variable compression. This MIGHT give just enough control to make HCCI viable in the varying load/RPM/temperature of an automotive application. The problem is though, if you're bleeding air off to adjust compression, you're bleeding out a mixed fuel/air charge and it would lead to a lot of potential unburnt hydrocarbon emissions. Catalysts take care of this but still, unburnt fuel out will then drop your efficiency.

[@luiz_mootta]

The future is: Ethanol. It's plant based and it is more efficient than gasoline and it's arguably cleaner than electric cars. Because all the CO2 produced in the combustion of ethanol can be compensated by all the oxygen generated by the plants used in making Ethanol. Meanwhile electric cars are often used in countrys where the energy comes specially from fossil fuels and needles to say that the making of the batteries generates A LOT of pollution.

[@mrawesomelemons]

Yes but ethanol is mostly made of corn. And that requires massive amounts of land. So what'll happen is people will either: A. Chop up more of the already dying forests or B. Make fuel instead of food. This fuel brings massive ethical questions with it. And while it is more CO2 neutral it is not entirely CO2 neutral in creation and still carries other emissions with it.

[@luiz_mootta]

@@mrawesomelemons In fact all the possibilities brings problems with it. As you said there's this problem with ethanol but all the other possibilities there's problems too: gasoline, electric, diesel etc. But it bothers me people trying to sell electric cars as the ultimate solution for all ecological problems and wanting to ban internal combustion engines. In fact the solution would be a little bit of everything because as long there's humans on earth there's gonna be problems too. In Brazil we use sugar cane to make ethanol and this fuel is commonly more used than gasoline but there's still enough sugar cane to go to people's tables and remains some unused canes still, but I don't know how it would be in a worldwide scale.

[@mathiasmang848]

@@luiz_mootta you are so right. There is no solution for everything. You need a mixture of many different technologies... But politics are selling battery electric as the solution for everything

[@TheFlick175]

@@mrawesomelemons gotta have that high fructose corn syrup

[@christopherayala4619]

@@luiz_mootta exactly true

[@wilhelmdahlqvist3387]

What is your opinion on E85? Most petrol cars can be powered by it with only a retune of the engine, they can run at higher compression and produces less emissions.

[@AdrianoCasemiro]

There's no "one size fits all" kind of solution. Here in Brazil, most (up to 90%, depending on price and availability) of our ice cars run on ethanol (made of sugar cane). Fuel production actually captures a lot of carbon via photosynthesis. The ethanol burn is also very efficient and dumps less carbon during combustion. And that's achieved with very common and cheap technologies (flex fuel software on the ECU, some materials coating in the engine to prevent corrosion and the car is converted to run whatever fuel or mix between gasoline and ethanol). That only works in a hot climate country where you can grow sugar cane, of course. So what serves Brazil wouldn't work in colder countries.

[@SmartMass]

Yes, electric motors are efficient, it's a shame we haven't identified an efficient solution to store it's potential energy in a car. That's why I still think a PHEV with range to do your commute emissions free and another solution to travel longer distances is the solution.

[@anthonypelchat]

We have an extremely efficient solution for energy storage already. They are called batteries. Those are like 98% efficient. The problem with EVs is that we don't have are enough smart people in the world to understand how to use them properly. 90% or more of all driving is done in short drives, which are perfect for EVs. But long drives require a change in habits. Charging only takes 30 mins to an hour and can be done while you are doing something else. Not difficult at all, especially with larger batteries. But telling people that they need to take random breaks when driving isn't something that many can understand.

[@TheZmoney420]

LPG.. After decades I finally came around. Ford is on top of it. Love my 5.0 flex fuel too. Gigantic tq gains and it works for what it was designed to do..

[@SuperLEGOMADNESS]

I feel like there could still potentially be a future for combustion engines in cars if we were to use hydrogen to make them much cleaner. I understand there are problems with using hydrogen in a combustion engine (mainly range) but given that it would be significantly cheaper, up front, to buy a car with a hydrogen engine vs an electric battery car or a fuel cell car I think it's something that should be considered more. I also think it would be better for the environment than a battery car because of the damage that's done when mining for ingrediants to go into lithium ion batteries. If you're going for the least environmental impact though then you would go for fuel cell cars but, again, they're VERY expensive.

[@yayayayya4731]

100% agree with you.

[@aidanwilliams9452]

The problem with hydrogen is the infrastructure to support it is much more expensive to build than the already existing grid for electric cars, not enough companies willing to put in the huge funding for that. I think the few hydrogen cars out there e.g mirai, use the hydrogen to create electricity for the motors, which is likely more efficient and less dangerous than combustion of the hydrogen. So if hydrogen does get more popular it likely won't be in the form of a combustion engine

[@aidanwilliams9452]

@Game tuner A way for what exactly? It's not gonna be as efficient, that's simply the nature of combustion you're naturally gonna lose energy in several forms. Right now majority of consumers just want transport, combustion or not doesn't matter to them

[@aidanwilliams9452]

@Game tuner Who exactly? The switching being done is substantially more to EV's or simply other standard combustion cars. The toyota mirai and hyundai nexo are really the only two on the market, and both of those are FCEV's and not in large numbers. There's not even a thousand hydrogen stations globally right now

[@aidanwilliams9452]

​@Game tuner Who cares about Musk or a 50% target, what makes you think hydrogen combustion is a more viable alternative to FCEV's let alone standard EV's?

[@edwalker8375]

Great video.This guy is common sense. What he says reflects what is reality - a sensible future belongs to everything, gas,diesel, electrics, hybrids, alternative fuel engines etc..(like many people,researchers and companies have said...)

[@gothicpagan.666]

One problem with optimizing the efficiency of any IC engine, is at what state are you trying to optimize? If an engine can be loaded at its optimum operating state, the rewards from a fuel usage perspective are quite small, unless the engine is designed to operate at that specific rpm point. The options are then, run a dynamo or hydro static pump at than specific RPM. For a road vehicle the best option right now is mechanical electro drive.

[@jammi__]

Applications, where high power density is actually needed, such as recreation boats, which run typically between maximum efficiency and maximum power of the motor. You can't have a battery powered fast boat that also has any kind of practical range. Cars on the other hand typically operate most of their time well below maximum efficiency and maximum power, because they need power only for good acceleration.

[@gqh007]

Some luxury brand is probably working on it already

[@ThomasAlex]

But you’re making a bold assumption that battery technology isn’t going to improve from what we have today, which is clearly false. It’s a very gradual progress, but hey if battery had 100+ years to mature and develop like the combustion engine, then your point is moot?

[@R4M_Tommy]

@@ThomasAlex battery tech has improved for over 100 years already. Batteries are 1800s tech, like ICEs.

[@creatineenjoyer7345]

Greatly explained. Airplanes and Ships also need power density in order to be viable

[@jammi__]

@@ThomasAlex At the historical pace of battery development, it'll take about 300 years for usable battery density in these applications. So no, in that long a time frame we can't say for sure about anything and it doesn't matter to us anyway, since we and everyone we know will be long dead and forgotten.

[@chapter4travels]

Combustion engines have a very long future. If you could magically have all new cars globally be electric, it would take 25years before combustion engines were eliminated. Of course, that's impossible, more like 100 years.

[@jasonmillner6416]

They wont get completely eliminated. We still have steam engines and horses, just wont be the norm. In 20 years from now EV's will be the norm new gas vehicles almost obsolete and the ones that are left on the road will be junk in just a few years there after. I feel that this is a conservative estimate most likely things will happen even faster.

[@chapter4travels]

@@jasonmillner6416 You think that's going to happen globally?

[@jasonmillner6416]

@@chapter4travels of course. China has the boldest environmental regulation plan on the planet when it comes to automotives. 3rd world countries will lag behind the first world obviously. the hope tho is that the 3rd world countries can skip a step and go straight to the new energy infrastructure.

[@gustavlicht9620]

Heck, we still use steam turbines in power generation and in naval propulsion.

[@chapter4travels]

@@jasonmillner6416 You actually believe the propaganda China puts out? Hahahahahaha

[@does_not_matter_91]

I love the way you explain things to people. This is incredibly useful and beneficial channel. If I may suggest a topic, EVAP systems. What they do, and what are the consequences of removing one from the car.

[@andreystaykov3619]

If you come to Bulgaria, (EU for those who don't know it), almost everyone is using 2 different fuels because the natural gas is really cheap and we use the gasoline only for ignition in the winter. What I am saying is that it's not too hard to adapt to two fuels even if the initial cost is higher.

[@coldarcluck5320]

Awhile back you did a video on Opposed piston engines. Achates power had been working on it. Is that dead? I found that very interesting, but haven’t heard anything from them in a couple years?

[@jonasstahl9826]

They are too complex to build. Adding a few more cylinder is much simpler than adding a second crankshaft ore some leveragesystem

[@coldarcluck5320]

@@jonasstahl9826 it seems that it’s less complex. A lot less parts?

[@jonasstahl9826]

@@coldarcluck5320 Damn you are right I forgot the valves🤦‍♂️

[@chedons91]

I heard about LPG on diesel engines,similar like rcci

[@SzwarcuKX5]

LPG adds power AND reduces emmisions :)

[@chedons91]

@@SzwarcuKX5 i know that it was expencive and put only in trucks

[@SzwarcuKX5]

@@chedons91 Guys in Poland are starting to make kits for various VW cars.

[@chedons91]

@@SzwarcuKX5 for vw is a must,because emisions 😁

[@fitz3540]

@@chedons91 They're not converting to LPG, they're rigging propane port injection to diesel engines. Diesel guys have been doing it for a few decades now

[@LawrenceMarkFearon]

Miscanthus cellulosic ethanol is here and it's wells to wheels carbon negative vs gasoline. Meaning it removes GHG from the air as its grown and consumed for fuel. Nearly triple the GHG absorption of first generation corn ethanol while producing more gallons for every acre grown. Just one biofuel compatible with existing liquid fuel infrastructure.

[@Akck67]

I'd imagine if RCCI engines become more common, they'd have a fuel option at gas stations where you could fill both fuels from one nozzle (I don't actually know what those things are called). Like when you get soft serve and you get the vanilla and chocolate swirl.

[@Bhatakti_Hawas]

So Diesel engine is the best. They have AdBlue which reduces NOₓ

[@lucasvanhamburg4937]

well it depends, engines put out les co2 without exhaust systems

[@Re_Kitty]

Great in theory, not great when you have to spend €2000 repairing a system worth more than the car itself, all while the car runs and drives perfectly

[@aquamaggerasim4993]

Rotary Engine is the best and still has a lot of potential ! If you use it working on Nitrogen or Hydrogen for example.

[@UnipornFrumm]

Are you payd by VW or something? 😂

[@Bhatakti_Hawas]

@@UnipornFrumm I wish

[@keithoverholt1963]

Any research being done on combining these more efficient technologies with carbon neutral fuels?

[@buchanap]

As a person that worked in the Biofuel industry for years I can say that it's never going to scale to mainstream. Its a great concept but producing that level of bio-mass in a sustainable way in not remotely feasible. Sadly the way to make it pencil out economically is to cut down rain forests to grow palm oil. The algae based alternatives have been dying in test tubes for 20 years, you can make a few gallons but not 10,000 per batch. Don't even get me started on switch grass based or corn based Ethanol.... just feed the corn to the cows and eat them. Big Oil produces many many thousands of times the amount of fuel that Bio does and to switch from one to the other wholesale would wreck the food supply and create swaths of global mono-cultures that come with even bigger headaches than climate change. Just imagine a single plant blight knocking out half of the worlds engines. Yup i really wished it was a better idea too....

[@Solaris_347]

Thats exactly what I was thinking, Biodiesel Has Advantages of Much lower CO HC and Particulate Emissions as well as No Sulphur Emissions At all Only trade off is 5-15% higher Nox Emissions Another issue is that Biodiesel (depending on the feedstock used) can have A lower Viscosity than Normal Diesel Most diesels today run at 30,000 PSI injection pressure, but with Biodiesel that can drop a couple thousand Another issue is that the Diesel engine has grown up with Dino Diesel, so its a little hard to find a compatible Biodiesel engine made by Manufacturers that don't want to spend the money making a B100 Compatible engine One way to combat the Nox issue to to include Water injection, It dramatically reduces Intake and Exhaust temperatures, Promotes efficiency, and Reduces Nox by 5-9% Another benefit is that it doesn't use any Limited resources, Biodiesle is made from vegetable oil, an alcohol (ethanol is perfect for this case since you can make it with just yeast and sugar, and An acid like Sodium or Potassium Hydroxide

[@christopherayala4619]

Right

[@christopherayala4619]

Porsche's e fuels might come in handy

[@anthonycyr9657]

hydrogen is an alternative fuel that would make the i.c engine green and still viable in the future.

[@lustfulvengance]

The problem with hydrogen is that it's extremely difficult to store and if you want to store it in a liquid form it needs to be kept ridiculously cold! That is, and always has been the problem with hydrogen! People seem to forget about that...........

[@saranjs3365]

@@lustfulvengance Water seems to be the best form of storing hydrogen and it includes oxygen to help with the combustion. We just need a method to break apart the molecules to where it then allows for combustion to occur. Somebody needs to work on this ASAP.

[@SOHCGT96]

@@saranjs3365 The problem is, unless you're deriving hydrogen from fossil sources, Hydrogen is a net loss process. If you're splitting water to make hydrogen, it takes so much energy to do that you'd have been better off just taking that power and charging a battery with it.

[@Zenheizer]

@@saranjs3365 well that would need electrolysis, meaning a bignbattery. Thus you would simply have an EV with inefficient extra steps and a more ICE feel to ut

[@pierrena3420]

I was expecting to hear about synthetic fuels because I believe that IS the future of combustion engines...

[@christopherayala4619]

True hopefully he makes a vid on it

[@ГеоргиГеоргев-ы3з]

Here in Bulgaria we put a LPG sistem on a disel engine this is something like RCCI you put the LPG (or CNG)in the intake and the result is that you have a good increase of power and a little economy

[@Steamrick]

'Half as efficient as an electrical car' - does that include electricity generation or are you only counting from the outlet to the road?

[@EugeneYunak]

that's only the engine+transmission efficiency, discarding battery losses and plant-to-battery transmission losses. (mind that i would love to buy an ev if i lived anywhere it made sense)

[@anthonypelchat]

Battery losses and plant to battery losses are minimal as well. You are losing more in efficiency transporting fuel to the gas station than you are from plant to battery to motor. Production of energy can a problem though. Coal is horrible, so using it would be worse than the best case ICE engine, but not worse than standard ICE. The cleaner the energy production, the more efficient the EV.

[@EngineeringExplained]

They will often still be more efficient, as always it goes both ways. Are you including the energy to get the gasoline from the well to inside your car?

[@THESLlCK]

@@anthonypelchat efficiency in fuel transportation is not taken into account and doesn't need to be

[@anthonypelchat]

@@THESLlCK Someone brought up transmission line losses for electricity. I was mentioning transportation due to that.

[@tracylemme1375]

Back in the 70s the tractor pulls would inject liquid propane into the intake manifold. They could reduce compression ratios and increase turbo boost and still increase torque significantly.

[@63turbo]

I want them to try external compression internal combustion... this is where the gasoline spark igniton engine has a compression ratio of say 10:1 and is running at stoich or a bit richer than that, and is running a 4 stage air compressor that ends up at the equivalent overall compression ratio of something like 25:1, and dumps its load to a storage tank. Because the storage tank has many times the volume of one cylinder, it is effectively slowing down the compression process, leaving the storage tank at a high pressure and relatively low temperature. The pressure pump would only partially be powered by the engine, and could also be configured to store additional pressure when braking... the neat part of what this would allow is... near the end of the normal combustion process (approximately 18 degrees after tdc), really high pressure air could be injected into a relatively small volume, and since theres still combustion occuring, this would dramatically lean the charge out, the hot charge would be forced to give up heat to a relatively cold load of high pressure air... getting all of the advantages of spark ignition and the practical effect of a diesel cycle, without any chance of blowing it up. Such a combustion cycle would also have a dramatic effect on cooling, it might not need to have a cooling system at all, and because the pressure injection strategy is controlled theres way more "levers" to control both the combustion process and the torgue output of the cycle. "waste" pressure at the end of the cycle, before the exhaust valve opens could be vented back to the intake of the pressure pump, and as long as this pressure pump is spinning fast enough to feed all cylinders of the engine, it stays caught up. If the tank was large enough, there might be conditions and loads where theres no fuel going into the engine, and is just running as a compressed air engine.

[@jirivymazal8427]

It is quite interesting idea, even though I am afraid that the overall efficiency of such setup will be way less that what we hope for... Also the complexity and weight of added additional system, lines valves etc. is not to be ignored, and seeing speeds and intervals this needs to operate with "relatively cold" might still not be cold enough. Also you still have the spark-induced flame front and associated emissions which systems in video try to eliminate.

[@63turbo]

@@jirivymazal8427 Keep in mind, a mulitistage air compressor is far less complex than an engine is... the "valves" arent speed sensitive like engine valves are and by splitting the compression process between stages, especially if theres intercoolers between stages, the work required to do the compression goes down alot! if it is small enough and simply run fast enough, it need not weigh a lot either. This one part of the process is by far the worst, most least efficient part of what an engine does... bringing the piston to t.d.c on the compression stroke in one stage causes a massive amount of waste heat that is a major contributor to detonation and high heats of combustion, which is were nitrogen oxides come from. The high pressure injection system could work just like pulse width moduated efi does, except it would be injecting air instead of fuel. The advantage is, a gasoline spark ignited engine is far more efficient than a diesel is at the same compression ratio, the trouble is to try and get one to run well at that compression ratio. Having the equivalent of a Otto cycle + a Diesel cycle would be more efficient than either. It would sure make for a heck of a hybrid though! we'd be talking about "air mileage"!

[@BT_aka_PET_ROOSTER]

Ahhhh yes whiteboard action first thing in the am.

[@JSFGuy]

Because refuel in 5 minutes back on the road.

[@Dinara1up]

@luke covill "80kg meat bag". The heck you talking about

[@marcoimanuel5489]

@luke covill i think 30 minutes is already the best we can hope for. Batteries are just limited on charging time in the way they're designed (chemical movement based instead of combustion based). For super fast charge times, supercapacitor might be the next best bet. However, even when incorporating advanced technologies like using graphene, supercapacitors still have 22 wh/kg of energy density which is still too low for powering cars

[@khaledali-di9mt]

@luke covill will take 30 years atleast!

[@tylerzesiger7648]

@luke covill is this what you tell yourself while you sit alone at the charging station watching everyone drive by?

[@ingerasulffs]

Because full battery every morning no need to leave the road.

[@Fee.1]

Not convinced they need to change much at all frankly, especially as long as electric energy density is abysmal

[@kamilb8232]

So we shouldn't strive to improve? Energy density for batteries is constantly improving. ICE should do the same.

[@DC-rn1fc]

@@kamilb8232 Absolutely! There still is a lot of potential left - but most ICE-appreciating people are somehow focussed on "old is good" and similar shenenigannery.

[@daftnord4957]

you should wright a scientific paper on it

[@tkermi]

Well, in a way yes - if you assume that ICE tech is dying off soon. But I think that ICE is still going to be around in a meaningful way at least a decade or two. So it's important to develop it.

[@lucasvanhamburg4937]

energy density in batteries is barely improving. and the longievity certainly is not improving either

[@69Atho]

From 9:35, you got it all back to front. The gasoline is the highly reactive fuel, and will ignight via compression sooner than the diesel fuel, not later. So you would need to inject the diesel fuel first, and then the gasoline to start the ignition process.

[@jericho86]

I see a future where we just use whatever power source best fits the application. If your car never leaves public infrastructure, use electric. If you need a hammer with 4 wheels to work off the grid (pun absolutely intended), use a liquid fuel.