Here’s technology doing something useful. Who wouldn’t like tires with better mileage? It comes from a new chemical additive, shown below. I chuckled when I saw the chemical structure, which itself looks like a tire tread:
Of course, before rushing out to buy new BF Greenrich radials, just making sure your tires are properly inflated will net you a similar mileage improvement.
From Eurekalert and ACS: Developing ‘green’ tires that boost mileage and cut carbon dioxide emissions
Lanxess
A new generation of “green” automobile tires that can boost fuel efficiency without sacrificing safety and durability is rolling their way through the research pipeline. The new tires could help add an extra mile or two per gallon to a car’s fuel economy. That’s the topic of the cover story of the current issue of Chemical & Engineering News, (C&EN) ACS’ weekly newsmagazine.
C&EN Senior Editor Alexander Tullo explains that rolling resistance — the friction that tires encounter when rolling — are a major factor in a vehicle’s fuel economy. It can determine up to 20 percent of fuel economy. Overcoming it accounts for 4 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels. For years, tire makers and their raw material suppliers have been eyeing lower rolling resistance as a way to boost fuel economy and promote a cleaner environment. But they have been thwarted by a principle in the tire world called the “magic triangle of tire technology.” It holds that an improvement to rolling resistance has to come at the expense of wet-road grip and durability.
That barrier is now falling, thanks to the development of new materials, including new forms of silica and nanomaterials. These new materials include a nanogel that improves abrasion resistance, grip and rolling resistance of tires as well as a newly-developed resin that helps tires retain air longer. But there’s a catch: Motorists still will have to keep tires properly inflated to take full advantage of the new technology, the article notes.
ARTICLE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
“Stretching Tires’ Magic Triangle”
This story is available at
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Terrific. If properly inflating our tires makes such an impact, why do we need to worry about cap-and-trade?
Well I love the chemical formula, just from the looks of that stuff.
But yes; who cares if a tire lasts 50,000 miles. What good is that to you, if you go flying off a wet curve one day, because your tires have low rolling resistance; aka poor cornering power.
I’d rather have a tire that can keep my car on the road for 50,000 miles wihout skidding; and you can keep your improved gas mileage.
If the state of inflation of people’s tires is thought to be a big contributor to fuel conservation then we are all in trouble.
I have a better solution. Simply pull out ever second traffic light signal on the planet; well that alone will save a lot of electricity. Then after a month of driver adjustment to the new arrangement, pull out every second one of the remaining signals.
I believe it used to be true that every drop of oil we imported from outside the USA got burned up by automobiles that were simply parked motionless at stupid traffic lights, that can’t make a decision that any two year old chile could make.
Get rid of all four way stop signs; car pool lanes, and traffic metering lights.
Most traffic lights are mostly red; most of the time; that came about naturally, because Red LEDs were the easiest to make.
If the lights were programmed properly, you could have most of them mostly green most of the time.
Well of course you would have to give people a driving test before you give them a driving licence.
The pople who program traffic lights are the same sort of people who wrote M$ Windows.
Giving traffic lights the intelligence of a two year old child; would save more gasoline than any tire pressure improvements might do.
After all any two year old child can tell the difference between a tree (ANY tree) and a telephone pole (the AT&T Tree).
How many computers can distinguish the tree (ANY tree) from the telephone pole ?
Less resistance to the road means better mileage. More resistance to the road (wet and dry) means lower stopping distances and faster lane changes.
How many times does a set of tires have to save your live to be worth a few more gallons of gasoline? After 190,000 miles my performance car, on performance tires, has only gone to the limits of adhesion one time to keep me away from the air bag. That’s enough.
What kind of tires does Al Gore trust to keep his loved ones alive?
“George E. Smith (17:10:39) :
But yes; who cares if a tire lasts 50,000 miles. What good is that to you, if you go flying off a wet curve one day, because your tires have low rolling resistance; aka poor cornering power.”
I really would like to know what Jimmie Johnson thinks about that (is there a racing driver among us ?).
Oddly this echoes a recent guest post I did on electric cars at the Air Vent.
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/electric-cars/
As the then ECG discovered In general rolling resistance is not terribly important except at low speeds.
For instance the rolling resistance of a railway train on a level track in good order can be as low as 2lbs [64 poundals] per ton [Imperial]. Air resistance does not become a serious drag at speeds less than about 15 to 20 mph.
Pneumatically tyred vehicles have a rolling resistance, depending on the surface, of about ten times that. But because they are very short in length compared to a railway train their total air resistance tends to be much higher for the weight hauled and becomes significant at around 30 to 40 mph.
These are necessarily very broad figures by the way.
Thus the ECG found that the original high pressure low rolling resistance tyre originally specified offered, in practice, negligible reductions in power saving over the then industry standard low pressure radial.
So whilst improvements in tyre tehnology are to be welcomed do not imagine they are going to save the world from the CO2 monster: as alarmists make him out to be.
Kindest Regards
Nanogel? How much is this going to cost me?!!
Besides, the tires I have right now will save me the same 1-2 miles per gallon if properly inflated. That’s why Mr. President said we didn’t need to drill for domestic oil.
And in fact we will do a lot less drilling, because of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act which withdrew over 3 million acres from energy leasing, in a huge Federal land grab. And all I got was this lousy “Yes we can” tire guage.
No contest.
Every winter, I sacrifice mileage, for traction, and put winter tires on my wife’s car.
Its worth every penny of the extra gasoline that she burns.
George E. Smith (17:10:39) :
> Most traffic lights are mostly red; most of the time; that came about naturally, because Red LEDs were the easiest to make.
Somehow I never looked at it that way. How’s your mushroom crop this year? Note that red LEDs were the frst ones invented to, the other flavors may still be playing catch-up.
> Giving traffic lights the intelligence of a two year old child; would save more gasoline than any tire pressure improvements might do.
Yeah, but what happens when the traffic light throws a temper tantrum?
For best performance, always inflate your tires to the pressure indicated on the tire, not what the car manufacturer recommends.
This is just a marketing gimmick. There’s all kinds of things that can be done to improve milage. Changing transmission gear ratios is one of the primary and best methods. Using a synthetic oil, modifying your driving habits, tuning the engine properly, etc. Even clocking spark plugs can help a bit. Many things could be done by the manufacturers to improve the engine (ICE) & drive train efficiency, but are not, because they would increase production costs. Some improvements cannot be done by manufacturer’s because of existing EPA, and other agencies, regulations.
To add to George E. Smith’s superb suggestions, I propose we revoke the licenses of all the drivers who maintain an average speed by alternately punching the accelerator and stabbing the brakes.
“For best performance, always inflate your tires to the pressure indicated on the tire, not what the car manufacturer recommends.”
I’ve always heard the reverse. The tire companies do not know anything about the load a specific set of their tires might be carrying.
As for me, I have never seen any difference in gas mileage before and after pumping up my tires, just like I have never seen any actual savings from using low watt bulbs. I think that, as long as your sidewalls aren’t nearly dragging on the ground, this is a 2nd order effect.
But, as far as energy saving goes, I will tell you this. We have a bonus room above the garage that was always hotter than the rest of the house in summer, and colder than the rest of the house in winter. My HVAC guy suggested getting additional insulation, and I figured I would try it. The room is still an outlier, but my overall monthly utilities bills have gone down by 1/3. This is a new house and not at all cheap in my area, so i was amazed at and immensely happy with the result.
“For best performance, always inflate your tires to the pressure indicated on the tire, not what the car manufacturer recommends.”
The pressure on the tire indicates maximum load carrying capability at that pressure. Not something to be used for daily use.
Always follow the manufacturer pressure recommendations found on the door jamb.
I’m with Bart on tyre pressures.
On my Peugeot 405 the tyre pressures are higher for the same tyres than other cars. Inflating the tyres to the same pressures on those other cars result in uneven wear & hence reduced grip,
DaveE.
Um… you DO know how Bill Gates got his start, right?
You’ll find “traffic lights” in any good Bill Gates biography…
Hmm, I have some rather soft light truck tires on my vehicle (an off-road Xterra). When I went to these tires (rather than the factory dry rots I started with), I lost about 1/2 mpg. Of course, I went from 17 to 16.5 mpg in the city, and 17.5 to 17 mpg on the highway. Nothing I can do to make it better or worse actually.
Mark
To save fuel, drive a manual. It’s more fun and operating the clutch even provides a bit of excercise. Interesting to note that about 95% of all cars sold in Italy are manuals whereas the reverse is true in the U.S.
The other advantage of driving a manual is that they deter those car thieves who can only drive automatics.
I had to swerve and accelerate violently to avoid an idiot in a winnebago who tried to cross three lanes of heavy traffic without looking.
Missed me by about 6 inches.
Turbo helped me accelerate, grippy tires kept me from spinning out and getting creamed.
No thanks on “compromise tires.” If you make a nanogel to improve tire performance, I only want to se better grip.
It’s a safety system, like brakes. I don’t want my brakes “worrying” about making power, I want them to stop the darned car. Safety system.
I leave the heated seats off to save energy, ’cause I don’t need them.
Not reducing my traction to save pennies.
I still insist that the best way to cut auto CO2 emissions is to get rid of catalytic converters. Sure the air will then be full of real pollution but at least that evil CO2 will be reduced. One must admire the government scheme for requiring autos to be equiped with a device that produces CO2 and now wanting to tax us for that production.
Wow. That’d improve the MPG on my full-size SUV by about 15%. Then again, if I was worried about MPG, I would not have bought an SUV for urban driving.
The new tires could help add an extra mile or two per gallon to a car’s fuel economy.
That might make up for the mileage I’ve been losing since ethanol was added to the mix.
How is it that a principle surrounding a round rubber tire is referred to as a “magic triangle?” Euclid must be rolling over in his grave. Only magic triangle I’m aware of is the one with multi-colored golf tees at Cracker Barrel.
I couldn’t help but notice that the new compound contains silicon. Given complete combustion, it’ll release SiO2 nano-particulates, which can be very harmful for lung tissue. Scrap tire fires are bad enough already. Will this make them worse?
Tom in Florida (19:53:22) :
Catalytic converters, yeah!
Most UK journeys, the CC doesn’t even start working!
Far better was lean-burn, but the German CC manufacturers wanted what they got.
DaveE.
I am in favor of any technical development as long as it results in BETTER products at COMPATIBLE prices, however I don’t think much money is to be made by the application of low resistance tires if you drive a 250 hp sports car or an SUV.
The government regulation driven green hike does not make our products better and certainly not cheaper. It pushes for irrational application of resources that will lead to extremely high energy prices and products that lack value for money.
Eventually this will lead to a collapse of our economies.
A recent example to make my point:
The new Volvo V70 Plug-in Hybrid, to go on sale by 2012.
Volvo has made a reputation for building one of the safest cars in the world.
Unfortunately the new hybrid is a safety horror.
It has an electric engine that drives the rear wheels and a 250 bhp diesel driving the front wheels. The electric engine takes care of propelling the car but also breaking, thus retrieving breaking energy and fill up the battery again.
Well, this new Volvo, on wet and icy roads goes everywhere and one of the new properties is the risk of spinning around the moment you take your foot from the gas pedal.
The car will be 15.000 dollar more expensive than a conventional model it will have a battery only range of 30 miles (in the test it made only 17.5 miles) at an access weight of more than 250 kg.
That’s a lot of money to turn a good car in to a bad car.
Would we not rather wait until radical new technologies make it to the main markets based on the good old principle of free markets instead of Government Dictate?
To be honest with you I am getting rather fed up with all the “Green BS” being pored all over us all day long, all based on the wrong assumption that CO2 emissions are turning our planet into a Thermogeddon?
Actually, a bigger gas saving might be to go back to lead anti-knock additives in petrol. I seem to remember that removing them increased consumption by 4%? And the supposed health benefits were not universally accepted as factual.