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

Interesting technology to watch.
1 posted on 01/31/2005 11:44:26 AM PST by anymouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: anymouse
On the other hand using coal fired furnaces to to generate electricity to hydrolyze water to create Hydrogen and Oxygen is probably what is going to be done for quite some time and makes no sense.
2 posted on 01/31/2005 11:52:27 AM PST by Mikey_1962
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

I think this will be OBE, specifically thermal depolymerization.


3 posted on 01/31/2005 12:03:34 PM PST by Meldrim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

later read bump


4 posted on 01/31/2005 12:05:28 PM PST by investigateworld (Babies= A sure sign He hasn't given up on mankind!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

Pah!

The flux capacitor in my DeLorean has been doing this for twenty years.

5 posted on 01/31/2005 12:11:23 PM PST by stinkerpot65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

I still think hydrogen is a non-starter. No matter how efficient you get at producing it, the low energy density and near-impossibily of storing it for any significant length of time (it seeps through damn near everything) makes it no match for other fuels.


6 posted on 01/31/2005 12:17:49 PM PST by Squawk 8888 (With enemies like Michael Moore, who needs friends?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

Of course, it still suffers from the same problem that all solar sources do, namely, the low power density of sunlight. At 1 kW per square meter, it would take 1 square kilometer of a 100% conversion efficiency process, at the equator (when the sun is directly overhead) to generate 1 GW - at noon. Away from the equator, away from noon, and if your process isn't 100% efficient, it would take more land area than that to make 1 GW. That's a lot of land for only a modestly powerful power plant.


10 posted on 01/31/2005 12:23:23 PM PST by coloradan (Hence, etc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse
If we destroy the ozone layer we could cause more ultraviolet light to strike the surface of the Earth. This would enable this technology to be more efficient so we don't have to release so many greenhouse gasses!
12 posted on 01/31/2005 12:25:55 PM PST by rightsmart (Was W '04, now W '0N)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse
From the article: "The 97 percent efficiency is the highest reported, according to the researchers. There is one catch -- only five percent of the sun's energy is ultraviolet light. "

In less-biased engineering terms, we would say that this process for converting sunlight to an alternate form of energy is 5% efficient. But why let realistic calculations get in the way of a good story.

18 posted on 01/31/2005 12:51:49 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

Depending on how big, how cheap and how resistant to contamination these gadgets are in practice, burning the hydrogen to make water might be a useful method of desalinization.


20 posted on 01/31/2005 1:22:15 PM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

You'd get more ultravilot if you widened the ozone hole.


26 posted on 01/31/2005 4:50:23 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

BTTT


28 posted on 01/31/2005 8:32:51 PM PST by Fiddlstix (This Tagline for sale. (Presented by TagLines R US))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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