jlf1961
Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
|
Actually, there is/was a power generation system that has proved both efficient and clean burning, and could be applied to everything from cars/trucks to electric power generation.
The primary exhaust emissions are water, O2 with a minimal amount of the toxic emissions generated by burning straight fossil fuels, which in turn could be replaced with bio fuels.
First, a couple of important points.
The diesel engine is twice as efficient as the gasoline engine.
The diesel engine was originally designed to burn vegetable oil.
Helmuth Walther, a German engineer was tasked with designing an improved propulsion system for the Uboat fleet before the start of WW2, and by 1940 had succeeded in his endeavors.
The resulting engine was the Walther turbine, which could be operated while the Uboat was fully submerged, depending on hydrogen peroxide for the oxygen source.
Considering that H202 is combustible at industrial concentrations, although highly corrosive, the solution was to mix a lower concentration with a low percentage of diesel fuel to allow for safe and stable operation of the vessel.
Another advantage of mixing a low percentage of diesel with the hydrogen peroxide is that the mixture prevents the natural breakdown of hydrogen peroxide.
Finally, this is a semi closed cycle engine design, meaning that no external air source is needed and the resulting exhaust gases can be filtered within the system to separate the harmful emissions and further break them down to non toxic compounds without added cost.
The German navy had a number of Type XXI UBoats in various stages of completion at the end of WW2, with a few ready for patrol, and a couple actually on patrol at the end of the war.
Both the US Navy and Royal experimented with these submarines but scrapped any plans for development when nuclear power plants were perfected.
Interestingly, the latest coastal defense submarines used by the German navy have returned to this system.
As I stated, the turbine technology can be scaled up or down depending on application, with the possibility of cost efficient ways to eliminate toxic compounds at the source.
While the initial conversion cost would be high, it must also be noted that the turbine engine is relatively simple and maintenance costs are considerably lower overall than standard engine designs.
Another point to be made is that plant oils used for biofuels would still have to be refined, and would use the same basic refining technology as petroleum, so it would, again fall to the oil companies to refine and make the final fuel product.
As for the argument that it would take essential food products out of circulation, I must point out that there are a number of plants with a high oil yield that will grow quite well on land unsuitable for food plants, and of these, a few have the added property of cleaning pollutants out of contaminated soils quite efficiently, which would mean that land presently unsuitable for food production could eventually made suitable for such production, with the added benefit of the contaminated plants make disposing of the toxic compounds much easier and cost beneficial.
_____________________________
Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?
You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.
Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI
|
RE: This is not about climate change but.... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread