For all those who doubted me about the water diesel.

BAM

http://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news...c-diesel-out-of-just-air-and-water/ar-BBemDfa

I learned a long time ago not to doubt you - you are a man of conviction, experience, knowledge, and honor.

jakematic said:

I learned a long time ago not to doubt you - you are a man of conviction, experience, knowledge, and honor.

Click to expand...

You were talking of Jack weren't you Jake?

Kidding aside, he is a man of conviction, experience, knowledge and honor. Couldn't agree more!

Yeah you have to love how this Is not being reported really........... only came out like over 10 years ago.
Like I said.............. the solar cell will have a big soft serve ice cream taken on it......

Oh man and than there is CF gasoline................and mechanical magnetic manipulation!

Sure you can make diesel from water and air. All you have to do is supply sufficient energy to break the bonds holding the CO2 and H20 molecules together, then you can recombine them into whatever hydrocarbon molecules you want. The catch is you're going to put more energy into that first step than you can ever get back out by burning the resulting diesel. So where are you going to get that energy?

TANSTAAFL!

-Uwe-

Uwe said:

So where are you going to get that energy?

Click to expand...

The communists would call that 'carbon negative'... so let's all hug and share a secret !

Crank up a few dozen more nukes per country/region I say.
We need diesel, we need electricity. Problem solved.

jakematic said:

Crank up a few dozen more nukes per country/region I say.

Click to expand...

It would take more than a few dozen, it would take a few hundred, but yes, in the long run, that's going to be the only way to continue to run an industrial society.

Just have Bruce make us a few of these

Hey Uwe but what about CF gasoline diesel?

Uwe said:

The catch is you're going to put more energy into that first step than you can ever get back out by burning the resulting diesel. So where are you going to get that energy?

TANSTAAFL!

Click to expand...

I disagree on the free lunch thing. If you use stationary solar farms to produce the blue goo, it winds up being nothing more than a solar energy storage device...one that just happens to work better in a TDI and not a Prius.....

It still ain't free. Tell me how much a sufficient quantity of solar panels would cost, which would produce the same amount of electricity in a year that a 1000 MW nuke plant would. Keep in mind that 1000 MW plant can make 1000 MW pretty much continuously, not just when the sun is shining.

-Uwe-

And they have a lifespan of 20-ish year, zero possible payback, and take WAY more area.

Oh and they're not allowed to be made in the US anymore due to the toxic chemicals involved.

jakematic said:

Oh and they're not allowed to be made in the US anymore due to the toxic chemicals involved.

Click to expand...

I suspect that's hyperbole. In other words, I really doubt it's forbidden; it's just that our standards for contamination with and exposure to those chemicals makes in economically unfeasible to produce them here in the US.

Yeah kind of like a company called Solyndra........only we gave them money to auger in like flight 800 with a tax payer missile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra

Oh boy where is Artie to hammer me on this stuff?

Jack@European_Parts said:

Oh boy where is Artie to hammer me on this stuff?

Click to expand...

He's outside in the garage, wiring up his hydrogen bomb (electrolysis chamber) to solar panels trying to make the 4 liters of blue goo that he needs to commute to work every day. If my streak of luck playing with hydrogen continues, I should have a new crater^H^H^H^H in-ground pool by dark.....

Uwe said:

It still ain't free. Tell me how much a sufficient quantity of solar panels would cost, which would produce the same amount of electricity in a year that a 1000 MW nuke plant would. Keep in mind that 1000 MW plant can make 1000 MW pretty much continuously, not just when the sun is shining.

Click to expand...

I wasn't thinking about building a 1000 MW power plant, since that just propagates the enslaving of the masses with yet another power grid and big energy master. Rooftop solar has the power companies scared, because customers are only using the grid as a storage medium and their net billable power use is zero. If you combine this with either a plug-in electric vehicle or Audi's new blue goo generator, you have the makings of complete energy independence. (*) Just say no to central points of failure.....

(*) Disclaimer that the author's retirement account contains energy/utility stocks, and his stock portfolio is long on Exxon Mobil.

jakematic said:

And they have a lifespan of 20-ish year, zero possible payback, and take WAY more area.

Click to expand...

I think that panel lifetime, efficiency and economics relative to utility power have evolved quite a bit since you last looked into it. That doesn't necessarily mean the Audi process is an efficient way to use electricity, although it might be someday. The interesting bit about it is carbon-neutrality. Burn the fuel and release CO2, then recapture it when making more fuel.

It's hard to beat liquid fuel. It's the best on volume/mass efficiency, it's easy to transfer rapidly, and it's easy to store for long periods. Maybe someday when we get fusion figured out, or at least people chill out and allow modern fail-safe fission designs. There are also places where electricity is very, very cheap for other reasons. Some hydro depending on the market, also geothermal in Iceland I think. Isn't that why almost all aluminum smelting is done there?

If a process is developed that goes from electricity-plus-air to liquid fuel with any semblance of efficiency, even if it's not very good, that opens opportunities.

There's solar panels available today with somewhat low efficiency (compared to the best modern ones) but are very cheap. So they're really good in terms of $$ invested/kWh delivered, but you need too many to fit on your roof. Instead, you go put a shitload of them out in the desert. That doesn't make sense right now because of grid transmission losses and no local consumers. If you can get to liquid fuel instead? Game changer. That energy is captured into stable storage that can be marketed and used nearby, or transported long-distance by pipeline or tanker with relative ease.

Also, as Uwe kind of alluded to, baseload plants really like to put out a certain amount of power and wind/solar can be unpredictable. Sometimes you have more power than you can use, and you have to do something with it, or things get explodey. Liquid fuel generation would be another good way to dump off excess power. In some cases, utilities have to literally pay (negative rates) to get rid of power. If you have electricity available that you literally have to pay to get rid of, who gives a shit if your liquid fuel generation is only 10% (made-up figure) efficient? Today in some places they use pumped hydro storage, like Taum Sauk in Missouri. This would be another interesting option, along with battery stations and flywheels and other experimental stuff that's been done.

Jason

vreihen said:

I wasn't thinking about building a 1000 MW power plant, since that just propagates the enslaving of the masses with yet another power grid and big energy master.

Click to expand...

I'm not worried about keeping the lights at my house on; there are off-grid ways to provide the kW or so that I need to do that. I'm worried about keeping an industrial society running; for that yo do need a grid with big powerplants on it.

vreihen said:

Rooftop solar has the power companies scared, because customers are only using the grid as a storage medium

Click to expand...

Yeah, if I owned a utility company, I'd be worried too, 'cause mandating that I provide a free, unlimited capacity "battery" to anyone who wants to build solar or wind capacity (the output of which is as unpredictable as the weather!) is a huge burden.

jyoung8607 said:

There's solar panels available today with somewhat low efficiency (compared to the best modern ones) but are very cheap. So they're really good in terms of $$ invested/kWh delivered

Click to expand...

Got any links? I was never very keen on putting panels on a roof to begin with. IMO it's a terrible location. It's a PITA place to do maintenance on your array, plus you're tearing it off and re-installing it when (not if) your roof needs to be replaced.

Now all I need is to figure out how to control it from becoming a grenade..........

Uwe said:

I was never very keen on putting panels on a roof to begin with. IMO it's a terrible location. It's a PITA place to do maintenance on your array, plus you're tearing it off and re-installing it when (not if) your roof needs to be replaced.

Click to expand...

You can mount the panels on a post, on the ground like a leaning snow fence, or anyplace else that you can get sun on them.

I have a detached garage with no interior finishing that has a perfect southerly exposure for 5 KW worth of panels. If I wanted to go further, I could extend the garage roof and make a carport to get another 2-3 KW of panels in play. Current pricing on panels is $0.90-$1.30/watt, depending on where you want them manufactured. If you want to have AC power, you'll need inverters or micro-inverters. Street price for a 1 KW grid-tie system with all mounting brackets and cabling is $2,500, plus shipping, labor (if you don't DIY), and permits if required. This is before federal and state tree-hugger tax exemptions and rebates. I don't have any of this stuff installed, but do want to buy even a minimum setup soon just to be grandfathered watching how the power companies are attacking net metering and grid-tie solar.

If you only want to run an electrolysis device to make hydrogen and/or blue goo, you don't need to buy any of the AC inverters or stuff since those processes run on DC. Does anyone have the power requirements needed to make one liter of blue goo using the just-announced process?????