[desdemona]

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/ne...roduction-soon

This ev tech sure seems, if the claims are not too-hyped-up, all things like range, performance, cost and ease+cost of recharging/fuelling, considered-together, a breakthrough.

The firm is a German one, albeit lead by an Italian engineer, which did a lot of the reasearch in the UK.

A large 'non-German' firm is said to be VERY keen on adopting this tech and maybe even these 2 protype sportscars, as its own.

Wonder who that could be? JaguarLR? Fiat-Chrysler for Maserati, Alfa? A large Chinese firm like say Geely-Volvo?

[SoulDrive]

Interesting though not a new concept. The low energy density necessitates a huge fuel tank. I see two major problems.
1. With a 300 lt fuel tank, I suppose the handling wouldn't be very different from a tanker lorry.
2. Any chance of having a practical boot is ruled out.

[GrammarNazi]

Originally Posted by desdemona

...a breakthrough.

The industry would have to spend on tech, but theres nothing like having a plan to get off fossil fuel in the long term.

The firm is a German one, albeit lead by an Italian engineer, which did a lot of the reasearch in the UK.

On a side note, lately its being seen quite abit that it barely matters where one has come from.

Originally Posted by SoulDrive

...1. With a 300 lt fuel tank, I suppose the handling wouldn't be very different from a tanker lorry.

Oh come on, the storage can be managed better (using chambers etc, I suppose there'll be many ways), so as to reduce its affects on handling.

2. Any chance of having a practical boot is ruled out.

OR this can be used for very large vehicles that pollute too. Public transport perhaps. Its not like its wrong to make something green, greener. Maybe it's precisely suitable tech to implement in a scenario where the organised usage & maintenance can be optimise its capability.

IMO ANYTHING other than fossil fuel applied in an organised manner will help, not just because it'd be greener, but also because it'd be out of the controlling grip of the energy market thats extorting the public.

Its up for adoption, who knows, it could be put to use to generate plain & simple electricity, and sell it. Lets see.

[desdemona]

@GrammarNazi

Don't know the details of this tech, in terms of its cost and its technical limitations, but what you say seems a priori correct: there's no reason small tanks could not be used to power say a mild-hybrid-like e-turbocharger or even just 2 small electric motors on the rear wheels for added traction or low-speed/high-inertia large torque, etc. Rather than a full-blown, high-powered EV?

It may well be that the cost/convenience equation is very much in-favour of flowcell based, rather than Lithium battery based, electric storage/generation, despite the much lower energy-density?

Which technology gets most-widely adopted, though, in the real policy/political/business world, though, is, as ever, not-necessarily the one that's most efficient, inexpensive and convenient!

It would be splendid, though for a firm like say Tata-JLR or FCA or Chinese firms to adopt this firm's technology wholesale for some charismatic models, as tech demonstrators and as a means to stealing-a-march on both Tesla and the German firms that seem, now post-dieselgate and emissions-testing scandals etc, to be in a government-supported way intent on fore-ordaining and heavily-subsidising particular, debatable ev-technologies as THE solution?

When, for example, far cheaper relative-'solutions' are sometimes already available, such as the much-wider use and availability of cng-powered ICE, or this flowcell battery, or 48-volt mild systems?