RE: Is this the future of Mercedes-Benz?

[sospan]

Two way hybrid?
Sinclair/Lotus7 with wheels stylised from "The Prisoner"?
Looks like an modern C2 and the Bicycle wheels tagged on to give Prisoner-ish styling combined with the Lotus 7 from the Intro credits.
These lightweight fun electric machines need a dose of power and performance to become anything like practical. Otherwise we will have roafs crowded with sucj rickshaws....

[Marwood79]

dom9 said:

350Matt said:

this took 150 people a year!!!


I hope they were doing something else as well

It is strangely interesting... Yet I am thinking exactly the same, Matt!

Exactly - on a conservative estimate including employment and costs this little beauty has cost Merc at least 12million Euros. Nice.

[pshooter]

nice.. i love this one off retrospective custom stuff.

cuss all like but its an artform, especially this one

[durbster]

annodomini2 said:

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

...Now if our cars are emitting water vapor (assuming the energy is coming from a 'clean' source), then ok the CO2 is reduced and has less retention in the atmosphere, but if we are emitting more water vapor anyway, it defeats the object.

Really shows you how BS is spouted around.

Err, I'm not being funny here but I really don't understand your point. You've explained exactly why it should work in order to claim it wouldn't.

Yes you're retaining less water relatively due to less CO2, but adding significantly more water into the atmosphere due to all the fuel cell reactions.

But if water doesn't do any harm to the atmosphere unless it's trapped by the CO2, there's no problem. Water isn't harmful to the atmosphere.

[ndj]

"IS THIS THE FUTURE OF MERCEDES-BENZ?"

Errrr, NO!

[Dagnut]

ndj said:

"IS THIS THE FUTURE OF MERCEDES-BENZ?"

Errrr, NO!

"IS THIS THE SAME POSTED REPEATED 3 TIMES"


errrr, YES!

[kieronj]

150 people and not one said "Those wheels look st on it."

Looks like an expensive Sinclair C5.

[BoRED S2upid]

If this is the future of car design I will be doing a lot more walking! talented car designers my arse.

[annodomini2]

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

...Now if our cars are emitting water vapor (assuming the energy is coming from a 'clean' source), then ok the CO2 is reduced and has less retention in the atmosphere, but if we are emitting more water vapor anyway, it defeats the object.

Really shows you how BS is spouted around.

Err, I'm not being funny here but I really don't understand your point. You've explained exactly why it should work in order to claim it wouldn't.

Yes you're retaining less water relatively due to less CO2, but adding significantly more water into the atmosphere due to all the fuel cell reactions.

But if water doesn't do any harm to the atmosphere unless it's trapped by the CO2, there's no problem. Water isn't harmful to the atmosphere.

The extra water increases the mass of the atmosphere, which absorbs and retains more of the heat. It also increases air pressure affecting weather systems.

[durbster]

annodomini2 said:

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

...Now if our cars are emitting water vapor (assuming the energy is coming from a 'clean' source), then ok the CO2 is reduced and has less retention in the atmosphere, but if we are emitting more water vapor anyway, it defeats the object.

Really shows you how BS is spouted around.

Err, I'm not being funny here but I really don't understand your point. You've explained exactly why it should work in order to claim it wouldn't.

Yes you're retaining less water relatively due to less CO2, but adding significantly more water into the atmosphere due to all the fuel cell reactions.

But if water doesn't do any harm to the atmosphere unless it's trapped by the CO2, there's no problem. Water isn't harmful to the atmosphere.

The extra water increases the mass of the atmosphere, which absorbs and retains more of the heat. It also increases air pressure affecting weather systems.

I can't see how it will make any difference. There's no extra water - there's a constant amount of water in the world - it's just being redistributed slightly.

[CarMad426]

Jay leno's 1909 baker electric car seems better
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/cars/Baker_E_shell.s...

Edited by CarMad426 on Saturday 28th March 13:55

Edited by CarMad426 on Saturday 28th March 13:56

[annodomini2]

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

durbster said:

annodomini2 said:

...Now if our cars are emitting water vapor (assuming the energy is coming from a 'clean' source), then ok the CO2 is reduced and has less retention in the atmosphere, but if we are emitting more water vapor anyway, it defeats the object.

Really shows you how BS is spouted around.

Err, I'm not being funny here but I really don't understand your point. You've explained exactly why it should work in order to claim it wouldn't.

Yes you're retaining less water relatively due to less CO2, but adding significantly more water into the atmosphere due to all the fuel cell reactions.

But if water doesn't do any harm to the atmosphere unless it's trapped by the CO2, there's no problem. Water isn't harmful to the atmosphere.

The extra water increases the mass of the atmosphere, which absorbs and retains more of the heat. It also increases air pressure affecting weather systems.

Depends on the source of the hydrogen, if its coming from Hydrocarbons, then that is extra water.

It is not a total extra water that is the issue, it is total extra water in the atmosphere.
I can't see how it will make any difference. There's no extra water - there's a constant amount of water in the world - it's just being redistributed slightly.