Synthetic fuels

[nova3930]

I think carbon engineerings method is more adaptive to society. Not everyone can run or even convert there engines to methanol. Iv seen a lot of water/meth injection mods for Audi’s FIS but never seen a FSI or even ant direct injection system use e85 or any methanol systems

If carbon engineering claim that no modifications or tuning are required Then sign me up!!

Oh I wouldn't expect it to be an overnight change. Probably be more like the switch from leaded to unleaded fuel back when. You just make new models compatible and eventually the majority of what's on the road will work with it. I've also seen some processes that can turn out a fuel that's roughly equivalent to #1 diesel. Methanol is just a simple fuel to produce chemically.

 

[nova3930]

Your right on the reactor part, I see a future for SMR technology where company’s can buy or lease a reactor small enough to run there business and have a swap and go system where ones the fuel is spent you just replace the whole reactor. Even nasa is in the development with there kilopower reactors that are so small you can hold in your hands.

I think those are both viable paths forward but ultimately I think they'll both be a stopgap. When it's finished, the ITER project should demonstrate the ability to get net positive thermal power from a fusion reaction. At present there's no scientific or engineering reasons it can't anyway.

If that holds, the conceptual DEMO follow on reactor could be producing power for the grid by 2035-2040 time frame. From there it's an engineering problem for expansion and integration....

Lockheed also reportedly keeps making advances with their small scale fusion reactor. That would be a game changer.

Lotta ifs all around but also lotta reason for optimism.....

 

[tyr382]

The problem with fusion is that there reactors are unbelievably huge.
Brilliant thing about SMR’s is that they are versatile to a point where you can use them for almost anything. Iv seen company’s such as pocatom using a SMR to produce not electricity but water, meaning that they are fully off the grid which is good idea being that in the event of emergencies, they will still be able to operate even when local power lines are down, but still supply drinking water.
Nuscale also announce that there reactor design can be custom made to retrofit any coal fired power plant. That idea alone is Australia’s solution to our energy shortage.

 

[nova3930]

They're def not size efficient. Advantages primarily lie in fuel availability and lack of long lived radioactive waste products.

 

[tyr382]

Not going to argue there about the waste, and it is the only issue with nuclear fuel. The fact is that nuclear power never really took off as it was supposed to. In the 50’s they saw so much potential for nuclear energy that they told everyone that energy will be so abundant it will be unmeaterd. Unfortunately that never happened and we are all starving for energy at too high of cost. Iv always wondered did they discover nuclear energy too early to a point that it would of made other sources of energy obsolete, was the nuclear revolution too soon? Far as I see it, we had the nuclear revolution was held back. Don’t matter how good of a technology you have or how it works. The problem is if no one invest in it, then it will brevet happen. And I do beleave this is the case with nuclear technology. It really just came to a dead halt and no one invested in it .that current operating reactors even the newly install gen IV reactor they just installed in China, still is out dated technology based on old pressure water reactors that use so tons of uranium, but only use 20% of it, having over 70% of it go to waste storage. This is the problem with current reactor technologies. Future reactors such as molten salt reactors can use the wasted spent fuel rods from previous reactors that also give no wasted products to produce weapon grades plutonium.

A reactor that uses all its fuel, that is the future.

 

[Grumpycat]

Not going to argue there about the waste, and it is the only issue with nuclear fuel. The fact is that nuclear power never really took off as it was supposed to. In the 50’s they saw so much potential for nuclear energy that they told everyone that energy will be so abundant it will be unmeaterd. Unfortunately that never happened and we are all starving for energy at too high of cost.

Nuclear power was killed with paperwork. When it got to the point it took 10-15 years or more to get a new facility online then utilities could not afford the cost of money tied up in construction and paperwork for that length of time before their Public Utilities Commission would permit amortizing in the rate charged customers for electricity.

Nuclear power was killed by trying to build each and every plant differently. Navy couldn't build enough ships in WWII until finally standardizing design. Thats why some ships are said to be "Nimitz Class", because they approximate the Nimitz.

Westinghouse is building state of the art standardized modular nuclear power plants for China as fast as they possibly can. Build large modules in a factory (in China) then ship to the multiple sites.

 

[lilranch2001]

Yea, that sounds like a good idea, give China control over our power grid!

 

[Grumpycat]

Yea, that sounds like a good idea, give China control over our power grid!

That is not at all what was said.

However, China is proceeding at full speed to be the largest producer of nuclear power in the world. With demonstrated theft of intellectual property shortly they will copy Westinghouse's designs and build their own without outside assistance. At least for now westerners have designed their facilities and we too could be building the same thing, if only we would.

While most of the USA nuclear plants were designed in the 1960's and have proven relatively safe, the new designs are significantly safer. If the nuke-haters could be ignored then we could build new and retire the old, but as things stand the stalemate means we continue to operate the less safe systems. This is what happened in Japan.

 

[the old grind]

... There's a lot of technology out there that can't get going because it cost more than the old way. No market for it no quick money to be made. No money means it dies.

What a great, if simple explanation of how 'high tech' can make everyone's life better.

btw, how are we doing on personal helicopters that have been predicted since the '60s. We have the lightweight composite materials that will bring them to our driveways, so what's the holdup there? Are we just waiting for a self driving one? :scratchchin:

Say what? .. that it'll happen after minimum wage workers get their self driving cars? Oh, so probably next year then ...

btw, we know that entrenchment of 'old way$' have prevented moving to thorium reactors, you know the ones that use 99% vs 1% of fuel energy and cannot melt down. Meanwhile, don't Teslas run on coal?

 

[LouNY]

That is not at all what was said.

However, China is proceeding at full speed to be the largest producer of nuclear power in the world. With demonstrated theft of intellectual property shortly they will copy Westinghouse's designs and build their own without outside assistance. At least for now westerners have designed their facilities and we too could be building the same thing, if only we would.

While most of the USA nuclear plants were designed in the 1960's and have proven relatively safe, the new designs are significantly safer. If the nuke-haters could be ignored then we could build new and retire the old, but as things stand the stalemate means we continue to operate the less safe systems. This is what happened in Japan.

Very true, safe efficient modular nuclear power plants distributed through the country close to where the power is consumed would reduce the reliance on an old and outdated power grid. Let the existing grip supply the local areas.

Or we can continue to sit on our dead butts and play with our selfs and allow the rest of the world to surpass us and we can be like the 3rd world countries of today.