Energy for (almost) free

Interesting. Seems to make sense. Best of luck to them!

Sounds similar to the process used at natural gas line compressor stations. Heat from the compressor exhausts is used to generate power.

Huh? What about the energy used to create the heat?

There is an endless stream of quick and easy solutions to our energy problems. These things NEVER pan out.

There is no such thing as a free lunch and our energy problems are essentially physics problems and WILL NOT be solved by a couple of kids tinkering in a garage as the ignorant Thomas Friedman has suggested. This clown doesn't know his *ss from a hole in the ground when it comes to energy and technology.

Now this is off the subject for this post, but I'm venting my frustrations with this type of article. It distracts us from the problems at hand and gives many the believe that there is a silver bullet to our energy problems.

Unless we take steps in the right direction in the area of energy (and soon), we will have a dismal future.

Hot exhaust...Obama, Fwank, Schumer, Pelosi, Reid, Rangel, Hoyer, Geithner, Obermann, Mathews and the list goes on!

Turn all that into electricity–why not?

It's low grade heat and the payback for the system might be prohibitive.

The French Engineering company Sofrite did something like this for a power generator running an irrigation pump in Senegal decades ago.

Solar collectors evaporated freon in a closed loop, which spun a turbine, which turned a generator that drove a floating pump mounted on a raft in the river.

There may just not be enough energy in gases with a delta T of ~200-300°F to make it pay.

Unless we take steps in the right direction in the area of energy (and soon), we will have a dismal future.

So, what do you think is the right direction?

I mean this slightly ironical, as the market does not know right or wrong, just more or less competitive alternatives. But it would be nice to hear anyway.

The chart looks like a standard closed cycle turbine steam generator with condenser and boiler.

Can the “vapor” spin a turbine-generator at 3600 rpm to give us 60 hz or is it such a low power unit that it must be conveted to DC then rectified to AC?

Sounds great, now we're getting somewhere, we never ever, did say ever?, had an energy crisis.

What we had or have is a stupidity crisis, know wha' I mean, Vern?

That heat is going to waste anyway so capturing it, if possible, is just using a throw away energy. Rather like you or I catching bathwater to flush a toilet.

Let’s hope this system generates enough electricity to run the pump that does all of the compressing.

Seems like a closed loop process to me.

So, what do you think is the right direction?

Well I've posted on this many times and I have limited time today but here goes:

1. Nuclear Power in a VERY big way. We should get most of our baseline Electrical Energy from Nuclear.

2. Drill for Oil wherever we can. This means opening up Alaska North Slope, ANWAR, etc. We should drill off all our coasts including California. Screw the wackos out in CA.
3. Make use of our abundant natural gas for transportation and other industrial uses. DO NOT USE NATURAL GAS FOR GENERATION OF ELECTRICITY.

4. Continue the use of coal by liquefying it into diesel, jet fuel, and gasoline. This technology is well known and is more expensive than generating these products from oil but this will pay off in the long run and will stabilize the oil price by not letting it sky rocket if there's a disruption in oil supply.

5. Stop the subsidies on wind and solar. If these technologies can survive on their own, then great but there is no indication these sources can be anything but a niche player. If I'm wrong great but I haven't been wrong in the area of energy for 30 years.

6. Conservation is a given. People conserve to save money as they should not because they feel like they are saving the world, but because it helps their pocketbook.

I've run out of time for today but this ought to enough to get us started.

Waste heat. Like off exhaust. Or run a system under the skin of a car. Or cover the casing of any motor... lots of possibilities

Well I've posted on this many times and I have limited time today but here goes:

No problem, a short synopsis is fine. You know, I'm a libertarian, so for me the best solution is always what the market decides - which of course you only know afterwards. In the that regard I find the nuclear / drill here, drill now crowd just as quirky as the green movement. I find it interesting to learn why they have such total faith in their convictions.

1. Nuclear Power in a VERY big way. We should get most of our baseline Electrical Energy from Nuclear.

I like nuclear and think it's very safe (much safer than coal mining *LOL). However, the only country to go 80% nuclear was France and EDF (Électricité de France) is a government entity. So should we have socialized energy and should the government pay for the development of those new reactor types needed to bring operating costs down?

2. Drill for Oil wherever we can. This means opening up Alaska North Slope, ANWAR, etc. We should drill off all our coasts including California. Screw the wackos out in CA.

Drilling at all cost is just not sensible, especially as oil is a fungible, internationally traded commodity. Producing more expensive oil via subsidies is putting the US at a competitive disadvantage. I'm all for opening up the coasts etc. for exploration. But it should be up to the market to decide whether to actually drill. So if the price get high enough, it will be done anyway.

4. Continue the use of coal by liquefying it into diesel, jet fuel, and gasoline. This technology is well known and is more expensive than generating these products from oil but this will pay off in the long run and will stabilize the oil price by not letting it sky rocket if there's a disruption in oil supply.

5. Stop the subsidies on wind and solar. If these technologies can survive on their own, then great but there is no indication these sources can be anything but a niche player. If I'm wrong great but I haven't been wrong in the area of energy for 30 years.

So instead of massive subsidies you're proposing massive subsidies? That just doesn't make sense to me. It's the same argument solar advocates use when they talk of peak uranium etc.: We must do it now or else we're dooooooomed....

6. Conservation is a given. People conserve to save money as they should not because they feel like they are saving the world, but because it helps their pocketbook.

Agreed.

I agree the energy problem is a complicated issue, especially because of the restrictions placed on energy supplies by the government, no drilling and development of our own oil reserves, very little use of nuclear power. Why we are not working “balls to the wall” on these sources now is extremely frustrating

However I feel if the free market is allowed to function the US will come up with solutions to our problems. We are the best in the world at developing solutions to complicated technical problems.

My first impression of this technology is it may be OK in some limited situations. For example if running an exothermic reaction on a fairly large scale where heat must be removed to control the reaction. This waste heat could be used to run their generator. All depends on cost.

I recently have been looking at new technologies such as second generation ethanol processes (no corn feedstock) using landfill waste (or any other organic feedstock)converted to syngas and then into ethanol by fermentation (Coskata and Ineos Bio for example). I also know of a stratup company, Kior, in Houston area working on catalytic conversion of cellulosic feedstocks to low grade gasoline.
There are many more examples of similar technologies.

There is still hope if the government can stay out of the way. Let the free market decide on the winners.

Probably true. However, these gases can do a dandy job of providing hot water for the facility at no energy cost. The equipment isn’t expensive either.

In high humidity areas they provide plenty of heat to dry out a desiccant wheel and remove humidity from the air at no energy cost, reducing the load on the AC dramatically.

Nuclear Power in a VERY big way. We should get most of our baseline Electrical Energy from Nuclear.

So should we have socialized energy and should the government pay for the development of those new reactor types needed to bring operating costs down?

Where in my statement do I say I want government to subsidize Nuclear Power? We don't have to have "socialized energy" as they do in France. We are already operating 104 Nuclear Power Plants in the US which generate about %20 of our electrical power. The reason we haven't built any Nuclear Power Plants in the US is not technological but political. The "Environmentalist" or "Greens" have found a way to kill Nuclear Power via the Lawsuit. By the way this adds to the pocketbook of a lot so scum of the earth lawyers. When a Nuclear Power Plant is proposed they immediately start legal proceeding by finding a scum of the earth judge who will issue a injunction and then the whole project is tied up in court for years artificially driving up the cost many times what it would be. This is why the people in the Nuclear Power Industry want loan guarantees and not subsidies. Load Guarantees are a VERY DIFFERENT thing from subsidies. The loan guarantees just protect the investors from the legal terrorism of the so called environmental groups. We could build the Nuclear Power Plants in less than four years IF we could get the lawyers off our backs.

What's wrong with drilling for oil? We need to drill for a number of reasons. First it's a national security reason. We are steadily becoming more dependent on foreign sources. I shouldn't have to tell you how dangerous this is. Although the prices of oil has dipped in the last year, it will rise again and this time when the economy recovers, the price of gas will sour to over $5.00/gal or higher. We need to start drilling now because it takes a long time to bring the offshore oil facilities into production. Mexico is a big supplier of oil. Their shallow oil wells are beginning to decline in production and most of their proven reserves are in deeper water. They (in typical Mexican fashion) haven't prepared for this. When this oil tapes out over a million barrels a day will be off the market. I should not have to tell you what this means. We need to start drilling NOW. There is no time to waste.

Coal gasification is something you don't often hear about but you should. VERY high quality diesel and aviation fuel can be distilled from the coal we have right here in the US. The technology is proven. The Germans used it extensively in WWII. It's more expensive than getting these fuels from oil BUT we have the coal right here. Coal gasification is economical at about $80-100/barrel. The Capital Costs are Large and so investors are frightened that the price of oil will plunge and they will lose their shirts. Therefore the government should put a tax on imported oil to a level that makes gasoline from Coal or Oil Shale competitive. This will bring lots of Capital into the market. This technology WORKS.

Natural Gas is our Ace in the hole. This is a tremendous resources but today so much of it is wasted generating electricity. California for example gets about 43% of its electricity form Natural Gas. This is criminal or should be. We should get ZERO of our BASELINE energy from Natural Gas. Maybe we can have a few peakers here and there but this fuel is too valuable to waste generating electricity.
Natural Gas can be used to for commercial, residential, and industrial purposes. It can be used for transportation and you have probably already seen Nat Gas Vehicles on the road. They are clean and efficient. The only issue is they require a larger storage tank and this cuts down on storage in the average vehicle. But we already have the existing infrastructure in place. You could actually fuel your vehicle from your house. Nat Gas can also be converted to a liquid fuel to make high quality gasoline or diesel just like coal. Natural Gas is heavily used in industry and one of the reasons we have lost so much of our heavy industry is because of the price of natural gas. This is because it's being wasted generating electricity. This is a crime.

Wind and Solar are a joke and can only be niche players. Unfortunately the average knuckle dragging American just doesn't know the situation. The MSM has so distorted and misinformed the public that they don't know what to think. But consider just this. Even in an area like Arizona with zero clouds and in the middle of the summer you only get about 6 good hours of sunlight a day. What the hell are we going to do the rest of the time? Are people so stupid that they haven't figure this out?

Wind is intermittent and unpredictably intermittent. The windmills are also heavily maintenance intensive. The Danes are finding this out to their dismay. The damn things EAT ball bearings and are in need of constant maintenance because they are exposed to the elements particularly the offshore wind mills. The salt air destroys them.

Look I've got to go but I've worked in the energy industry for over 20 years and I know a lot more that Al Gore or any of the politicians. There are many who know more than me. I can give you some good sources to learn the real story about energy if you are interested.

Load Guarantees are a VERY DIFFERENT thing from subsidies.

No, they are not. Loan guarantees make loans available at rates below the market rate, because risk is a factor that determines the price / interest rate. By paying in case of a default, the government lowers that price / interest rate for one company or a sector of the economy, however at the expense of the taxpayer, i.e. us all.

The right way to go is to write better laws and to streamline the approval process. You know why very few people sue McDonalds in France. Because there are legal guidelines that state that burning your lips with hot coffee isn't worth 5 million euros. No frivolous punitive damages = no incentive to go to court.

What's wrong with drilling for oil?

Nothing and I'm all for it. You mentioned the Germans: Their largest oil platform (Mittelplate A) is located in their largest national park (Wadden Sea), so there's why it should be a problem in the US. But I disagree with you on one aspect:

We need to start drilling NOW. There is no time to waste.

First of all, oil prices don't rise when there are shortages, they rise in anticipation of shortages 5 years down the road. So the market will indeed take care of the optimum timing for exploration. Until then, pumping oil at uncompetitive costs puts the US at a disadvantage.

Also, drill here, drill now is not a panacea for a country that imports 2/3 of its oil in that even doubling domestic production by drilling for rather expensive to reach oil doesn't make the US autarkic, price formation would still take place on the international market.

Therefore the government should put a tax on imported oil to a level that makes gasoline from Coal or Oil Shale competitive.

Which is the textbook defintion of an economic subsidy and no different from the call for a $5.00 gas tax in order to curtail demand.

This technology WORKS.

And it will be done sooner or later anyway. The problem with your suggestion is that subsidies distort the market. The market allocates resources best and makes sure that the most efficient and productive solution will succeed, because that's what's best for the economy as a whole. E.g. you can save say 25% fuel by using modern engine technology (e.g. turbodiesels for trucks etc.) and lightweight material for cars. If that's cheaper than building huge coal gassification plants, it will be done first. Once oil prices reach a point where there is a sustained demand for $100+ oil/fuel, investors will raise the capital in a second. It's just not the job of the friggin' government to decide when that point is reached. It's the right of every single citizen to decide if he want's to pay for the fuel or rather commute to work by bike instead of being taxed into submission on the behest of energy companies.

It can be used for transportation and you have probably already seen Nat Gas Vehicles on the road. They are clean and efficient.

Agreed. Also, most car manufacturers (not only Mercedes, but also GM or Ford) already offer CNG models in Europe, so the experience with the technology is there.

Probably true. However, these gases can do a dandy job of providing hot water for the facility at no energy cost. The equipment isn’t expensive either.

A local Y runs a natural gas generator for their own power, and recovers engine and exhaust heat to heat the swimming pool for free. There are commercial systems sold that do that, pretty much off the shelf.

Here is one:

"If you are presently burning natural gas (or propane) to heat water and buying electricity from your utility, you could be saving money with TECOGEN Cogeneration Modules. In a conventional water heater, fuel burning at temperatures greater than 2500°F produces only low-grade energy - 150°F to 200°F hot water. These water heaters don't make full use of the high-grade energy in the fuel; and because they are thermodynamically wasteful, they waste your money too! In the TECOGEN module, high-temperature combustion produces both hot water and valuable electric power. Thermal performance is comparable to conventional water heaters, but in addition, 26% of the fuel's energy is converted into high-grade electrical energy. The combined electrical and heating efficiency is 83%. Utilization of the fuel's energy potential, both high-grade and low-grade, is maximized. "