Mdi Air-Powered Car Gets Priced and Dated: Air Not Included
June 30th, 2009
What would you say if I told you that your next car could run on air instead of gasoline, and that it would produce zero pollution? The MDI AIRpod might just bring that promise to reality when it hits the streets later this year.
The subcompact AIRpod runs on compressed air instead of traditional automotive fuels. A set of carbon-fiber tanks sit underneath the passenger compartment, loaded up with 2900psi of compressed air. The tanks power a tiny engine capable of cranking out a whopping 5.4 horsepower and 11-foot-pounds of torque. Woo-hoo!
It takes 2 minutes to fill up the tanks, and a single occupant should be able to go somewhere around 90 to 125 miles on a full set of tanks. And with air costing just €1 (appx. $1.40 USD) for a fill-up, fuel costs are pretty much a non-issue. Of course, that all assumes you can find a place to fill up the tanks.
MDI says the production version will transport up to 3 adults and 1 child, with a single front-facing driver’s seat, and a rear-facing bench for the other occupants. This tiny green car looks awfully cramped – not to mention a bit dangerous for the passengers, but maybe that’s just me.
Want to know how it drives? The guys over at Edmunds Inside Line have actually gotten a chance to test drive the prototype and it through its paces.
While the current prototype car can only hit 30mph, the production model should hit 50mph when it hits at the end of 2009. The 2010 AIRpod is expected to be released by the end of 2009 in France for €6,000 (appx $8380 USD). MDI plans on offering additional compressed-air cars in the not-too-distant-future.
Comments (8):
Post a Comment:
Categories: Future Tech Strange + Wonderful Technology Weird Science
Tags: air-powered alternative energy car eco-conscious mdi price release date vehicle
Oh, not this idea again.
The problem with air-powered vehicles is that they’re nowhere near as efficient as electric or petrol cars. With petrol, you ignite it and it explodes to drive the car – not terrible efficient, but pretty easy.
With an air-powered car, chances are you’re going (a) burn fossil fuel to generate electricity, (b) consume electricity to run the air compressor, and (c) convert the energy potential in the compressed air into motion. You lose an incredible amount of energy each time you convert, and the result is anything but green. We’d be better off driving ancient smoke-spewing Indian scooters.
Before assuming how these work and trashing them without real knowledge, I suggest you read up on how this all operates. I read an article about two weeks back and it made sense that air is the only power needed because of how it works. I can not explain it, but I did understand it.
It on the same principle of solar energy not needed anything but sunlight to produce its own electricity. The Austrtalian outback has used that for years.
If the air powered cars consume so much electricity, then I think the new CNG Logan is much better option as a Green environment friendly. It consumes the least possible fuel and the running cost of the car is unusually low. I am a loyal Mahindra Renault Logan user so I can say it is really cost effective http://www.mahindrarenault.com
5.4 horsepower is not enough power to move a real car. However, it is enough to run an electric generator. So why not use the air power to make electricity and give the car an electric motor? Then we can use this technology in Real cars and leave this little green pod to Barbie And Ken!
Do you all feel that Benz felt that way when he did his 1st combustion engine? New ideas are always hard to except.. With time this tech will become the norm and be transformed into racing engines.
It’s always all about in “time”, Tech will catch up and push this engine to a higher performance, :MDI are also working on a dual-power version, which will use the air engine together with a tiny “supercharger” which heats the air and thus boosts performance.
It’s now late September 2010.
Still no air car.
MDI has no official schedule for starting production, but rumors are “early next year”.
But “early next year” or “late this year” is that status of production for each of the last 10 years.
I hope for the best:)
What i do know is there in NO reason we should still be using gas
i wish the scientists would stand up to the oil companies for the rest of us.
We are actually having a discussion about this…..
http://www.mforums.org/showthread.php?tid=101