I am not into physics or all that smart but there are two major problems with compressed air except for perhaps as DAT mentioned,tapping already available resources.
The first would be the economics of it...compressing air is all about resistance.
You are literally putting 50 lbs of crap into a 5 lb bag and that takes a lot of effort to achieve.
The second problem I see is heat.
Compressing air makes the molecules collide and the friction creates a large amount of heat,it is what allows a diesel engine to run without an external means of igniting the fuel.
The sizable storage tanks (really another problem as now you are adding weight) and plumbing from the compressor would be hot enough to set the vehicle on fire I would think.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Actually, all the discussion about "alternative energy", etc. is just a bunch of compressed air (to coin a phrase).......
The entire issue of total transportation fuel efficiency boils down to one simple concept:
"Energy budget".....is the technical term,
translated it simply means that you need a fuel that:
provides more energy in its usage than it consumes to create.........Simple concept........and there is only one viable option that meets this criteria at present technology levels........
petroleumWhy, many would ask is petroleum the only economical motor fuel, with a positive energy budget? Also simple, because nature has done nearly all of the work, and expended the energy to produce it.
Scientifically, the discussion is over. the only thing remaining to talk about is how much of the taxpayers hard-earned money is the government willing to squander to make these "alternatives"
look like they are competitive, when they really never will be.
doc