Is compressed air technology not lucrative for automobiles?

Question

Tatas are going to introduce compressed air technology at global level. While we say this technology is a boon ,more especially, when we are at the juncture of oil crisis, the governments of all countries should undertake a massive research on this technology together with solar energy, find out a viable solution. Once an alternate source of energy is identified with an economical cost component, the same may be put on global track for the benefit of the masses.

s venkataraman

Answer 1

The air still needs to be compressed in the first place, which requires Work to be done; so you still need some sort of energy source.  And a badly-designed compressor can be horrendously inefficient, since compressing air increases its temperature and this heat can end up wasted.

In a factory environment, where compressed air can be piped around, it can be a useful alternative to electricity.  Electricity is still required, but only for running the electronic control system; the pneumatics do the donkey work instead of large electric motors and solenoids.  In the Summer, the exhaust air contributes to cooling; in the Winter, waste heat from the compressor can be diverted into the building.  Pneumatic drills attached to a semi-static compressor are commonly used in construction work.  And many domestic appliances that currently use electric motors could conceivably be run on compressed air piped in as a utility -- it might be worth it on densely-populated housing estates.

In an autonomous vehicle, compressed air is rather less useful since it has to be carried in a tank.  Compressed-air locomotives were once used over short distances to connect acetate works  (where there were lots of inflammable materials about, hence probably not a good idea to have a steam engine with a fire around .....)  and similar places with the railways, but have since been replaced by electric vehicles or safer fuel-burning vehicles.

Answer 2

Compressed air power, while possibly solving pollution problems in densely-populated areas, is not a solution to the oil crisis. It takes energy, electricity, to compress the air, and that electricity comes largely from fossil fuels - oil, gas and coal-fired power stations. Really, they fall into the same category as electric cars - they don't remove the problem so much as move it elsewhere. Compressed air vehicles have some advantages over electric ones - they are lighter, cheaper to manufacture and don't require bulky batteries filled with hazardous chemicals. But there are disadvantages too - compressing air is only a third as efficient at storing energy than charging a battery, involve carrying around potentially volatile cylinders of highly compressed gas, and they suffer performance issues, particularly at low temperatures. Until the majority of the electricity supply is generated from sources other than oil, compressed air cars do not offer a way to break dependence on oil.