ELECTRIC AIRLINERS are fantasy
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 авг 2021
- Battery power at the moment does not stand a chance against jet fuel - but not for the conventional reason of energy density. Our current airliners have a sneaky little cheat nobody is talking about. The gasoline in their tanks comprise just 1/14th of their total energy requirements. Most of their power needs from oxygen in the air and which they do not need to carry on board. If jet aircraft had to carry their energy load on board they would never take off just like battery airliners.
This is why - until science comes up with real answers we are stuck in the awkward dilemma of the only way to fly long distances is to generate huge quantities of CO2.
This 1 minute video is an entry for the Veritasium contest.
By weight 1 unit of jet fuel burns 14 units of oxygen.
Voice - Matthew Bell
Animated in Blender
3D models - 3D Warehouse
Southwest 737 thanks to PlanespotterA320
Delta 757 thanks to chobs
Video Pexels
Joggers Production ID_4612365
Pancakes gabby-k-7143980
Vapors kindle-media- 8326610
Sounds Freesounds
South Central Ice Cream Truck.wav thanks Ciccarelli
Joggers.wav thanks to kaonaya
#Planes #Aviation #Airliner #Electric #Battery #Elektroflugzeug 
Наука
I love how you showed a Duracell plane flying on magic. In reality physics does tend to get in the way of imaginary things.
Solution: cover planes in solar-plated windmills to generate the missing electricity. ez
4 50 t t[4/90 9t6666666659
Love the way you explain things. Short simple and to the point.
so what we need is jet fuel cars
Another benefit of fuel, as it burns off the plane becomes lighter, thats not the case with batteries. Passenger planes can take off fully loaded, but if there is an emergency they have to bump fuel as the weight is too high to land without damaging the plane.
On the plus side, this does give us a bonus cloud type.
Jettisoned fuel rainbow clouds.
Thanks to you I finally know the name of that song!
Great explanation!
So if planes running on electric power are able to take, say, solar power and use it efficiently, we should have electric planes, right?
There are solar electric planes but they can only fly slowly because of low power from the solar panels.
...Hmm...I see your point.
Excellent point however, battery efficiency for short range air use is just today, hitting the minimum limit. Orders already placed for fleet sized, short hop use (videos documenting this here on youtube).
Waiting for all of the greenies to get triggered by this video.
😂
Thanks. It's a neat explanation, and from a viewpoint which we forget to consider. There is also the huge amount of energy which is required to find, extract, transport, refine and then transport the jet fuel to the customer. Then there is the vast amount of solar and geothermal energy which is expended in converting ancient flora into crude oil and gas.
Incidentally, Solar Impulse flew one man around the world, powered only by solar energy with battery storage. It took a number of long flights and months to achieve that record. We need to find a way of storing around 20 to 40 times as much energy in batteries than is done at present, and more efficient aircraft are needed. These things are being done, little by little. So maybe in 25 years' time, our next generation might see and experience fully electric long haul flights, most likely at significantly lower speeds than those achieved by jet aircraft.. At present, the maximum flight by a battery powered light aircraft has a duration of no more than about 2 hours, and is good for pilot training or short haul travel.
This is one interesting point being overstretched in its conclusions. The long term trend is that everything will be electrified. There are overwhelming technical benefits on top of environmental ones. I just watched your speed record video… quad copters don’t use gas turbines for a reason. It would be comically complex. Will commercial air travel be among the last things to be electrified? Yes. Is it all but inevitable that it will be electrified? I would say yes.
The video is a little too short imo, I would have loved if you went more in depth on why electric would not be effective, so far I hear it's not effective for long flights ... but what about short ones? And would it still be cheaper to charge a plane with electric motor than to fill the plane with jet fuel.
I agree the topic deserves more detail however it is entered for a competition which stipulated a 1 minute length.
Take-off and landings are the most risky part of flights. Do you want all that that risk for a 10 minute flight? You need "extra fuel or charge for more than the rated time for any flight, due to uncertainty about available runways when you land. What if there is a plane broken down on the run-way, and you have to re-route to another airport? Having two hours of extra flight time, just in case, on a 10 minute flight does not make sense. How much extra range should you have on a longer flight?
Perhaps international flights with electric sea planes could be almost viable: They could land on the water and recharge via solar panels. Of course, night time charging would be tricky.
As for electric everything saving the planet; nothing is greener than freshly laundered public funds.
There is was 90s but they failed I mean a fast like werid shape plane like jet in the front
Battery powered airliners can travel all the way
to the scene of the crash: ruclips.net/video/HRJpRu2RsSs/видео.html
I am super pro electric planes but denying that there are big challenges toward fully electric fleets all around the world would be absurd. Now I get it why electric planes cannot compete that well on long distance travels. Basically they don't use air around them which is gas and therefore part of the fuel in conventional planes. Really cool insight. Thanks ! I wonder if that could be solved in future..but that would mean plane would have to make electricity on board somehow using oxygen and not polluting environment. Can't imagine that being fissable.
Fuel cells haven’t quite gathered speed in the various marketplaces compared to batteries in particular… sadly it seems unlikely that fuel cells will be important even in long haul aviation where they could be maybe most relevant anytime soon - I hope I’m proven wrong ASAP🤯
how much oxygen per kg of jet fuel?
By weight, 1 unit of jet fuel burns 14 units of oxygen.
@@Mike-Bell so 400 tonne 747 fully fuelled means 100 tones of fuel plus 1,400 tonnes of oxygen for a long trip.
And 70,000 tonnes of atmosphere with the nitrogen and oxygen included. Oxygen is 20% of the atmosphere.
And 316 tonnes of CO2.
Just saying.
Edit, nitrous oxide gas aswell ????
Nitrous oxide (N₂O) causes 265 times as much warming and methane causes 28 times as much warming. Just saying.
@@stephenbrickwood1602 its crazy isn’t it!!!
@@Mike-Bell These sort off numbers help understanding of the Climate Destabilisation and our civilisation needs.
A stable climate is the absolute priority.
Now Australia's area is 8 million square km, or 8,000 billion m2.
And we have sunshine all year with every m2 producing 1KW every day. FREE ENERGY forever after the mass produced solar panels are installed.
Australia could power the world for a year with one day's sunshine. In theory. In practice with all the real world problems, we would need a week. LOL.
So we could make all the synthetic fuel to power the all the worlds aeroplanes. In theory. LOL
Then we have wind ......!!!
Just saying.
In the health world there is a saying,
No money in the cure, the money is in the medicine, Vested interests etc.
Just saying a little more.
@@stephenbrickwood1602 You may have to calculate again your numbers. 8 million sq km is not 8 billion m2. A m2 producing 1kW is just not correct. True, heat capacity can (and is) achieved, but solar panels work on the range of 20% efficiency. And you can't install every m2, you could calculate 1/4 to have a general idea.
Anyway, your conclusion is mostly right, Australia could power everything. ;)
Oxygen is already taken into account when calculating energy density, oxygen itself does not burn
You are missing the whole point. Combustion propulsion only needs to carry 1/14th of its energy on board. Batteries have to carry 100% of their energy on board. Electric is at a brutal disadvantage.
The energy density comparison is comparing apples and watermelons.
It's Supersonic airliner
It's the energy density of the battery that's inadequate. Besides I can't really see how oxygen can be compared to a bulk energy carrier.
The reason why we don't see long hauling tractors or planes or boats powered by batteries it's because BATTERIES will NEVER cut it as energy repository and the industry is playing heavily with this misconception of people thinking EV will never be used as bulk hauling fleet.
The EV industry needs to stuff the market with rubbish range EVs that need A LIFE to recharge and are depleted in 25 minutes of spirited driving, beyond needing a powergrid like every house is a heavy industry production plant before they finally provide the real EV, I mean that one that's able to create its own energy from a much denser source than any battery will ever be.
There's already a perfect "battery" that can store safely and densely all the energy we need, it's called liquid fuel. Of course if you want to be ECO compatible you must convert it rather than burn it, only then batteries (or supercaps) make sense... as heap power reserve, while during partial loads all the energy needed is covered by internal fuel cells.
Considering the Talibans that are ruling Planet Earth in the current era I believe we're roughly at least a couple of lifetimes away from the period. I may be wrong... hopefully will I be.
@Matthew Johansen Kind of agree on the concept. But just let me name a car I evaluated: to charge a Q4 eTron in 41 minutes (82 kW/h battery) it takes a 100kW CCS Type2 station. Can you imagine a modern road stop restaurant having 10 of those cars charging? They'd need a 1 MW power line just to serve 10 FREAKiots charging their electric toy.
That is not the future... that is the FAILURE. That's why we will all be taken over by THE TALIBANS!
You didn’t understand anything of the video, try rewatching more slowly.
B..but Elon told us electric planes were super easy and made perfect sense, and as we all know, Elon is the smartest man on Earth who definitely doesn't just constantly pull things out of his arse.
I don't understand this. Can you make another video explaining this for dumber people, please? I can sort of understand it but I'd like some elaboration. Thanks!!
This was squashed into 60 seconds for a competition which is not enough time to do the principle justice. I would like to remake it.
But basically electric needs to carry its full power load on board. In aircraft 85% of if power is oxygen which it breathes along the way. Gasoline aircraft take off with just 15% of their power carried on board. Battery can never compete. Does that help or is another video required?
Ur nuts
"humans are mostly powered by breathing oxygen"
...shows stock video of man breathing CO2
haha
😂🤙🏻 only see that now
ÕMĞ é PôWéŘ-PhÛľĽ Orrrsé-Strâylêan
😲😲😟😰😟😰😩😩😩😩😰😟😰😩😧😧😧😧😦😥😦😧😳😳😵😶😵😳