". ready in ten years."
Which means NEVER.

I think we have to solve the electical energy storage problem for all electric vehicles for other reasons (to make renewable energy feasible, so that we have better quality power etc.). Putting science dollars into energy storage is (IMHO) the way to go (though admitedly this is BMWs money and they can do whatever they want with it).

Last time I looked at Steam powered cars there were three problems.
1. Warm up time: it takes a couple minutes before you can go anywhere.
2. Higher maintenence, users must fill up the car not just with fuel but with whatever they're steaming as well.
3. Water freezes in cold climates which means you fill up your steamer with something besides water, or you have to allow your water storage to expand 10% or so.
It seems like a electric/steam vehicle would take care of the first problem, but the second and third one remain. It's easy to overlook how convienient gas/diesel cars are, there are plenty of people that don't know how to check thier oil! I think that for urban and suburban areas something like www.skytran.net would work beautifuly. For more rural areas (say north Texas or all of Wyoming) they really need to use cars (or rather trucks).

No problem with the 5 minute warmup, why not add a remote warmup keyfob. Press the button, it tells the car to warmup, and you get a signal back from the same keyfob that tells you the process has begun and when it is ready. Side benefit, the interior is heating up. Hey folks, they had useful steam powered cars that had modern power and speed in the mid-1930s. In some cases those steam cars were better than their gasoline cousins. Do an internet search for White and Doble steam cars.

I've been contemplating a gas steam hybrid for about the last 6 months. I think it's a great idea. I was both happy and pissed when I heard BMW was working on it. "They stole my idea!". But then, I knew I would not have the resources to put something like this into full developement. So I'm greatful for their efforts.



One nice thing about a reciprocating closed system steam engine is that energy can be extracted during every stroke of the piston. Both up and down. Something you don't find on any other type of engine to my knowledge.



I would also like to comment on the previous posts.



". ready in ten years."

Which means NEVER.

I don't think that's what they meant. I could have a prototype on the road in less than a month if I had the resources. As has been mentioned before, this is ancient science. "So why hasn't anybody else done it yet?" Because gasoline is still cheaper than bottled water maybe? Imagine fueling your car at Evian prices ;)



1. Warm up time: it takes a couple minutes before you can go anywhere.

Not true. This is a gas steam hybrid. We're not using gasoline to generate steam directly. We're converting wasted heat into steam.
We don't have to wait for steam before we drive this vehicle. It will just have less power for the first few minutes. 50hp vs. 100hp. I don't know how many people need full power in the first few minutes of driving. I never break 15mph for the first 3 minutes.



2. Higher maintenence

Probably. But this is a more complex machine with more moving parts. This would be true for any more complex machine.



, users must fill up the car not just with fuel but with whatever they're steaming as well.

Yes. But by using a closed system with a condensor, we won't have that stereotypical locomotive steam puff. All steam would be converted back into water in the condensor. There will be losses due to the neccesity of removing the air from the system during the warmup phase. So it is true that water will have to be added periodically. But since we can cut the size of the gas tank down by a third, we can add a similar sized water reserve tank. A more complicated solution would be to condense and purify the moisture from the gasline exhaust. This would probably generate enough condensate such that you would never have to tell the gas station attendent "and could you also fill up the water tank!"



3. Water freezes in cold climates which means you fill up your steamer with something besides water, or you have to allow your water storage to expand 10% or so.

This is a very good point. But one feature of the hybrid would be that most of it would be thermally insulated. It would be a simple matter of using a small electric heater to keep the water from freezing, or perhaps transfering all the water to a thermally insulated tank within the vehicle. I agree though that this type vehicle may not be practical in thermally severe regions prone to extended freezing periods unless they were comfortably garaged when not in use.



Side benefit, the interior is heating up.

This, given my advanced age and hatred of sitting in a cold car, is one of the major fringe benefits.
If you don't think so, go out to your cold car, start the engine, go put your hand on the exhaust manifold. All that thermal energy would be available for the passenger heating system. Yes, yes, I know. "That's energy that could be used in the steam engine!". Screw that notion. Telling people that they can be in a car from cold start when it's 35'F outside to a comfortable 72'F within 2 minutes would get a lot of people interested real fast.



I told my brother a few months back that if we really wanted to do something about fuel consumption just remove all the windshields and rear windows of every car in America. No one would drive over 35mph. Fuel consumption would be cut in half. But we know how we like our comfort, and that's another topic altogether anyways.



Garry

Having been a mechanic for most of my life I've know that infernal combution engines area a total waste of the energy avaiable in a gallon of fuel. Only about 25-30% of the energy available is used by an engine to move a vehicle down the road. this system is definatly a step in the right direction.

Further study reveals that the only thing that is supposed to come out of gasoline powered cars are roughly equal amounts H2O and CO2. So the condensing of exhaust should yield 1/2 gallon of water for each gallon of gasoline burned. So a water tank of maybe 2 gallon capacity should suffice.

One more thing; My friend was screaming at me the other day that all this extra stuff is going to add weight! Never mind about the extra hp and gas mileage. YOU JUST CANT ADD ANY WEIGHT! I politely reminded him that a car that is 100% more efficient requires only half the fuel. Hence half the fuel weight. Which more than makes up for the added engine and steam generating contraptions.

Can't add weight? Ha!

Funny how the most popular vehicles are not at all optimized for weight and how people don't mind adding tons of options and features that add weight to a car.. But if it's something to make it cleaner or more efficient, then it gets scrutinized.

I personally wish Doble hadn't gone all obsessive compulsive and drove his company into the ground with his nit picking of every detail. His 1924 Doble model E Started in 30 seconds, could go over 100 mph, got around 65 mpg, which meant you could go 1500 miles without filling up anything, had a super efficient condenser coil, didn't need to fill up water very often, and the boiler only boiled a little at a time, so there was almost no chance of a boiler explosion! modernize the brakes (all brakes were terrible back then), and it would be far superior to anything out there right now! oh ya, 0-75 mph in 14.93 seconds, silent all the way. Fun times, those 1924's.

I think that BMW plans on using water and/or Ethanol so as to improve efficiency and attempt to fix that freezing problem. Either that, or just put the reservoir near the engine to warm it up nice and quick.

Re: Ryan's comment on April 26, 2006: "His 1924 Doble model E Started in 30 seconds, could go over 100 mph, got around 65 mpg, ..."

That is not correct. Doble's car's got more like 15 mpg (on kerosene). See this paper for a more complete picture of the car's capabilities.

I highly suspect that mordern engineering, materials, and computer control systems could improve that quite a bit but probably not to 65 mpg for the same size car as the Doble.

Doble was claiming a thermal efficiency of 14 percent on average. Getting a fixed steam plant to operate at 50 percent thermal efficiency would be considered good and getting a mobile plant to that level is probably not possible. Even if accomplished it would "only" bump the mpg up to about 50 -- nothing to sneeze at but still not 65 mpg.

THE DOBLE STEAMERS ARE THE GREATEST CARS EVER TO BE MADE!!
ABNER DOBLE HAD ONLY ONE FAULT, HE WAS A PERFECTIONIST.
HIS CARS WERE FOR REAL!!!!!!!!

Abner Doble was the man!
But there is somthing to be said about simplicity.

Check out a engine called a steam quasiturbine.

Don't forget that this system could be compatible with electric hybrid technology as well.
The recovery of heat to steam is possible whenever the exhaust is hot. The steam system doesn't utilize braking energy at all.
This could either be addressed by water cooled front brakes generating pulses of steam into the steam system, or by traditional electric generation while braking.

In the meantime, I will continue with my efficient driving style of minimizing braking and avoiding rapid acceleration.

HI,
I JUST READ IN MAY 2007 POPULAR MECHANICS THAT JAY LENO HAS A DOBLE AND LOVES IT. THE ARTICLE IS GREAT.. WHY ISN'T THERE SOMEONE OUT THERE MAKING SOMETHING LIKE THIS NOW USING THE SAME TECHNOLOGY??--------BILL

I'm a retired computer service rep and before that a aircraft mech. I remember seeing a drawing (maybe a science mag.) for a engine that was like a piston driven gas engine but used water vapor mixed with gas or something as fuel. It used only a very minute amount of fuel and when ignited the water turned into steam inside the cylinder and drove the piston dowm. The estimated mpg for the igniter fuel use was way above what anyone would venture a guess at. Does anyone else remember this kind of engine?