Page 10 of 42 FirstFirst ... 3456789101112131415161720 ... LastLast
Results 118 to 130 of 534
  1. #118
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    21,309
    Post Likes
    You wanna know one answer? Or at the very least an interim solution that is so good? My suspicions why it isn't done is because it would put many out of work. Check it out . . .

    This is something that was 'created' right before obummer took office. Or rather, all of the theoretical planning and designing was finished just before he took office. It's a power plant that needs no maintenance, so therefor the scientists said it could be buried underground. What is the fuel?

    What is the fuel, now here is where it starts to get real interesting. The waste product from nuclear power plants. Yup, that's right. The waste product that has a half life of a billion years. Okay, small exaggeration. But yes, that same waste product that we store in some mountain cave in Nevada or where ever.

    A power generation plant that uses waste nuclear product, needs no maintenance, can be buried underground, and is small enough that they can be placed closer to the point of use, thereby reducing the need for beefed up power transmission lines.

    It's just so good, now you know why Congress didn't (won't?) approve funding. Like they really have our best interests at stake. NOT.

    All that is needed is a billion dollars for the first prototype. The research was funded by us American tax payers at the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory.

    Solar and wind power, LOL. Give me a break.

    After that, the net return to us American citizens is almost too incredible to even think about.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bazooka Joey View Post
    Seeing that this thread has moved back to the lighter side in the last few post, I'm still convinced that our long term clean energy source ( for the whole planet, as I'm sure this country will be one of the first to find the answer as being on the forefront ) is still reverse engineering those pesky alien craft(s) from Roswell.. err... a as BBeerme reminded me those weather balloons or from other countries that crafts have crashed after being shot down or from lighting or etc. and are feverishly being working on vs a man/women made solution. We must be making some type of progress by now as it's been easily 70+ years.
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

    I use 56% silver on everything except steel.

  2. #119
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    21,309
    Post Likes
    This is from some guy at Cornell University nine years ago. Hope they've made fantastic leaps in efficiency.

    https://www.organicconsumers.org/sci...thanol-cornell

    I have never heard anything positive about using a food product to make fuel. Just more hocus pocus and government subsidizing an industry that shouldn't even be.


    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    Just want to put out there that corn does yield a net positive energy yield and has been for a while.
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

    I use 56% silver on everything except steel.

  3. #120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    77,256
    Post Likes
    Contractor locator map

    How-to-apply-for-Professional

    How many times must one fix something before it is fixed?

  4. #121
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    21,309
    Post Likes
    What about the energy to collect and harvest the seed? Energy for the rail cars, the trucks to deliver the seed, the farm equipment to till and fertilize the soil, energy to make and process the fertilizer, that same equipment to harvest product, then transport to be malted, then mashed.

    You're only considering the distillation process.

    I have never seen a positive for using corn to make fuel when you consider how much energy it takes to make that fuel.

    An argument can even be made to include the open pit mines to pull the iron ore out of the ground to make all of the equipment needed to farm that corn. And all of the energy required to process that iron ore.

    You see, all in all, it's just a net loss. Kinda like a government sponsored program to dig a hole and then fill it up again, net loss.


    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    Seems to me the plant around here runs on NG and it has a lot of useful byproducts like CO2 and water vapor along with feed from the dried mash.
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

    I use 56% silver on everything except steel.

  5. #122
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    8,117
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    What about the energy to collect and harvest the seed? Energy for the rail cars, the trucks to deliver the seed, the farm equipment to till and fertilize the soil, energy to make and process the fertilizer, that same equipment to harvest product, then transport to be malted, then mashed.

    You're only considering the distillation process.

    I have never seen a positive for using corn to make fuel when you consider how much energy it takes to make that fuel.

    An argument can even be made to include the open pit mines to pull the iron ore out of the ground to make all of the equipment needed to farm that corn. And all of the energy required to process that iron ore.

    You see, all in all, it's just a net loss. Kinda like a government sponsored program to dig a hole and then fill it up again, net loss.
    However all that energy would be used anyway. The farmer isn't going to let that ground sit, they will plant what ever crop they can make money on, corn being one. If they don't sell it to the ethanol plant they will sell it to the elevator, who will store and dry it, then load it onto rail cars and grain trailers and it will go to feed mills, or corn syrup plant, etc. Very little of the corn grown around here is edible for humans, it all goes to livestock or pet food, corn/pellet stoves, etc. This stuff is harvested at 15% moisture, it is about like a soft rock.

    I don't have a problem with the use of the corn for ethanol, but I do have a problem with all the government subsidies that are pumped into it. Which is not much different that subsidizing tobacco farmers then running PSAs against cigarettes. When I hear a farmer talk about people on welfare I have to laugh when I consider all the subsidies they get.

  6. #123
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    21,309
    Post Likes
    It's still a product with a net loss. Using fuel to make another fuel with less output.

    If those same resources were used to make a food product, then there would be a 'gain'.

    And less of a drain on society due to less government funds being spent.


    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    However all that energy would be used anyway. The farmer isn't going to let that ground sit, they will plant what ever crop they can make money on, corn being one. If they don't sell it to the ethanol plant they will sell it to the elevator, who will store and dry it, then load it onto rail cars and grain trailers and it will go to feed mills, or corn syrup plant, etc. Very little of the corn grown around here is edible for humans, it all goes to livestock or pet food, corn/pellet stoves, etc. This stuff is harvested at 15% moisture, it is about like a soft rock.

    I don't have a problem with the use of the corn for ethanol, but I do have a problem with all the government subsidies that are pumped into it. Which is not much different that subsidizing tobacco farmers then running PSAs against cigarettes. When I hear a farmer talk about people on welfare I have to laugh when I consider all the subsidies they get.
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

    I use 56% silver on everything except steel.

  7. #124
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    8,117
    Post Likes
    Not really. All the corn that goes into feed gets processed and you get feed out of it, that's it but you have a bushel in and less than a bushel out. All the corn that goes to an ethanol plant has a similar usage of energy to get it ready for feed but after the ethanol is made you you still have a very nutrient rich livestock food source, plus CO2, plus other gases in smaller amounts (not sure what they are) plus the ethanol. So there is a lot more out of a bushel of corn than just a bushel of feed. It almost seems like there is a secondary liquid that they get from the mash also.

  8. #125
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    21,309
    Post Likes
    Here, let me put another way.

    You've got ignorant morons out there that think it is better to send three $25/hr techs out to solve a problem that one $50/hr tech could figure out.

    That is the state of the ethanol production in our country.
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

    I use 56% silver on everything except steel.

  9. #126
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,874
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    This is from some guy at Cornell University nine years ago. Hope they've made fantastic leaps in efficiency.

    https://www.organicconsumers.org/sci...thanol-cornell

    I have never heard anything positive about using a food product to make fuel. Just more hocus pocus and government subsidizing an industry that shouldn't even be.
    That 9 year old article references an 18 year old article that may have been dubious at that time.

    https://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/ene...ornEthanol.pdf

    https://www.ilcorn.org/news-and-medi...-ethanol-myths
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  10. #127
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    21,309
    Post Likes
    I did a quick scan and it does look favorable. But you need to consider the source. It's the old fox watching the hen house conundrum.

    Always remember, the energy output of ethanol is much less than gasoline. So you need to buy more at the pump to go the same distance. And, of course, gasoline that is diluted with ethanol is all taxed the same.

    D'oh !!


    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    That 9 year old article references an 18 year old article that may have been dubious at that time.

    https://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/ene...ornEthanol.pdf

    https://www.ilcorn.org/news-and-medi...-ethanol-myths
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

    I use 56% silver on everything except steel.

  11. #128
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    21,309
    Post Likes
    All in all, it has become more of a welfare program than anything.

    The energy expended for this cause could bring a higher return if spent in other areas. Or not spent at all.


    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    I did a quick scan and it does look favorable. But you need to consider the source. It's the old fox watching the hen house conundrum.

    Always remember, the energy output of ethanol is much less than gasoline. So you need to buy more at the pump to go the same distance. And, of course, gasoline that is diluted with ethanol is all taxed the same.

    D'oh !!
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

    I use 56% silver on everything except steel.

  12. #129
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,874
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    I did a quick scan and it does look favorable. But you need to consider the source. It's the old fox watching the hen house conundrum.

    Always remember, the energy output of ethanol is much less than gasoline. So you need to buy more at the pump to go the same distance. And, of course, gasoline that is diluted with ethanol is all taxed the same.

    D'oh !!
    I gave you an independent link also.I knew your conspiratorial mind would lead you where it did. Ethanol has other benefits by lowering emissions of the gasoline and is also considered carbon neutral
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  13. #130
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,874
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    All in all, it has become more of a welfare program than anything.

    The energy expended for this cause could bring a higher return if spent in other areas. Or not spent at all.
    You are still arguing a debunked point but go ahead.

    Right now it is a win win. It is renewable at a net positive, it lowers emissions including CO2 also.
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

Page 10 of 42 FirstFirst ... 3456789101112131415161720 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor MagazineThe place where Electrical professionals meet.