Concept power units from 2030

[mzso]

generate hydrogen from surplus windfarm electricity ....
store said hydrogen in a handy undersea cavern formerly used for natural gas storage and ....
burn said hydrogen in a gas turbine turning an electrical generator .....

A hell of a lot of energy is wasted compared to pumped hydro.

ammonia is transposable to hydrogen
Toyota has so-called ammonia fuelled cars (presumably without the problems that mzso has posted)

Ammonia is also a very light gas. (Also methane, ethane) It has much of the same problems, I think. Including requiring inefficient processes to create. Also it's highly toxic.

[mzso]

V6 bio/efuel
electric compressor (turbo or volumetric)
separate unit for harvesting electricity form the exhaust only to power the compressor
small battery as a buffer for harvested energy - may be also acting as a boost mode to power the compressor with open waste gate
variable timing valves on exhaust and aspiration

or if we want something difficult camless valves

Would the separate compressor/harvester have enough advantages to worth the extra weight and complexity?

Any really strong reason to not make the engines smaller/ligther with less cylinders?

[mzso]

The crankshaft is the heaviest single component of the engine, and it will be higher.

The sump of a Vee or inline engine can be placed into the step in the floor.

For a flat engine, the crankshaft has to be raised to allow space for the exhaust or intake below the engine.

The X has the same issue, but compounded by the angle of the banks raising the cranklshaft even higher.

For an X engine the lower cylinder heads would not be much lower than the V6's cylinder heads, if at all.

If the gearbox is lower than the engine the additional gears have to be added, making it heavier.

You can see how big the airboxes and exhausts are for the current engines. I don't think so much an issue for aerodynamics, but for the CoG. Except, of course, if the rules allowed for big venturi tunnels.

So I guess the question is: is the smaller size (and weight?) not enough to offset these drawbacks?

[ispano6]

A lot of scientists acknowledge hydrogen to be the future with BEVs as stopgap for the medium term. Unfortunately we have a lot of non-scientists making decisions for the rest of the world. Maybe Super Formula and Japan will lead the way. I can see IMSA/LMP also allowing it too. There needs to be another body that rivals FIA as well, preferably an Asian and American coalition.

This is pure unadulterated fantasy. And I don't think any serious scientist would claim it.
If you produce hydrogen the worst thing you can do is burn it. It pollutes (due to high temperature combustion) and wastes a good chunk of the energy. Fuel-cell is the way to go with hydrogen.

Not that hydrogen makes any sense whatsoever. And it's not an ideological issue, but a physical and technological one.
It's not an energy source, it's an energy storage medium, a very poor one at that. You need to produce it, which is inefficient. Then compress and or cool it, which is also wasteful. You need to store it, which is highly problematic an rather dangerous. Then you need use it. Proton-exchange membrane fuel cells are not particulary efficient, burning is even worse. And storing the huge 700 atmosphere (!) gas cylinders in a car require significant sacrifices.

You can call it fantasy. I call it vision. Have you even researched blue and green hydrogen and ammonia? It's a byproduct we generate already.
Your description of understanding of hydrogen seems archaic to me.

Here's an AI summary for you:

A hydrogen-fueled rotary engine (HRE) is a type of internal combustion engine that utilizes hydrogen as fuel, offering potential advantages like lower emissions and higher power density compared to gasoline engines. Rotary engines, particularly Wankel engines, are well-suited for hydrogen because their design features separate intake and combustion chambers, which can mitigate backfire issues often associated with hydrogen in piston engines.

Hydrogen is often referred to as the "fuel of the future". It's a clean-burning energy source that produces water vapor as a byproduct, unlike fossil fuels which release greenhouse gases. Hydrogen can be produced from various sources, including water, and used to power vehicles, generate electricity, and even heat homes.

There's a ton more research articles you can find from AI search.

[.poz]

You can call it fantasy. I call it vision. Have you even researched blue and green hydrogen and ammonia? It's a byproduct we generate already.
Your description of understanding of hydrogen seems archaic to me.

Hydrogen has a big problem: is very inefficient

The most efficient way to create green hydrogen is High-temperature electrolysis (HTE): at 850 C is 64% efficient
then you have to compress such hydrogen, and that cost about 4% of the energy of hydrogen (so 96% efficient)
Fuel cell efficiency can range from 40–60%, let' assume is 50%

so you have 100 energy in form of electricity
64 uncompressed hydrogen
61,44 compressed hydrogen
30,7 electricity to run an electric motor

[.poz]

Would the separate compressor/harvester have enough advantages to worth the extra weight and complexity?

Any really strong reason to not make the engines smaller/ligther with less cylinders?

The electric compressor is to have zero turbo lag and mostly to greenwash the engine so Honda, Mercedes etc are happy
V6 is for sound and for Ferrari (originally the actual ICE project was a 4 cylinder in line, Ferrari asked for V6)

an electric turbo can work at 48v, so you don't need high voltage cables and is al lot lighter than a kers

BTW
i think that current PUs will became simpler if you split turbo and compressor; except maybe for lean combustion on actual PU the MGUH is the most difficult part to design and to fine tune

that because is always a compromise between energy harvesting and air compression; if you split the turbine and the compressor, each with a dedicated electric motor/generator there is no need of compromise in design and the fine tune becomes trivial because each part can do what is designed for at its best

[Tommy Cookers]

Hydrogen has a big problem: is very inefficient

not so much if you use the production waste (heat) for co-located industry or other heating
not so if your (windfarm) electricity would otherwise die unborn yet (as now) still be charged to the (non) consumer


btw you can use ammonia as fuel and from it strip some hydrogen as desired for ICE or fuel cell

[Tommy Cookers]

If you produce hydrogen the worst thing you can do is burn it. It pollutes (due to high temperature combustion) and wastes a good chunk of the energy.

decarbonisation of steel making (ie iron smelting) is the burning of hydrogen
decarbonisation of fertiliser making is by the use of hydrogen
these would eliminate 10% of global carbon emissions

hydrogen may be available as fuel for motor vehicles
there is nothing immutably high temperature about hydrogen combustion

[ispano6]

You can call it fantasy. I call it vision. Have you even researched blue and green hydrogen and ammonia? It's a byproduct we generate already.
Your description of understanding of hydrogen seems archaic to me.

Hydrogen has a big problem: is very inefficient

The most efficient way to create green hydrogen is High-temperature electrolysis (HTE): at 850 C is 64% efficient
then you have to compress such hydrogen, and that cost about 4% of the energy of hydrogen (so 96% efficient)
Fuel cell efficiency can range from 40–60%, let' assume is 50%

so you have 100 energy in form of electricity
64 uncompressed hydrogen
61,44 compressed hydrogen
30,7 electricity to run an electric motor

Again, this talk is likely too early for 2030 Power unit concepts, but hydrogen-fuel engine concept is not a fantasy. It is very real and in development.

It seems a lot of naysayers aren't keeping up with what is being developed for the future and are quick to shoot it down without considering ALL of the merits and current developments of hydrogen energy. Even solar energy and next generation panels. A retired alum of MIT and Stanford Physics who developed high power lasers for the private sector told me that Hydrogen energy is the future. If forward-thinking, responsible people, organizations, and governments are willing to invest in the future, then it is expected a hydrogen economy will replace the fossil fuels one.

Honda has been working on solar-powered electrolysis for a decade now.
It is getting ready to deploy a system on the ISS.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/honda-fuel-cell

[Tommy Cookers]

Hydrogen is ... a clean-burning energy source that produces water vapor as a byproduct, unlike fossil fuels which release greenhouse gases.....

about 93% of greenhousing is done by water vapour
the atmosphere contains about 50 times more water vapour than CO2

[ispano6]

Hydrogen is ... a clean-burning energy source that produces water vapor as a byproduct, unlike fossil fuels which release greenhouse gases.....

about 93% of greenhousing is done by water vapour
the atmosphere contains about 50 times more water vapour than CO2

While water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, accounting for a significant portion of the overall greenhouse effect (between 41-67%), it's not responsible for 93%. The claim that water vapor contributes 93% of the greenhouse effect is inaccurate

It contributes significantly, but not 93%:
.
Water vapor is responsible for a substantial portion of the natural greenhouse effect, NASA estimates it accounts for about half.
Other greenhouse gases also play a crucial role:
.
Carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide are also important greenhouse gases, and human activities have significantly increased their concentrations in the atmosphere.

Water vapor is not directly affected by human activity:
.
While water vapor is abundant, its concentration is not directly controlled by human activities. Changes in atmospheric water vapor are more of a feedback mechanism related to other greenhouse gases, says an article from MIT Climate Portal

Why Earth needs water vapour to stay warm:

Earth needs water vapor for the greenhouse effect because it's a significant greenhouse gas, absorbing heat radiated from the Earth's surface and preventing it from escaping into space. Water vapor, in fact, is the most abundant greenhouse gas, playing a crucial role in trapping heat and warming the planet

Water Cycle and Water Vapor:
.
The water cycle (evaporation, condensation, precipitation) plays a crucial role in transporting water vapor around the globe and also in transferring heat and energy between the Earth's surface and the atmosphere.
.
Natural Greenhouse Effect:
.
The greenhouse effect is a natural process that keeps the Earth's temperature warm enough for life to thrive. Without it, the Earth's surface would be significantly colder

[hollus]

Water vapor’s effect? Leave politics, ehem, climate change out. Thanks. Water vapor is not in consideration for the fuel of the future, I am sure. So please, don’t go there.

[Tommy Cookers]

75% of hydrogen fuel is made from natural gas - this is a highly carbon-emissive process
but when used hydrogen fuel tailpipe emissions are 'clean'

similarly the G****L W*****G effect from 'well-to-wheel' hydrogen migration into the atmosphere will be discounted
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... en-use.pdf

so, appropriately handled, FIA recognition of hydrogen could please both the new-thinking and the traditionalist factions

[DenBommer]

And what about white hydrogen?
If it can simply be extracted from the ground, wouldn’t that require less energy than producing hydrogen?

[leblanc]

Water vapor is not in consideration for the fuel of the future, I am sure. So please, don’t go there.

lol MGU-H (steam) coming soon...