Will this new technology work with a catalytic converter in US?

If not, then its a europe only technology.

- Is there a difference in catalyst technology between Germany and the US that you know of? Enlighten us.

2)

5% savings, but how much will it add to the unit cost of a vehicle? if it costs more than the lifespan fuel savings, then there needs to be a different incentive to get consumers to buy

Math:

5% of 25 mpg is 1.25 mpg

25mpg at 12,000 miles per year =480 gallons

26.25mpg at 12,000 miles per year = 457 gallons

Net delta (round up) 22.9 gallons/year

5 year life span 114.2 gallons

Europe pays ? $6 US/gal = $685 save in 5 year total

US pays @ $2.2/gal = $251 save in 5 year total

(note a 40 mpg base would only save 14.2 gal/year, so a higher mpg vehicle would have reduced savings)

These prices assume minimal change in prices, which is highly improbable in reality.

- Yes, but that’s only 5% as tested. You might get even better consumption in colder areas due to the greater temperature delta of the exhaust gases.

3)

Any cost estimates on what the upgrade will cost?

- Should not be that expensive and will drop in price as soon as other manufacturers catch on

Will this new technology work with a catalytic converter in US?

If not, then its a europe only technology.

- Is there a difference in catalyst technology between Germany and the US that you know of? Enlighten us.

2)

5% savings, but how much will it add to the unit cost of a vehicle? if it costs more than the lifespan fuel savings, then there needs to be a different incentive to get consumers to buy

Math:

5% of 25 mpg is 1.25 mpg

25mpg at 12,000 miles per year =480 gallons

26.25mpg at 12,000 miles per year = 457 gallons

Net delta (round up) 22.9 gallons/year

5 year life span 114.2 gallons

Europe pays ? $6 US/gal = $685 save in 5 year total

US pays @ $2.2/gal = $251 save in 5 year total

(note a 40 mpg base would only save 14.2 gal/year, so a higher mpg vehicle would have reduced savings)

These prices assume minimal change in prices, which is highly improbable in reality.

- Yes, but that’s only 5% as tested. You might get even better consumption in colder areas due to the greater temperature delta of the exhaust gases.

3)

Any cost estimates on what the upgrade will cost?

- Should not be that expensive and will drop in price as soon as other manufacturers catch on

Will this new technology work with a catalytic converter in US?

If not, then its a europe only technology.

2)

5% savings, but how much will it add to the unit cost of a vehicle? if it costs more than the lifespan fuel savings, then there needs to be a different incentive to get consumers to buy

Math:

5% of 25 mpg is 1.25 mpg

25mpg at 12,000 miles per year =480 gallons

26.25mpg at 12,000 miles per year = 457 gallons

Net delta (round up) 22.9 gallons/year

5 year life span 114.2 gallons

Europe pays ? $6 US/gal = $685 save in 5 year total

US pays @ $2.2/gal = $251 save in 5 year total

(note a 40 mpg base would only save 14.2 gal/year, so a higher mpg vehicle would have reduced savings)

These prices assume minimal change in prices, which is highly improbable in reality.

3)

Any cost estimates on what the upgrade will cost?

Will this new technology work with a catalytic converter in US?

If not, then its a europe only technology.

2)

5% savings, but how much will it add to the unit cost of a vehicle? if it costs more than the lifespan fuel savings, then there needs to be a different incentive to get consumers to buy

Math:

5% of 25 mpg is 1.25 mpg

25mpg at 12,000 miles per year =480 gallons

26.25mpg at 12,000 miles per year = 457 gallons

Net delta (round up) 22.9 gallons/year

5 year life span 114.2 gallons

Europe pays ? $6 US/gal = $685 save in 5 year total

US pays @ $2.2/gal = $251 save in 5 year total

(note a 40 mpg base would only save 14.2 gal/year, so a higher mpg vehicle would have reduced savings)

These prices assume minimal change in prices, which is highly improbable in reality.

3)

Any cost estimates on what the upgrade will cost?

It is using the thermoelectric (Peltier) effect, and this does not require radioactive materials.

Your headline is misleading, unless you can point to your source of information that the materials are radio-active. One would have hoped a review of technology considered the basic science before using emotive headlines.

It is using the thermoelectric (Peltier) effect, and this does not require radioactive materials.

Your headline is misleading, unless you can point to your source of information that the materials are radio-active. One would have hoped a review of technology considered the basic science before using emotive headlines.

Why isn’t this first hooked to the radiaor as noted bove?

It uses heavy metals? How much does it cost to recycle it?

Why isn’t this first hooked to the radiaor as noted bove?

It uses heavy metals? How much does it cost to recycle it?