Rek
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 11:37 AM |
|
|
New type of renewable fuel
I read in James May's column in the telegraph that he'd been out in the US making a documentary about some scientists creating fossil
fuels on the fly from carbon dioxide and oxygen. and it being useable in a regular petrol engine. He wouldnt add any more detail as he said it was all
going to be in a programme later this year.
Anyone know any more info on what the process he was talking about?
|
|
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 11:40 AM |
|
|
making fossil fuels on the fly from CO2 and Oxygen - sounds like a complete load of Bow Locks to me!!
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 11:40 AM |
|
|
I've heard recently about using carbon as a fuel source, damned if I can remember, thought it was a hoax
|
|
|
hoots_min
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 11:46 AM |
|
|
I'd heard about this too, and found this linky on tinternet: Clicky
here
Today is a good day: I achieved new heights of ineptitude.
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 11:53 AM |
|
|
seems reasonable to me.
petrol is just a chain of hydrogen and carbon atoms, so if all kinds of plastics can be made from oil, then there's no reason petrol can't
be made from hydrogen and carbon.
of course, could this process keep up with the demand, thats a different question
if it can take co2 from the atmosphere, then it should please the environmentalists. well, sort of...
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 11:57 AM |
|
|
??? Well I don't really see the point of that, if your having to heat the thing up to 1500 degs using solar power to run the reaction why not
just produce electricity instead, rather than some petrol which will later release more CO2...
A bit mad me thinks
|
|
|
Davey D
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 11:58 AM |
|
|
Could you stick one of those on the end of your exhaust to catch the CO, then recycle it back into fuel.... thus making the worlds first perpetual
motion car 
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:01 PM |
|
|
It sounds interesting, and plausible too. I do have a concern though, efficiency.
It will take more engergy to convert water and CO2 into petrol than petrol gives off when being burned to CO2 and water. Even then, petrol engines
convert barely 20% of that into rotating the clutch plate. Even less for older engines. Given that you'll use 6 times as much energy or more
to make the fuel than you'll usefully get from it, why not use the solar energy directly?
That said, converting geology into petrol isn't an efficient process either and it involves giving lots of money to questionable political
regimes in exchange for their oil. Why was it we went to war in Iraq?
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:01 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by blakep82
seems reasonable to me.
petrol is just a chain of hydrogen and carbon atoms, so if all kinds of plastics can be made from oil, then there's no reason petrol can't
be made from hydrogen and carbon.
of course, could this process keep up with the demand, thats a different question
if it can take co2 from the atmosphere, then it should please the environmentalists. well, sort of...
Hehe - you can tell you arent a chemist!!
The link above says they are planning on using a concentrated solar source to provide the huge energy demands required to produce synthetic petrol.
Cant see them managing to do it myself and certainly not with a small enough reactor to fit into a car so as to meet the "on the fly"
requirement.
Just cant see it being more worthwhile for car use than existing or future solar power technology to produce electricity so we can all use electric
cars.
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:03 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Davey D
Could you stick one of those on the end of your exhaust to catch the CO, then recycle it back into fuel.... thus making the worlds first perpetual
motion car
it's not perpetual motion, it's requiring a heap of heat to split the gas.
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:07 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Paul TigerB6The link above says they are planning on using a concentrated solar source to provide the huge energy
demands required to produce synthetic petrol. Cant see them managing to do it myself and certainly not with a small enough reactor to fit into a car
so as to meet the "on the fly" requirement.
Just cant see it being more worthwhile for car use than existing or future solar power technology to produce electricity so we can all use electric
cars.
The link said nothing about it being fitted to a car. They said the reactor will be 4 times the size of a beer keg, which obviously wouldn't
fit in a car. The benefit of making liquid fuel it that it is more easily transportible than electricity. You have a static plant in a sunny part of
the world making liquid petrol which you then transport around in your car.
We'd all be driving electric cars already if it wasn't for the fact that batteries are truly terrible. Electric cars are better than
petrol ones in all respects except for the 200kg stack of batteries that you have to drag round with you that only hold 50 miles worth of power. Once
they crack the battery problem, IC engines will die. You can then use your concentrated solar engery to drive a power station rather than make
petrol.
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:21 PM |
|
|
Well I've been spending my time on the DIY electric car forum and the batteries (unless you what to spend a fortune) are rather rubbish. Like
said above the range is about 50miles, don't know if it is going to be worthwhile converting my Bluebird 
I still think magnetic induction from a HT cable buried in the road could be used to charge and power cars. Either at specific sections of road (the
car recharges as it drives over, and then runs on battery power till the next section) or put the domestic power grid under roads and meter off what
each car has used.
There was a guy who was caught running his house from the magnet field of a pylon using a simple coil in a shed directly under it
[Edited on 14/4/08 by Mr Whippy]
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:25 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Paul TigerB6
Hehe - you can tell you arent a chemist!!
lol, i left my chemistry exam early to go on holiday my flight left the same time as the exam finished lol
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:26 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
Well I've been spending my time on the DIY electric car forum
Which one? The one I looked at was useless. I abandoned my electric car project to start the sooter engined cabin scooter.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr WhippyThere was a guy who was caught running his house from the magnet field of a pylon using a simple coil in a
shed directly under it
Genius.
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:31 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
The link said nothing about it being fitted to a car. They said the reactor will be 4 times the size of a beer keg, which obviously wouldn't
fit in a car.
The link doesnt - the original post mentions seeing in J May's column about producing fossil fuels on the fly which to me means having the
ability to produce the fuel whilst mobile.
Can only see this working on a commercial basis myself
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 12:36 PM |
|
|
Ah, I was thinking of Hoosts min's link, not the James May link.
|
|
|
caber
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 01:10 PM |
|
|
Didn't we used to just dig up some black rocks and burn them? I think if you heated them up first you could extract gas and pipe it all around
the town, the stuff leftover still burned if you put it in a stove and then there was not even any smoke!
Caber
|
|
|
jlparsons
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 01:17 PM |
|
|
This is just the same as biofuel but using an artificial mechanism instead. I'm not sure how that can be as efficient, except that it'd
free up land resources for food production instead of biofuel crops.
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 02:06 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
I've heard recently about using carbon as a fuel source, damned if I can remember, thought it was a hoax
Fred Dibnah pioneered the early development work didn't he 
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 03:47 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rek
I creating fossil fuels on the fly from carbon dioxide and oxygen.
think about it.
fossil fuels are chains of Hydrocarbons.
Carbon dioxide = C02
Oxygen = O2.
We are missing Hydrogen, hello Hydrogen, can anybody hear me?!?!! Come in please, Brain May want to make you into fuel!!
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 03:54 PM |
|
|
^ lol, oh yeah. typing error maybe
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 04:01 PM |
|
|
quote:
Researchers at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico, are to test a prototype device this spring, which will use concentrated solar energy
to drive chemical reactions that --- split carbon dioxide molecules to get carbon monoxide.---- The same system was originally designed to --- split
water to form hydrogen; and these two products can then be combined --- to synthesise liquid hydrocarbon fuels - such as methanol or petrol.
quote:
if you read the description above, you'll see that the process is in fact a two part one, first splitting the Carbon and then splitting water to
produce Hydrogen, that is then combined to make your Hydrocarbon.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 04:02 PM |
|
|
as has been said its just another way of storing solar power. I think fuel cells are a better concept as electric cars are a more efficient idea than
IC engines.
Its also ridiculous to try to power this from solar, if its to be a viable replacement for mined HCs.
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 04:18 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
Ah, I was thinking of Hoosts min's link, not the James May link.
Gotcha. I should have clarified which link as there were 2. Will be interested to see what they come up with on TV anyway!!
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 14/4/08 at 04:21 PM |
|
|
anyone know when this program is on?
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
