GM's Compressed Air Engine Is NOT Cost-Effective!

[@Davidlahall]

Yes I would be interseted. I cringe to understand the real purpose of your video. How many Lives were lost by gready govermental permissions to use cheap lead in gas , what will we find out about the fuel we use now in the future . Why not use your knowladge to help figure out a way to bring down the cost of something that is good for you the earth and everyone else. Is this what you were educated for . To fight change for good. Left up to you I wonder how many more people would die just so you can save some money.

[@markscythian7179]

Hi! You may want to view this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3qraJyXjZmqn7s Design plans and narrated-lecture regarding a technology congruent with your inquiry(s). The first Alternative-Power-Concept (in green). 'Non-Combustion Compressed Hydrogen Gas Piston Engine'. Cost-effective, environmentally-friendly, and high energy-density. Hydride-Electroysis of Water split into Hydrogen & Oxygen gases: 66.7 times less expensive compared to DC Current Water-Electrolysis Feasible Liquid-Hydrogen filling-stations: cost-effective Gaseous-Hydrogen liquefaction to Liquid-Hydrogen. Non-Combustion Liquid-Hydrogen Gas-Expansion-Ratio = 1:848 Emissions: 100% Water Vapor. Thanks for your comment!