Question to C.Martz

[Misterloxo]

Huum, I'm not going to try to get you out of your nose. I hope that you will make us a very complete dossier with technical, practical data, photos and everything

[Christophe]

well you can count on it

electronic management and all the mess !!

[Christophe]

the Zx will turn (on the road) for the return. We are a little late: /

here is the response from renault (mail) which I also posted on the PMC working group:


Hello, I found on my hard drive the mail of May (or June) 2001 that I had in response from Renault (my answers to this answer are in bold) after having briefly presented the Pantone process and the first results. I leave you alone judge and invite you to obviously learn from it ...: //

friendships

Christophe.

His "raw" answer (you will notice the formulas of politeness very developed):

It requires power
to clean up (500W
at 1500W), which is
unacceptable, whereas today we use a jar
catalytic which
does not require it.
On the other hand, the level of reduction of HC is at
97 to 98% penalty,
whereas currently, we
easily exceeds 99,7%, or to compare
pollutant emissions
(HC) remaining in a
ratio of 10, which is huge.

My argument to which I did not get an answer (obviously):

Hello,

I allow myself to take up the 2 arguments that you defended against my project:

"It requires power
to clean up (500W
at 1500W), which is
unacceptable, whereas today we use a jar
catalytic which
does not require it. "

Yes, the reaction for treating the fuel in the reactor is an endothermic reaction which requires a supply of heat power. This heat is entirely supplied by the heat of the exhaust gases, so there is NO ADDITIONAL POWER SUPPLY and therefore excess consumption with this process. The drop in power observed comes from LOSSES of charges in the intake gas treatment circuit, which greatly affects the cylinder filling rate.

On the graphs that I have provided you, the 500 to 1500 W are not the power necessary for the reactor but the electric power that the generator provides, therefore the load of the engine. In order to relate the depollution to the power.

"On the other hand, the level of HC reduction is at
97 to 98% penalty,
whereas currently, we
easily exceeds 99,7%, or to compare
pollutant emissions
(HC) remaining in a
ratio of 10, which is huge. "

I agree that with your latest generation pots (regeneration particle filter I suppose) you can remove 99,7% of the particles. But my questions (with limited knowledge about your technology) are:

-How much does such an exhaust cost? Financially and ecologically?

-What is the fuel consumption for regeneration?

-You are only talking about ppm HC… what about reducing CO2 and CO?

-Does such a pot equip petrol engines?

"It's a shame, because he (speaking of me speaking to a mutual friend) had to believe it, but you know, we will not have spent 2 more than 2 minutes there and will not have read half of his folder.

Indeed, its system consumes energy, and therefore fuel, and 1kW is huge (when you drive in the city, your engine consumes ten kW) and the depoll objectives (standards) are so severe that 3% residual pollutants, it's still 10x too much today, and 100x too tomorrow. "


I still believe in it… despite much opposition from all sides and the gas analysis results that I have just received are very promising. I should point out once again that the system PUMPS the heat lost in the exhaust gases (approximately 40% of the calorific power supplied by the fuel) without any external energy supply.

Regarding standards:

Have you ever seen an engine running in a loop on its exhaust gases, that is to say, swallowing 100% of its exhaust gases (and therefore no longer rejecting any gases)! The process, under certain conditions, allows it… and I understand very well that it may seem IMPOSSIBLE! But the facts are there…

I would like to clarify that this is my End of Study Project which is based on an existing patent, so it is not my process but a process that I am trying to characterize scientifically.

Kind regards.

[Christophe]

ps: I advise you to register for this working group (registration box on the water injection page)

[Christophe]

ok for the forum, I agree with you !! but the people of the groups apparently not ... very few are registered on this forum the...

so your reaction to renault? Fuck the balls huh?

[Dearcham]

You are extremely annoying to note that even with the information in hand people do not read it, preferring to stay on an opinion already ready.

By chatting with a few green and ump personalities during the energy debates last summer it was pretty clear. To wonder if there are still specialists to advise policies other than industrialists (yes during the debates the only minister in office present was Nicole Fontaine).

Regarding this informative side that you are trying to set up, I think it should be valued even more through discovery days or we would explain the process for half a day for example to interested people.

The other solution is to set up a box to promote these technologies. Or is mister Pantone on this subject?

(and where is the zx a little more precisely? You could do some tests on it? Could you put some news in the welcome news from time to time?)

[Christophe]

for the zx: final assembly phase, always no start-up, therefore necessarily no news ...