Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brad from Tennessee
...carbon, copper and nitrogen and applied voltage...

In other words, the process requires energy.
Not surprising, it's the law of physics.
Where will that energy come from? Will it be cost effective?

6 posted on 10/19/2016 7:45:33 AM PDT by BitWielder1 (I'd rather have Unequal Wealth than Equal Poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: BitWielder1

Some of the informed commentators at WUWT.com have read the article and done the calculations to show that this is far from a viable anything. The nanocatalyst stuff is intriguing but in a far more basic way.


9 posted on 10/19/2016 7:50:54 AM PDT by bjc (Show me the data!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: BitWielder1

My guess is that the process is fairly slow, and doesn’t produce great volumes of ethanol. If the voltage requirement isn’t too high, it might be viable to do this using a two-layer solar panel: the top layer is the photo cells producing the voltage, feeding a layer just underneath of the carbon-copper catalyst (maximize surface area) that runs more or less continually producing a small but steady stream of ethanol. Get a field of these going and you might have something.


12 posted on 10/19/2016 7:54:15 AM PDT by Little Pig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: BitWielder1
The article mentioned solar so that it can be used when the solar panels produce more than can be used. It's a very interesting idea, especially being able to create ethanol electrically rather than biologically with yeast. I wish it gave some idea of the ratio of energy in vs. energy from burning the alcohol out.

Now can I get a hat with a solar panel and this catalyst so that I can turn my own breath into alcohol and dump my old beer can hat?

19 posted on 10/19/2016 8:00:22 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (If Muammar Gaddafi had donated to the Clinton Foundation he would still be alive and in power today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: BitWielder1
"...carbon, copper and nitrogen and applied voltage..."

In other words, the process requires energy.
Not surprising, it's the law of physics.
Where will that energy come from? Will it be cost effective?


I think you miss an essential point. You can think of the ethanol as "storing" the energy from the "applied voltage".

What are the biggest issues with the so called "renewable" forms of energy, like Wind and Solar? They don't work all the time. They are not located where the energy is needed. How do you "store" extra wind? How do you "store" sunlight for nighttime? How do you "transport" wind energy from the plains to the cities where it's needed?

So, imagine this catalyst process where the "applied current" comes from a bank of solar cells. The burnable ethanol is literally a way to "store" the energy for later.

As long as you are not doing something as stupid as burning Natural Gas or Coal, to turn a turbine to make electricity to power the catalytic process, you can consider it a "net gain" in stored energy, which can be bottled and transported where needed.
22 posted on 10/19/2016 8:03:43 AM PDT by Rebel_Ace (HITLER! There, Zero to Godwin in 5.2 seconds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson