Indian scientist invents bloom box for electricity production
in [Physics]
|
From: jimp on 24 Feb 2010 21:00 In sci.physics habshi(a)anony.net wrote: > > http://www.dailytech.com/Bloom+Energy+Unveils+Energy+Servers+Looks+to+Revolutionize+Power+Industry/article17770.htm > > The units (of any size) pay back their cost within 3 to 5 years and > they will operate efficiently for 10 years (at which point they would > presumably be serviced with new catalyst material, i.e. new fuel cell > discs). Not at the current prices they won't and anything else is just arm waving at this point. > The company's fuel cell boxes are composed of ceramic (sand derived) Big whoop. All semiconductors are "sand derived"; the cost is in the processing into something useable, not the raw material. > The result he obtained was a fuel cell that went from "powder to > power" and was "twice" as efficient as traditional power plants due to > the on-site scheme eliminating grid losses. Notice the word "twice" in quotes. Grid losses are nowhere near 50% and the efficiency of combined-cycle gas fired plants is already near 50% so there isn't a lot of room for miracle efficiencies. Assuming these yahoos don't wind up in court over their obviously pie-in-the-sky pronouncements and some things that look like outright lies, there is a chance the thing will "revolutionize" electrical generation the same way the Segway "revolutionized" transportation, i.e. in a tiny niche market. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply.
From: habshi on 25 Feb 2010 19:10 it might make hybrid cars affordable. Natural gas or oil going through a bloom box and driving motors at each wheel , a true four wheel drive
From: Michael Coburn on 26 Feb 2010 01:32 On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 01:36:18 -0500, J. Clarke wrote: > On 2/24/2010 1:01 AM, Michael Coburn wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:41:19 -0500, J. Clarke wrote: >> >>> On 2/23/2010 4:41 PM, Michael Coburn wrote: >>>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:38:51 -0800, Benj wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Feb 23, 4:09 am, "Cwatters" >>>>> <colin.wattersNOS...(a)TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> From what I can tell it's "just" a fuel cell. No doubt people >>>>>> like >>>>>> Google are interested so they can run it off biofuel. >>>>> >>>>> Right. Electricity from food. Burning food for energy has already >>>>> begun to work out real well. >>>> >>>> Typical oil company shill response. There are a lot more biofuel >>>> efforts that use non food resources these days. Corn was a disaster >>>> and it is the gift that keeps on giving for the oil company shills. >>> >>> So how much of this biofuel comes from non-cropland resources? That's >>> the issue. >> >> In the case of switchgrass and woodchips and algae there is no use of >> "cropland". > > So where do the switchgrass and wood chips and algae come from? >> From land that cannot grow food crops economically. -- "Senate rules don't trump the Constitution" -- http://GreaterVoice.org/60
From: Michael Coburn on 26 Feb 2010 01:34 On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 12:29:32 +0000, JohnF wrote: > In sci.physics Michael Coburn <mikcob(a)verizon.net> wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:00:14 -0800, Eric Gisin wrote: >> >>> Sounds like a solid oxide fuel cell running on methane. >> >> If this rig dramatically increases the amount of electricity per unit >> of natural gas > > There's just so much chemical potential energy in the bonds of whatever > fuel it uses. That's the upper limit of electric energy you'll get out > of it. But I don't know what typical efficiencies currently are, or how > much they might improve. The folks using this rig are claiming very good savings on power. That is all I can go on. -- "Senate rules don't trump the Constitution" -- http://GreaterVoice.org/60
From: J. Clarke on 26 Feb 2010 09:19
On 2/26/2010 1:32 AM, Michael Coburn wrote: > On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 01:36:18 -0500, J. Clarke wrote: > >> On 2/24/2010 1:01 AM, Michael Coburn wrote: >>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:41:19 -0500, J. Clarke wrote: >>> >>>> On 2/23/2010 4:41 PM, Michael Coburn wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:38:51 -0800, Benj wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 23, 4:09 am, "Cwatters" >>>>>> <colin.wattersNOS...(a)TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> From what I can tell it's "just" a fuel cell. No doubt people >>>>>>> like >>>>>>> Google are interested so they can run it off biofuel. >>>>>> >>>>>> Right. Electricity from food. Burning food for energy has already >>>>>> begun to work out real well. >>>>> >>>>> Typical oil company shill response. There are a lot more biofuel >>>>> efforts that use non food resources these days. Corn was a disaster >>>>> and it is the gift that keeps on giving for the oil company shills. >>>> >>>> So how much of this biofuel comes from non-cropland resources? That's >>>> the issue. >>> >>> In the case of switchgrass and woodchips and algae there is no use of >>> "cropland". >> >> So where do the switchgrass and wood chips and algae come from? >>> > > From land that cannot grow food crops economically. And yet it can grow switchgrass. Hint--if it's a grass it grows in the same kind of conditions as other grasses, and "other grasses" includes wheat and corn. As for wood chips, what kind of land can grow trees but not trees that are currently useful for purposes other than being burned? |