Zero Pollution !

[einstein89]

Originally Posted by Shaunzer

Maybe we can have more "mr fusion" in our cars for now, toshiba jus tmight have the answer with their consumer micro nuclear plant

thts the way it is done

still further solutions are welcomed!

[Er.AtulSingh]

Hi,
dats a fantastic thot,
I m with u E89,
The thing is ,V r restricted in imagining, V think on wat is already created ,Say the "Engine",
Cant v think of some weared way for transport. which doesnot require Eltrcty.
I strongly believe , we may find some organic design approaches to it.
SO Try to Think out of BOx.
Think of something Crazy.

Hey wish u all a very Happy New Year.

[priya mandole]

sir ,im right now working on a project which would help in a zero pollutoin,
but using wind energy.if u could help me in that.............

[Er.AtulSingh]

Hi,
I may not b the right person to give u some information, as i hav jus compltd my BE dis year
Ya but we can Share ideas , and through Brainstorming sessions , wwe cud come out wid a Feasible Solution
So lets start
wat xactly ru thinking?

[videotuning]

0 pollution means that we go to work with the bycicle

[arunbs]

hu pollution is a real problem no doubt in it. but the guy who is freaking out. how many trees have u planted in your locality. why u want to travel in ur super bike or car y not a public transport... ya prevention is better than cure but can we prevent pollution .. a big NO. but we have many ways to cure. y dont we think to develop a efficient method for that.ya the question is also about global warming too but we cant hold our breath for that.& abt production of electricity.. burning fossil fuel at thermal plant is different from internal combustion engine in vehicles...it produces oxides of nitrogen & sulfur. but a coal powered thermal plant wont only co2 & co.
nw compare the pollution created by 10 bikes & a bus with 10 guys. bus will produce less pollution. nw wat abt a huge thermal plant. i agree abt the energy loss/efficiency coz of converting frm one from to another but still.
having a optimum level of greenhouse gases & other stuffs wont harm our ecosystem that bad.

cigarette smoking is injuries to environment !!

[einstein89]

Er.AtulSingh
good tht u r thinking logically
really good thought , is engine always necessary
cant we move out of it???????????????????
we call ourselves crazy , we need to develop something crazy
transportation we aim
@!$#@$ the engine, we need something else
lets discuss tht
certainly combustion goes to hell
we must use something tht uses
magnets
gravity
some chemicals which r not hazardous
only one thing we keep in mind , zero pollution
thts crazy , thts why we r here.
i hope we think abt this

[vimalcasio]

Originally Posted by einstein89

Whts going on im tired of this fuel prices , this pollution ,
and non working solar energy!
Ya there r air compressed engines , which use compressed air at 4,315 PSI and a air injector injects it in cylinder which pushes piston , but again , to compress air till tht extent , huge compressor is required and for tht electricity , again pollution during creating electricity , i mean during generation of electricity! So leave Air compressed Engines!
Stirling Not yet so efficient or productive tht they will use solar energy and drive my car!
Fuel Cell , same concept , tht they will again create pollution some where else! ,
Nitrogen is similar to air compressed engines! it too compresses nitrogen and liquid nitrogen when gets into gas , it expands 700 times! again pushing piston and tht saga continues!
but compressing nitrogen , takes electricity ! again same saga pollution!
SO ANY ONE CALLING HIMSELF/HERSELF ENGINEER can we unitedly make something which is pollutionless , ya , electricityless!
can anyone here help each other!
atleast imagination and making some concepts! so tht we will have peace in this world , ya pollution free one!
So guys concentrate here pls!

hi guys,
i have heard some where about using hydrogen, i.e hydrogen powered cars

[gohm]

Good topic!

First I think one must define pollution. Is pollution just unwanted byproducts from a process, or is it much broader and include any negative side effect from a process? I would say the broader definition as if a process uses up a resource but does not emit polutant byproducts, isn't that just as harmful? In that case, I do not think 0% pollution is possible within the chain from aquiring raw materials/resources all the way to the end usage of the product. Everything has its trade off. for example, get rid of mechanized transport and you will reduce co2 emissions. Flora damage from walking causes some plant species to become extinct. Ok, so maybe not the greatest example however you get the idea. The key to me is to limit the footprint or impact of the process to as small as possible while keeping the economic viability of the process/product high so to have a large global impact. The most amazing low pollution device is pointless if nobody uses it. my 2 cents!

[ash]

Crap, gohm.. I typed up a long ass post offline a few days ago, and you basically summarized it

Anyway, the key is finding an efficient way to generate electricity. Thats it. Electricity itself is not a problem.