How Czinger plans to save the combustion engine
1,250hp hybrid V8-powered 21C can be much more efficient than battery equivalent, says CCO
Practically every automotive sector is readying itself for an electrified future, we're told. But is battery power really the long-term solution to today’s far-reaching issues? Jens Sverdrup, the chief commercial officer of new US supercar maker Czinger, doesn’t think so. The former Koenigsegg and Rimac employee says the smarter, more scientifically-sound answer lies within the company’s 1,000hp per tonne 21C, a project that’s as much a demonstration of future powertrains and production methods as it is a £1.4 million hypercar. What’s going into the 21C will, Jens reckons, be pivotal in ensuring the survival of internal combustion engines long into the future.
That’s quite the claim for a brand that, until a few weeks ago, very few people outside of southern California had actually heard of. But Czinger isn’t your average new kid on the block; its 21C - and a trio of more attainable future models - already have funding, so it’s far from a flash in the pan. The wheels are very much in motion. That’s why the Kevin Czinger-headed Los Angeles company isn’t seeking deposits to take its new single-seater to production, with support provided by Divergent 3D, the industry-shaking Cali start up, and other significant backers, including Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing’s Horizons Ventures. That, and doubtless the prospect of moving to The Golden State, was enough to lure Jens over in early 2019.
“The sort of technology we’re talking about at Czinger is capable of making cars – even those that are driver-focussed supercars – carbon negative,” the 48-year-old says from a smog-free LA during lockdown. “Divergent’s production processes can be completely CO2 neutral, while the use of fuel like Volcanol to power the engine means what comes out of the car is cleaner than what went in. Compare that to the entire supply chain from well to wheel of a lithium-ion battery EV and it’s clear to me that this is the future we should be going for. For sustainability, to protect the environment and even viability.”
You may have read about the hybrid 21C’s engine before, a twin-turbocharged 2.88-litre V8 that produces 950hp alone, making it the most power-dense road car motor in the world. It revs to 11,000rpm and sounds like “an old Formula 1 car engine when it gets going from 6,000rpm,” according to Jens, so it’s liable to make even a bluff traditionalist get excited. But with very few differences to a conventional ICE motor, including larger valves and different fuel sensors, this engine runs on a methanol made with gases captured from industrial waste. Meaning that in broad terms you're essentially redirecting pollution that would otherwise reach the atmosphere and using it to make a liquid fuel that’s easily processed and of a very high octane. Jens says RON 110 is possible.
In a future world where industrial emissions are reduced, the methanol can come from other sources, including renewables. Indeed, the 21C’s methanol – Volcanol from Carbon Recycling International (CRI) in Iceland – is created using carbon dioxide emitted at the geothermal powerplant beside the Blue Lagoon. It’s a process driven naturally by the heat of a nearby volcano, hence the fuel’s name, making it cleaner than the use of natural gas for methanol production. Jens reckons it’s the best bet we have for future powertrains as it doesn’t require farm land like crop-based ethanol, and it doesn’t demand energy intense and environment-damaging extraction of rare earth metals from China like BEVs. It relies on processes that are already going on. That it could ensure the survival of high-revving engines is, for the most part, an added bonus. The biggest drawback - aside from the currently prohibitive cost of production compared to pumping oil from the ground - is, admittedly, that methanol can almost halve an engine’s fuel economy, but with a proper supply system established, it might conceivably one day compete with fossil fuel.
Why aren’t more companies investing in this alternative fuel, then, you might ask? The reason, Jens reckons, relates to China’s immense market power. BEVs are popular there because the lithium their batteries use is locally sourced, so it makes economic sense. There’s a lot of money to be saved and made. And with China’s market being so enormous, car makers the world over are naturally vying to succeed there with appropriate BEV products. That, and the great marketability of a tailpipe-free propulsion system which, even Jens concedes, “has efficiency that’s hard to argue with”, means it’s become an attractive and quick emissions-fighting solution for regulators and governments the world over.
But Jens isn’t the only one arguing that BEVs are a short-sighted route that doesn’t consider the wider implications. Why do you think the likes of BMW and Toyota remain committed to hydrogen R&D in the background? “They know lithium-ion isn’t the future,” says Jens.
That being said, the present industrial scenario means even Czinger has had to implement lithium in its 21C’s hybrid batteries, albeit of the titanate kind. This more advanced technology enables near instantaneous recharging so it’s always providing power, “like a KERS system that’s permanently on,” explains Jens. It’s enabled Czinger to keep the total weight of the full hybrid powertrain down to just 450kg, helping to achieve Koenigsegg One:1-beating power-to-weight. That’s equally as important to Jens’ argument for the 21C’s case for the future, which he explains by highlighting something many of us will feel passionately about, in the most PH way possible.
“I recently drove a Peugeot 106 Rallye back in the UK and was like wow,” Jens reports with real enthusiasm. “It was clear 50 per cent of my joy was down to the car’s light weight, as it felt so up on its toes. Starting light makes for a better canvas to build on, and it means that you can take real enjoyment even at slower speeds. It doesn’t feel intimidating when you don’t have this huge mass moving around you – something even ‘light’ hypercars still have to contend with. Those of us who really love driving know that even the very best electric cars can’t do that, not without adding more complex technology to try and counter the mass.”
Czinger’s 21C and subsequent models – which will share some parts with the hypercar but be more practical and road-focussed – will always be light. Jens assures us of that. It’s something made possible thanks to the freedom provided by Divergent’s 3D printing technology, which is already becoming advanced enough for Czinger to start thinking about future platforms that have tunnels and tubes built into them for fluids and wiring, removing parts, weight and waste from the build, and complex internal structures that enhance crash safety. Such production techniques can also reuse leftover material from other parts of the process, eliminating waste. And thanks to the flexibility of the printing hardware, which includes robotic arms with “precision far greater than a human” that can run 24/7, you no longer need production lines.
“Imagine the space, energy and cost savings of a plant that operates in this manner,” says Jens, hinting at the advantages of Czinger’s LA facility. “With our techniques we can easily do 10,000 cars a year from the ground up in a space that’s much smaller than usual. We’re not interested in mass producing our cars to that level [for reasons related to brand exclusivity], but the technology could do that in a site of 5,000 square metres, [a tenth of that] required by conventional production techniques. All it takes is a software change, not tooling change, to switch from producing one car model to another.”
Compare that to the vast supply chain, production waste and long-term recycling challenges of a BEV, not to mention the fact their weight requires additional power for them to be hauled on boats and lorries around the world and, well, Czinger’s case does seem rather persuasive. But with the spotlight already cast on battery power, there is a risk that investment in alternative liquid fuels will come too late. Plenty of manufacturers have reduced their engine R&D budgets and it’s not hard to imagine a time when the focus will have completely shifted, at least on the spreadsheets of mainstream car makers. Perhaps that will leave the internal combustion engine in the hands of the few, its future finally intertwined with a sustainable gameplan. Either way, Czinger is another new firm clearly intent on innovating its way to a workable long-term solution - and that, frankly, is 11,000rpm music to our ears.
Marvellous to think we could have cleaner than source fuel emissions, we won’t see the outcome to this but our grandchildren will
No, if's, no buts, no nothing. As Sotty so correctly says so many times, I don't care how flash your designer suit is, how many billions of dollars you spend, how nice you houses in the Holiwood hills are:
you cannae change the laws of physics, captain
(hint, one is a consumable, the other is a 100% non-consumable and 100% recyclable component)
Recently i've heard this from the likes of Riversimple, claiming on twitter that "green hydrogen" makes their product clean and now here's Czingers chief b**lsh*tter spouting the same total nonsense!
Lets be clear, if Renewable energy makes your product "Greener" then it also makes every other product greener as well, so your product has NO NET BENEFIT over any other! It's a zero sum game. RS claimed green hydrogen reduces the CO2 footprint of their "car" by 75%, well guess what, it reduces the CO2 footprint of my BeV by 75% as well, and because my BeV is much more efficient, the effect is actually amplified by the efficiency of the device converting that energy into useful work! So for any single gramm of CO2 created in the production of energy used for transport, a BeV still goes the furthest on that energy, across the widest range of operating conditions, and therefore still is the lowest polluter......
https://www.bosch.com/stories/synthetic-fuels
And these guys don't know what they're doing?
https://www.israel21c.org/israeli-breakthrough-cou...
And all those car cos such as BMW continuing with hydrogen are stupid and wrong? And only the EV-ers are pure and righteous?
Recently i've heard this from the likes of Riversimple, claiming on twitter that "green hydrogen" makes their product clean and now here's Czingers chief b**lsh*tter spouting the same total nonsense!
Lets be clear, if Renewable energy makes your product "Greener" then it also makes every other product greener as well, so your product has NO NET BENEFIT over any other! It's a zero sum game. RS claimed green hydrogen reduces the CO2 footprint of their "car" by 75%, well guess what, it reduces the CO2 footprint of my BeV by 75% as well, and because my BeV is much more efficient, the effect is actually amplified by the efficiency of the device converting that energy into useful work! So for any single gramm of CO2 created in the production of energy used for transport, a BeV still goes the furthest on that energy, across the widest range of operating conditions, and therefore still is the lowest polluter......
The only reason you can say make a crankshaft cheaply and easily is because there is already a vast supply chain in place! Have a go at say making a crankshaft, piston or a turbo in your kitchen at home an see how you get on! For a BeV, which are intrinsically highly parallel unlike for an ICE vehicle, where despite having the same type of parts as another ICE, actually cannot use any of those similar parts (trying fitting the piston from say a ford fiesta into your Fiat 500 for example), that supply chain can be leaner, greeaner and crucially, so can the recycling, as it's easier to recycle a single type of thing in large volumes than it is to recycle a lot of different things.
2) "their weight requires additional power" - Vehicle Weight does not proportionally affect energy consumption for moving vehicles, what affects consumption is drag.
This is extemely easy to show: Take Tesla - They make some of the heaviest vehicles you can buy, thanks to having very large batteries and generally being physically big, premium segment vehicles. A Tesla Model X P100 D, a huge SUV that weighs 2,500 kg and returns the equivalent of 90 miles per gallon over the US homologation fuel economy tests. If overall consumption was in any significant way proportional to vehicle mass, then a ModelX would have roughly 2 times the consumption of say a BMW i3, also an BeV, that weighs "just" 1250 kg, and yet a BMW i3 only manages 113 g/km equivalent over the same test. What this tells us is that a BMW i3 has 80% of the DRAG of a ModelX, despite being half the mass.
This is one of the enourmous strengths of pure BeV's, because of the innate physics of our universe, is that there is a very close link between energy stored in mass (Kinetic energy), Magnetism and Electrical energy. They basically are practically interchangable. That equivalency means a BeV has an intrinsically bi-directional capability. It can move energy with very low loss both into, and cruically, out of, mass as a function of velocity (KE = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity^2 for those playing along at home...). Suddenly, therefore Mass has lost its direct impact on consumption because you can change the velocity of a mass and actually get most of the KE back again (around 68 to 72% for todays BeV's)
Lets be clear, in that ENTIRE article above, i cannot find a SINGLE TRUTH, a single fact that actually stands any scientific scrutiny what-so-ever. In these Trumpian times, where simply shouting the loudest wins, i guess i shouldn't be suprised........
Lets be clear, in that ENTIRE article above, i cannot find a SINGLE TRUTH, a single fact that actually stands any scientific scrutiny what-so-ever. In these Trumpian times, where simply shouting the loudest wins, i guess i shouldn't be suprised........
this video goes in to more detail.
https://youtu.be/OCto6qSjIXw
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff