The Advanced Rankine Engine Conundrum
(Conclusion of the Subject)
Time Frame: Studies begun in 1967 – 68, Government supported R & D from 1970 – 1976
Plan: Develop clean, efficient, fuel diverse, high performance steam engines for automobiles.
A great purpose and lofty goal! The effort was called the Federal Government Alternative Automotive Power Systems Program. The role of the Federal Government was suggested by a Department of Commerce study in 1967. The U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare was also instrumental during the period 1967 to 1970. The Federal Government development program was initiated within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and concluded by the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) which is to be construed as the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) from 1970 to 1976.
Under the program, the advanced piston type, water based, multi-stage, reheat engines were shown to be the best alternative. The Department of Energy published a report on the program. The report, “An Assessment of the Technology of Rankine Engines For Automobiles — DOE/ CS-0125", was printed in April 1977.
The report showed clearly that clean, efficient, fuel diverse, high performance steam engines could be built and installed in standard automobiles! More work was needed, but it could be done and was getting close to success!
The next logical step should have been a major commitment to developing such advanced steam engines and bringing them to market. Instead, what actually happened next brings total consternation. Spin doctors from both the government and industry stepped in and turned the report and program topsy-turvy. The auto industry, led by General Motors, declared steam to be “no good”. (My paper, “General Motors’ Flawed Perception of Rankine Technology”, answers the objections of the auto industry and exposes their deception.) Under duress from the oil and auto industries, The Departments of Energy and Commerce changed their tune. They began to sing, “It Can’t Be Done”. Industry and bureaucracy began to poison the well.
The Department of Energy halted steam engine development and declared it to be inferior. (The question is, “Inferior to what?”. After 50 years and $$ billions, the hydrogen fuel cell is still nothing — the hybrid is a poor band aid at best, even though it is expensive — the E V is a hoot — the ceramic engine is a flop — the adiabatic turbo compound diesel is a phantom — the Wankel engine is just silly — the coal fuel diesel is a night mare — and so forth.) The Department of Commerce, which was instrumental in getting government support for Rankine development started, declared “steam is dead” and became an accomplice to DOE in helping block further steam engine development. (My paper, “Evidence of the Department of Energy’s Costly Duplicity”, answers DOE’s objections and exposes their duplicity. The same applies to the Department of Commerce.) The EPA, which had initiated the program, faded into obscurity and remained strangely silent. The well was being poisoned.
Why did a program with so much promise and potential; why did a program that represented such great need; get tossed on the ash heap? That is the conundrum.
I will postulate a possible answer to this puzzle. Certain special interests began to realize that Rankine engine development was getting too close to success. Roger L. Demler of Scientific Energy Systems Corporation were on the cusp of greatly advancing Rankine efficiency and performance. Special interests panicked. They perceived Rankine engines to be too great of a threat to their profits. The auto and engine industries saw their enormous investments in internal combustion engines threatened with obsolescence. There is not room in the market for both internal combustion engines and Rankine engines. The two are mutually exclusive, and a properly designed Rankine engine will always trump an internal combustion engine. The oil industry saw the possibility of their market dropping by half or more. Special interests could not tolerate the competition of efficient steam engines. Possibly, buy-offs and covert strong arm tactics swayed the bureaucracies. Probably, the combined power of the auto-engine-oil coalition made it too risky for Congress to push for advanced Rankine engine research and development funding and support. Congress probably did not see advanced Rankine development as particularly important anyway. Steam engine development was thought not to be worth the hassle, and doing nothing would not cost any votes. The well was poisoned. Now the auto industry is begging for multi-billion dollar government bailouts for the mess they caused.
The Presidents Reagan and the Bushes sided with big oil and Detroit. President Clinton and Al Gore tried to get a “green” car, but look at what they were up against! The green car was alright in theory, but let advanced Rankine “rest in peace”. An advanced Rankine engined car is the truly “green” car.
The Cozby brothers were for the most part unaware of the details of the foregone history. In 1981 the Cozbys approached the automotive industry, the engine industry, the oil industry, the Departments of Energy and Commerce with a disclosure of a U. S. patented engine. This disclosure showed how to make the advanced Rankine cycle engine even cleaner, more efficient, more fuel diverse, give it higher performance, and make it more adaptable to the automobile. The disclosure also showed how to fix the problem areas the DOE report had identified, and how to do much more with steam engines than had been envisioned previously. It made no difference, the dye was cast — steam was officially “dead”. The Cozbys were distinctly invited to “go away”.
Neglecting Rankine development has resulted in:
Foreign oil dependence
Worse air pollution
Increased greenhouse gases (global warming)
Demise of the U. S. Auto industry
Loss of millions of jobs
Huge foreign trade deficit
High energy costs
Economic distress
Weakened national security.
The cost to the U. S. Economy alone runs in the range of $50 to $55 trillion. Advanced Rankine cycle engine development is that important! Over about 35 to 36 years.
This subject is not about me. It is not about the Cozby brothers. It is far greater than us. It is about the excellency of advanced Rankine cycle engine technology which has been much maligned and the consequences have been severe.
John A. Cozby, January 2009 rev. 7.19.12
