Cleaner Energy Technologies

[BigPheces]

While I still can find no excuse for the gov't backing out of Kyoto (other than lining pockets that is), at least there are some new things on the horizon.

Turkey Power! (http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/12/16/energy.environment.turkeys.reut/index.html) Unknowns: How expensive is this per kilowatt hour compared to conventional fossil fuel energy? What other by products are going into the air/aquifer?

Oil From Anything! (http://www.kantor.com/useful/thermo.shtml) I know of a few countries that are building these to test them out. While it doesn't remove our dependence on fossil fuels, it creates them from regular industrial and household waste. Would this negate the need to drill in Alaska or anywhere else int eh world for that matter for oil?

Damn I love science...

[Red Shift]

Oil From Anything! I know of a few countries that are building these to test them out. While it doesn't remove our dependence on fossil fuels, it creates them from regular industrial and household waste. Would this negate the need to drill in Alaska or anywhere else int eh world for that matter for oil?


While this will stop the oil reserves being used and having them run out i was thankful fossil fuels would one day run out as the Renewable fuels are much cleaner and do not pose the same "global warming" types of problems fossil fuels do, oil from anything or course will start this problem again as the global warming and other problems will continue, Darn it! I want Cleaner renewable fuels

Solar, wind and hydro electric power, please!!!!

[Bigsky770]

. . .Even like the sound of that! :D Good post, BigPheces! We really NEED to be looking in other directions. Seem to remember reading something years ago, about a guy that ran a "Volkswagon" on used cooking oils from Micky-D's. Wonder what ever happened with that?

. . .Yah know what really irks me about all this? We ONLY *really* start focusing in earnest in other directions when things have already gone BEYOND desperate. It'll be the same with this :po:

Joe (Bigsky770) :vbroll:

[marglarg]

I watched a documentary on wind power the other day and found it quite incredible. Incredible in the fact that people who are living in the areas where these towers are being constructed are saying that it's not worth it because they look really bad for the country side, there is a constant humming associated with their operation etc.

Did anyone else catch this report ?

I was a bit shocked, and undecided when I saw the story. I'm not sure I would be for this if whole fields of them where constructed in my back yard, yet I think we should be using as much of these clean/renewable fuels as possible. Tuff choice.

Do you agree that these people have a case on this one or should we be gun ho for anything that is of the clean/renewable fuel variety, regardless of aesthetics ?

[lotrfan55345]

Thermal Depolymerization (TD), which can turn many forms of waste into fuel, is another false messiah, albeit a fascinating one:



1. Currently, only one TD plant is operational. The plant is currently producing a whopping 100-200 barrels of industrial heating oil per day. That’s enough to power the US economy for about half of one second and the world economy for about one-tenth of one second.



2. TD is really nothing more than high-tech recycling. Most of the waste input (such as plastics and tires) requires high-grade oil to make it in the first place. As we slide down the downslope of oil production, we will have less waste to put into the process.



3. According to the company itself, the TD process has an efficiency of 85 percent. You stick 100 units of energy into the process to get out 85. This means TD has a negative net-energy profile. Thus, it’s not an energy source, folks!



Simply physics dictates that TD will never have a positive or even break even net-energy profile. The process requires energy to turn garbage into oil. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states energy cannot be created or destroyed. Thus, the energy obtained from the TD process will be less than the energy used to create it.



4. TD was “announced” in an article that ran in the July 2003 issue of Discover magazine. Virtually nothing has been written in the press since then. That should tell you something. Given the fact oil is pushing $50 per barrel as of mid-August 2004, if TD was as great as so many techno-worshippers think or hope it is, don’t you think we would have heard a bit more about by now?



The biggest problem with TD is that it is being advertised as a means to maintain business as usual. Such advertising promotes further consumption, provides us with a dangerously false sense of security, and encourages us to continue thinking we don’t need to make this issue a priority.



You may find it interesting that if a 175-pound man falls into one end of the TD machine, he comes out the other end as 7 pounds of gas, 7 pounds of minerals, 123 pounds of sterilized water, and 38 pounds of oil.

http://www.museletter.com/archive/135.html

[BigPheces]

There was a follow up study done regarding the 85% efficency rating that has since been changed.
Clicky for article (http://www.kantor.com/usatoday/thermal_depolymerization.shtml)

Yes there is only one up and running plant as of now, but I know of three in America and one or more in Italy that are bring built, mainly near animal plants that produce tons of animal wastes daily.

And even if the technology doesn't pan out to be a perfect answer, it sure as hell beats many recycling methods we are currently using. I read someplace that the proces would (theoretically) even be able to break down nuclear waste if they could get the compression/heat ratios down and of course work in some shielding. The New York based comapny has been focusing their R&D on oil production due to America's dependence on foreign oil and less on the raw resource/environmental clean-up/recycling potential and has been using only products that are "oil rich" in their experiments, in otherwords, organics. Who knows what other raw elements we can milk out of this thing which can then be used to reduce moning and reduce costs to manufacturers?

Using the 2nd law of thermodynamics, it's true that energy in cannot be more than energy out, but don't we get material which can then be used to create more energy? The raw oil out? I'm not sure on this one, damn you hich school science!

Who knows why people haven't written about it lately? I won't go as far as a conspiracy to keep the fossil fuel mining industries going, I just believe that there haven't been many places giving this a chance. I read the Discover article back in 2003 when it came out and havne't been able to keep up with it since... I'll do some more searching and see what I come up with...

[Red Shift]

I was a bit shocked, and undecided when I saw the story. I'm not sure I would be for this if whole fields of them where constructed in my back yard, yet I think we should be using as much of these clean/renewable fuels as possible. Tuff choice.

Do you agree that these people have a case on this one or should we be gun ho for anything that is of the clean/renewable fuel variety, regardless of aesthetics ?

I was on holiday in the Canary Islands and came across a large amount of wind turbines, its pretty weird but i actually like em and find them fascinating to look at, if it were up to me, there would be Wind Turbine Feilds all over

It is true that they hum quite a bit, but you get used to it ;)

[lazserus]

I watched a documentary on wind power the other day and found it quite incredible.
Was that the same documentary that showed how the Egyptians built the pyramids with kites? I knew one of those MIT guys. Wind is an amazing source of work energy and should be considered.

[marglarg]

Egyptians built the pyramids with kites?

Incredible ... just incredible :yikes: :grin