wylie
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 129
|
Post by wylie on Oct 29, 2008 23:57:28 GMT
Ron,
The hydrogen economy is probably a dead-end. The storage efficiency in terms of energy per unit volume of hydrogen is simply terrible. Even liquified hydrogen (90K) is very low in volumetric energy density.
If we have a good source of hydrogen, the sensible thing to do would be to upgrade those billions of barrels of carbon sitting in the tar sands (or their waste disposal areas). There is something called "petroleum coke", which is a graphitic byproduct of oil processing. There are massive amounts of it available (and there will be more in the future). It can be converted into natural gas with the appropriate catalysts AND HYDROGEN. Natural Gas can be polymerized into liquid fuels or used directly as a vehicle fuel. Natural Gas has been used effectively as a vehicle fuel for many years and its volumetric energy density is many times higher than hydrogen.
There are several promising technologies for the production of hydrogen other than steam-methane reforming. One of them is called "Radiant Energy Technology", which is a plasma-based dissociation process for water vapor. The energy content of steam is MUCH higher than liquid water becasue of the high heat of vaporization of water. Using a plasma to break apart the water molecules and then separate the hydrogen from the oxygen is quite possible and has been generated.
There is another hydrogen production technology which uses rapidly spinning electrodes to electrolyze water which promises to reduce the energy consumption for electrolysis below the standard values seen today in "immobile electrode electrolysis". Finally, there is the formation of hydrogen from the waste heat and electricity from nuclear plants (which could be located near the sources of carbon!!).
So there are some hopeful technologies around, but they will not negate the need for the Rich World to moderate its use and WASTE of energy.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by pidgey on Oct 30, 2008 21:31:17 GMT
|
|
lads
New Member
Posts: 13
|
Post by lads on Oct 31, 2008 10:43:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Oct 31, 2008 14:22:18 GMT
There is plenty of energy, only a lack of desire to get it. The AGW and 'environmental' movement has effectively stopped energy development in its tracks. If they continue to be so successful at stopping energy development many lives will be lost. No one speaks for the 100 million lost to Malaria when effective use of DDT would have stopped those deaths. I hope that we can speak and overcome the AGW and 'environmental' Ludites. The AGW, 'environmental' movement is anti human, using non science to justify its actions.
|
|
|
Post by pidgey on Nov 11, 2008 15:24:40 GMT
Anybody wanna' talk more about imminent financial and economic collapse and how it would relate to carbon emissions? I mean, I know the likelihood of financial collapse is virtually impossible and all...
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Nov 11, 2008 15:44:34 GMT
Anybody wanna' talk more about imminent financial and economic collapse and how it would relate to carbon emissions? I mean, I know the likelihood of financial collapse is virtually impossible and all... Pidge: Decaffeinated coffee doesn't work! Also, with the onset of cool October weather, you may not be getting enough vitamin D. Maybe try a walk in the Oklahoma sunshine on this glorious Veterans Day? If you still want to talk about the end of the world after real coffee and ten minutes of sun, then I'm totally up for it!
|
|
|
Post by pidgey on Nov 11, 2008 16:24:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Nov 11, 2008 16:55:58 GMT
Well, I glanced through a few pages of the article. This caught my eye: "Now that the era of cheap gas is over, demand for development on the fringe is down, and consumer interest and market potential lie in developing and redeveloping neighborhoods closer to the urban core."
What I mainly notice about the oil market is that it is volatile. If you had told me in July, when regular gas was selling in Austin for as much as $4.35/gallon, that I would be able to get a gallon of the same stuff for $1.94 in November I would have said that you were unwell.
But, of course, it's the market that is unwell. I hope that prices stay low long enough to ruin Putin and Ahmadinejad and give us all a breather. I don't think we're on the verge of running out of oil, however. Call it a feeling.
|
|
|
Post by pidgey on Nov 11, 2008 17:29:57 GMT
The current drop in price is due to "demand destruction". That is, the finances of enough businesses and people have cratered to reduce the world's GDP and, therefore, energy consumption (can't use what you can't pay for) to the point where it's causing a downward deflationary spiral. That won't last forever, but the rebound could be a nightmare.
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Nov 11, 2008 17:32:02 GMT
The current drop in price is due to "demand destruction". That is, the finances of enough businesses and people have cratered to reduce the world's GDP and, therefore, energy consumption (can't use what you can't pay for) to the point where it's causing a downward deflationary spiral. That won't last forever, but the rebound could be a nightmare. In the meantime, I plan as many trips to the beach as possible. ;D
|
|
|
Post by pidgey on Nov 11, 2008 18:15:16 GMT
The current drop in price is due to "demand destruction". That is, the finances of enough businesses and people have cratered to reduce the world's GDP and, therefore, energy consumption (can't use what you can't pay for) to the point where it's causing a downward deflationary spiral. That won't last forever, but the rebound could be a nightmare. In the meantime, I plan as many trips to the beach as possible. ;D I realize that it's a depressing subject that most people can't approach given the potential ramifications to their lifestyle. I personally feel that we can, on this forum at least, maintain a professional manner to our discourse. That said, there's no reason for you to get all beachy about it!
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Nov 11, 2008 21:39:48 GMT
In the meantime, I plan as many trips to the beach as possible. ;D I realize that it's a depressing subject that most people can't approach given the potential ramifications to their lifestyle. I personally feel that we can, on this forum at least, maintain a professional manner to our discourse. That said, there's no reason for you to get all beachy about it! I was dead serious. I haven't driven from Austin to the coast in over a year, largely because of fuel prices. I intend to make it there by Easter at least twice, while gas and lodging prices are both down. God loves the beach, is what I hear. As a semi-ex-surfer, I am grateful for the many surf trips made possible by the internal combustion engine over the course of my lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by pidgey on Nov 20, 2008 3:52:38 GMT
Enjoy! I'm hoping that the economy won't completely collapse by next Easter but I seriously have my doubts at this point. The way it's going, nobody's going to be able to afford alternative energy...
On the brighter side, carbon taxes might be real low.
|
|
|
Post by crakar24 on Nov 20, 2008 5:27:44 GMT
Just up the road abit from where i live a company has begun building a geothermal (hot rocks) plant. There are a number of restrictions with this technology as the rocks have to be hot enough but not too deep, easily drilled etc etc.
They approached the government for funds to develope a small prototype plant but the gov said no thanks so they approached one of the mining co. near by and a deal was struck. The mining co would pay for the plant and in return get free electricity. The advantage here is of course once this prototype proves successful they can then sell the technology ona much larger scale.
They it works is, you find 4 or 5 locations for the hot rocks (preferable close together) and drill and cap them. you then pump water down into one location and capture the steam as it rises, this steam then drives a turbine and before you know it you have electrickery.
When the rocks cool you simply move on to the next drill site and continue eventually you return to the first drill site and by then the rocks have heated up again and the process continues.
The system can recover i think about 99% of all water used which is handy as it is situated in the desert.
On another topic i always that nuke plants produced a lot of water vapour which of course much to the IPCC's denial is a major green house gas. Is this correct?
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by pidgey on Dec 4, 2008 0:29:35 GMT
|
|