Let's Talk Flying Cars

Anything Less is Unacceptable

A flying car future is infinitely smarter than an electric car future. Aside from the road issue, EVs can only access 0.00001% of the Earth, not to mention that it is the lesser desirable fractions of the Earth. But perhaps most importantly, 2D travel is so much less, qualitatively, than 3D travel.

The problem we currently face is that the thought leaders of the day seem to be handicapped in that they think that any future conveyances must be battery-powered as it is the only carbon-free avenue forward. But this is not true. It turns out that you can heat natural gas to produce Hydrogen for carbon-free power, either through internal combustion or fuel cells. Ammonia can also be used for carbon-free stored energy. And of course you can synthetically produce hydrocarbons. Then, you can power flying cars with liquid fuel acting as a consumable battery, as charge storage batteries simply weigh too much and do not have the energy density necessary to make flying cars practical.

The arguments for a flying car future are so great as to make the debate non-sensical. First and foremost, “What is the most important criteria?” when deciding the future of human conveyance. It is that whatever form of conveyance society chooses, it should bring the greatest convenience, performance, and pleasure to the greatest swath of humanity. This is then defined as “What offers the greatest performance?” tempered with “What can be most affordably provided?” Fortunately and ironically, flying cars offer the greatest performance at the lowest price.

The first criteria really need not even be debated. Flying cars would afford everyone the shortest travel times and best traveling experiences. And while there is some issue with bad weather, it is equivalent to the similar limitations of any other form of conveyance. Severe weather may ground flying cars for normal use just as snow and ice similarly limit 2D conveyances.

The second criteria of affordability is similarly overwhelmingly positive. A flying car eliminates 80% the complexity and cost of a surface-limited vehicle as it eliminates the suspension, transmission, wheels, brakes, steering, and even air conditioning. It is actually stupefying how much simpler a flying car can be. And as regards the actual flying of a flying car, the use of drones for fireworks displays shows that flying cars can fly people at least as safely as people can drive themselves.

The only thing holding up the proliferation of practical flying cars is a false conclusion that a liquid fuel, which has a far higher energy density than even the best theoretical battery, cannot power the future. This has led society to work on battery-powered flying cars which can only fly for 15 minutes. And since this is ridiculously impractical, no one is giving flying cars the consideration they deserve.

For flying cars to be practical, they must fly for hours at hundreds of miles an hour and they must not cost significantly more than a conventional car. This is only possible using a consumable liquid battery otherwise known as a liquid fuel. And since this is as simple as using ammonia or a synthetically manufactured hydrocarbon, the sooner we start pursuing this route the better.

So what are the arguments for flying cars? First and foremost, 3D travel is a thousand times cooler while offering a thousand times greater destinations. They offer a massive savings in otherwise wasted human travel time. Then there is the phenomenal savings in both road creation and road maintenance. Beyond these points, they can be built for a fraction the costs, they eliminate the tire industry, and they are effectively impact free travel. Then from a mechanical perspective, 2/3rds of the mechanical failure potentials are eliminated.

In the end, it is a pretty simple choice. Do we use a liquid, consumable, chemical battery to give us personal conveyances that give us access to every single glorious part of this planet with the shortest possible travel times in the most comfortable manner or do we use far inferior conventional batteries that will never make it possible for everyone to have access to this planet? Do we use green energy stored in a super high density medium or do we use a far less capable manner of storing energy for human conveyances? Do we keep building and maintaining roads or do we quit wasting our time on things that aren’t even needed?

The only draw back to a green energy flying car future is that flying cars will consume more energy and at some point, we won’t have the free bounty of 500 million years of collected solar energy in the form of fossil fuel. We will have to produce that energy otherwise and 100 million barrels per day of oil-energy-equivalent is a tall order. But the answer isn’t using pathetic electric batteries pushing around 2d conveyances that can only go where roads go. The answer is using a consumable, liquid, green energy to take us anywhere we want to go in the fastest, most convenient, and most enjoyable manner, even if it does mean we will use more energy in the process. Because in the end, it isn’t about using less energy but rather, it is about maximizing the human experience in providing the human need for travel.