Cracking Hydrocarbons
- Thread starter nelg
- Start date
The big question is, does power in > power out? Microwave magnetrons need a LOT of power to boil water. If this technology is based on the same concept (as they say it is) then I'm not certain that the process has a net-gain...
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't anything else break the laws of thermodynamics?
LoL, sorry, worded that badly
Let's say the machine goes through 1800W to crack up some REALLY long hydrocarbon chains into 6oz of some usable fuel. Then let's say that fuel is then burned to create power -- 1000W worth of power.
I can't recall what the term is for this process, but it's the same basic reason why current designs for hydrogen powered cars are also worthless. The energy that we must expend to make the fuel viable cannot be offset by the energy created by the fuel we just "made".
That's a pretty exciting way to recycle 'stuff'.
WhiningKhan
Regular
Yeah. Nice way to turn every single drop of oil to CO2, instead of wasting its carbon content to solid matter.
If we need the energy, we're going to use it--either by drilling for more oil or we could possibly recycle trash--the CO2 problem is a completely different problem that needs to be addressed.
Aha, that quote above (Thanks Nelg! ) is exactly what I was looking for.
And it looks good!
) is exactly what I was looking for.And it looks good!
Mintmaster
Veteran
Demand of fossil fuels is extremely inelastic. Adding more supply of natural gas would only increase our consumption by a fraction of the amount, so in the end we'd simply extract less gas from the earth (or maybe less coal/oil because gas power becomes cheaper). If you're thinking about long term when renewable energy starts replacing fossil fuels due to cost, we've got a long way for that to reach the cost of electricity, let alone the cost of heating which is ~1/3 of that.
This is much more relevent from the point of view of recycling. If taken to it's full potential, an idea like this could reduce our solid waste by a huge factor, possibly even by an order of magnitude.
Thinking about it further, though, this may be a good way to generate energy if we can find a plant or algae that captures a decent percentage (and by that I mean 1% would be fantastic) of incoming sunlight without degrading the land/water on which it grows. That latter part is the trick, though, and I guess that's why biodiesel and ethanol are pretty idiotic fuel sources if expanded beyond what comes naturally from waste.
Last edited by a moderator:
WhiningKhan
Regular
The doomsday scenario in my mind was exactly that in the following decades, using this gizmo on waste from refined oil products would be more economical than using it to extract hydrocarbons from renewable sources. Given that waste is free, that does not seem like a long stretch to me.
So, we end up pumping oil until it is too expensive, then move to using the oil-based waste until it is too expensive, and only then we reach the end of net increase of CO2 in atmosphere.
Sure this is simplified and I pulled it out of my ass, but panicmongering is such a great fun.
We should really stop using hydrocarbons alltogether. I hope in near future we will have some better way for powering our cars, heating etc.
But at least if this would take off, it would end the wars for dominance in the middle east and all that crap, so at least some good would come out of it.
But at least if this would take off, it would end the wars for dominance in the middle east and all that crap, so at least some good would come out of it.
I think the value of creating fuels from garbage is greatly exaggerated. The total amount of stuff that could be converted to usable fuel is nearly non-existent compared to how much is needed. Anyone wants to guess how many old tires it takes to fuel a one-way cross-Atlantic airplane?
Sure, it is good for recycling garbage but it is in no way usable as a viable source of fuel.
One promising direction could be biodiesel from algae, though there have been different studies with some saying it is extremely expensive.
Another alternative might be using geothermal energy to break seawater to H2. Of course transporting it in huge quantities is a "bit" complicated. Also pretty much the only place where geothermal energy is cheaply available is Iceland.
Sure, it is good for recycling garbage but it is in no way usable as a viable source of fuel.
I wouldn't say that. You can produce hydrocarbons from other sources than fossil fuels.
I hope so too but I can't see anything good in the near 10-20 years. Sure, you could say that electricity is a good alternative but it won't be good for planes and most of it is produced in coal power plants that produce huge amount of pollution. H2 is not a fuel, it is only an expensive and inefficient energy storage. Also most H2 is produced from natural gas at the moment.
One promising direction could be biodiesel from algae, though there have been different studies with some saying it is extremely expensive.
Another alternative might be using geothermal energy to break seawater to H2. Of course transporting it in huge quantities is a "bit" complicated. Also pretty much the only place where geothermal energy is cheaply available is Iceland.
WhiningKhan
Regular
Speaking of which, I've wondered why Greenpeace and others seem to think practicing forestry is pure evil? Trees and stuff grow pretty damn quickly in the rainforest. If the rainforests are supposed to be such a great factor in CO2 balancing, shouldn't we start chopping the trees for real so that the new trees that grown in their place suck up more CO2? Just keeping the old trees rotting in place does not seem to do much positive in regard to CO2-sinking.
IKEAs with full range of rainforest-grown wood furniture in every village FTW...
They do grow fast assuming that there is a place for them to grow. If you take down a big area of rainforest then rainfalls will wash away most of the soil and you will basically have desert where the trees won't grow nearly as fast as in the real rainforest. Actually you should be lucky if the rainforest returns at all to those areas.