[LINK] Risk Management [WAS: Compressed Air Hybrids]

Karl Auer kauer at biplane.com.au
Wed Sep 9 12:38:47 AEST 2009

On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 12:11 +1000, David Boxall wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 at 22:41:32 +1000 Karl Auer wrote:
> > > There's no explosion, as there can be with batteries in that situation.
> >
> > ... When a container holding very high pressure
> > "goes" (and I think we are talking multiple thousands of bar here) I
> > suspect it goes in a big way.
> I bow to your superior knowledge of carbon fibre technology.

Oh, don't - I have no great knowledge of it at all. I am just working on
the basic principle that where a lot of energy is held, and it all
releases at once, you get a big bang, regardless of the kind of energy
or the kind of container. The tank itself may tear, but what happens to
whatever is in the way of the rapidly expanding air?

> On further reflection, I'm confirmed in my opinion that a battery - no 
> matter what its technology - presents far greater safety and 
> environmental risks than a carbon fibre tank of air.

Ah well, that's a different argument. I'm just talking about the direct
safety aspects of having sufficient energy contained in a compressed gas
to power a car. Carbon fibre and air may well be less toxic than
batteries, but can they actually do the job, and if so, how safely?

Regards, K.

Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)                   +61-2-64957160 (h)
http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/                  +61-428-957160 (mob)

GPG fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF

More information about the Link mailing list