Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

New tech worth looking into.

sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Windmills solar and all that crap that doesn't work efficiently or serve the needs of everyone anywhere is a waste of time. They are OK for where they work but are in no way a solution to solving our energy needs. Now this is the way to go. It is a fuel source that can make itself. It produces more energy than it takes to make it. The single most important factor for a viable alternative. But alas it will be rejected by everyone because it works and does not provide 0 emissions.

http://www.flixxy.com...
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 3:52:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I assume it has the same problems as other forms of recycling, that is it's cheaper and easier to drill for oil than to reclaim it? Or else I'd think someone here would be making a lot of money off our old plastics.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
corinneyvette
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 4:01:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM, sadolite wrote:
"Windmills solar and all that crap that doesn't work efficiently or serve the needs of everyone anywhere is a waste of time. They are OK for where they work but are in no way a solution to solving our energy needs."

I feel like this is a very uneducated way to state your stance. I have recently researched several various methods for renewable, and alternative, fuels and disagree that windmills and solar power are completely useless. They both are in fact definitely renewable, and their benefits outweigh their negatives. It is true that at the current moment, the entire world could not sustain itself solely on solar and wind power. But this fact is more due to our current lack of technology and resources in these areas. These methods provide only a small portion of power, and thus can't be expected to accommodate a large portion of people right away. However, the research into these two areas should not be disregarded. Do you have substantial support that your method would work any more efficiently without running into similar issues that these areas face? To simply site an online source doesn't say much, especially if it's not an accredited, researched source. I guess what I'm really wondering is what makes any single method better than another? All of these are in their preliminary stages.
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 4:13:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 4:01:27 PM, corinneyvette wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM, sadolite wrote:
"Windmills solar and all that crap that doesn't work efficiently or serve the needs of everyone anywhere is a waste of time. They are OK for where they work but are in no way a solution to solving our energy needs."

I feel like this is a very uneducated way to state your stance. I have recently researched several various methods for renewable, and alternative, fuels and disagree that windmills and solar power are completely useless. They both are in fact definitely renewable, and their benefits outweigh their negatives. It is true that at the current moment, the entire world could not sustain itself solely on solar and wind power. But this fact is more due to our current lack of technology and resources in these areas. These methods provide only a small portion of power, and thus can't be expected to accommodate a large portion of people right away. However, the research into these two areas should not be disregarded. Do you have substantial support that your method would work any more efficiently without running into similar issues that these areas face? To simply site an online source doesn't say much, especially if it's not an accredited, researched source. I guess what I'm really wondering is what makes any single method better than another? All of these are in their preliminary stages.

Um, the plastic already has the fuel source in it. You get 1 liter of fuel from 1 kilogram of plastic. Do the efficiency math. It will not take one liter of fuel to process 1 kilogram of plastic, that means it is a viable cost efficient never ending fuel source. Well until we stop making plastic, which will be never. The problem is that it is a fossil fuel and will be rejected summarily by environmentalists and the EPA regardless of how well it works or how efficient it is to make.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 4:27:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 4:13:02 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/24/2013 4:01:27 PM, corinneyvette wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM, sadolite wrote:
"Windmills solar and all that crap that doesn't work efficiently or serve the needs of everyone anywhere is a waste of time. They are OK for where they work but are in no way a solution to solving our energy needs."

I feel like this is a very uneducated way to state your stance. I have recently researched several various methods for renewable, and alternative, fuels and disagree that windmills and solar power are completely useless. They both are in fact definitely renewable, and their benefits outweigh their negatives. It is true that at the current moment, the entire world could not sustain itself solely on solar and wind power. But this fact is more due to our current lack of technology and resources in these areas. These methods provide only a small portion of power, and thus can't be expected to accommodate a large portion of people right away. However, the research into these two areas should not be disregarded. Do you have substantial support that your method would work any more efficiently without running into similar issues that these areas face? To simply site an online source doesn't say much, especially if it's not an accredited, researched source. I guess what I'm really wondering is what makes any single method better than another? All of these are in their preliminary stages.

Um, the plastic already has the fuel source in it. You get 1 liter of fuel from 1 kilogram of plastic. Do the efficiency math. It will not take one liter of fuel to process 1 kilogram of plastic, that means it is a viable cost efficient never ending fuel source. Well until we stop making plastic, which will be never. The problem is that it is a fossil fuel and will be rejected summarily by environmentalists and the EPA regardless of how well it works or how efficient it is to make.

And for the record I did not sat wind and solar are completely useless. I said they are "OK for where they work" but they are in no way cost efficient and cheap. I live in sunny Florida. I looked into solar to run my house completely off the grid. It would cost $70,000 to do it. I would never recoup the cost even if I lived to be 100, and of course it wont stand up to the elements so it wont last more than 15 years tops then I would have to reinvest all over again. Windmill ..........usless and not allowed.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
corinneyvette
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 4:41:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 4:13:02 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/24/2013 4:01:27 PM, corinneyvette wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM, sadolite wrote:

The problem is that it is a fossil fuel and will be rejected summarily by environmentalists and the EPA regardless of how well it works or how efficient it is to make.

If this is so efficient, despite the fact that oil is still a fossil fuel, why hasn't it been implemented anywhere. I watched the video, but that alone didn't even really explain when this breakthrough occurred, or what exactly has been done with it. By simply typing "converting plastic into oil" in my Google search bar I was able to find a company that currently is using this type of science. There is a company, JBI, that is actually working with this method in Canada successfully. Do you have any knowledge of whether or not this method has been evaluated in our own country?
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 5:04:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 4:13:02 PM, sadolite wrote:
Um, the plastic already has the fuel source in it. You get 1 liter of fuel from 1 kilogram of plastic. Do the efficiency math. It will not take one liter of fuel to process 1 kilogram of plastic, that means it is a viable cost efficient never ending fuel source.

That doesn't necessarily make it cost efficient, until it becomes cheaper to convert plastic back to oil than to drill for new oil it won't be cost effective. I can only assume that's why it's not a widespread practice today.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 6:59:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 4:41:27 PM, corinneyvette wrote:
At 2/24/2013 4:13:02 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/24/2013 4:01:27 PM, corinneyvette wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM, sadolite wrote:

The problem is that it is a fossil fuel and will be rejected summarily by environmentalists and the EPA regardless of how well it works or how efficient it is to make.


If this is so efficient, despite the fact that oil is still a fossil fuel, why hasn't it been implemented anywhere. I watched the video, but that alone didn't even really explain when this breakthrough occurred, or what exactly has been done with it. By simply typing "converting plastic into oil" in my Google search bar I was able to find a company that currently is using this type of science. There is a company, JBI, that is actually working with this method in Canada successfully. Do you have any knowledge of whether or not this method has been evaluated in our own country?

"If this is so efficient, despite the fact that oil is still a fossil fuel, why hasn't it been implemented anywhere."

It is a fossil fuel. The US govt is moving away from fossil fuel. It will not allow it's development. It wants clean energy, 0 or next to zero emission. The only things that will do that is wind solar and nuclear. Those are your choices. We cant even build a pipe line from Canada, want on earth makes you think this technology will be approved?
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 7:06:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 6:59:12 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/24/2013 4:41:27 PM, corinneyvette wrote:
At 2/24/2013 4:13:02 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/24/2013 4:01:27 PM, corinneyvette wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM, sadolite wrote:

The problem is that it is a fossil fuel and will be rejected summarily by environmentalists and the EPA regardless of how well it works or how efficient it is to make.


If this is so efficient, despite the fact that oil is still a fossil fuel, why hasn't it been implemented anywhere. I watched the video, but that alone didn't even really explain when this breakthrough occurred, or what exactly has been done with it. By simply typing "converting plastic into oil" in my Google search bar I was able to find a company that currently is using this type of science. There is a company, JBI, that is actually working with this method in Canada successfully. Do you have any knowledge of whether or not this method has been evaluated in our own country?

"If this is so efficient, despite the fact that oil is still a fossil fuel, why hasn't it been implemented anywhere."

It is a fossil fuel. The US govt is moving away from fossil fuel. It will not allow it's development. It wants clean energy, 0 or next to zero emission. The only things that will do that is wind solar and nuclear. Those are your choices. We cant even build a pipe line from Canada, want on earth makes you think this technology will be approved?

But just imagine if it was. You know that island of plastic in the middle of the ocean and all the plastic that gets thrown away in land fills. MAN OH MAN WOULD THAT BE A GOD SEND TO THE ENVIROMENT. But alas it will never come to fruition because environmentalists and the EPA are to f-ing stupid to see the benefits. They are all just myopic aholes with a clean energy agenda that will serve no ones needs.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 5:32:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The article says a liter of oil from plastic costs $1.50. That means a barrel (200 l.) costs $300. The current price for oil is under $100 per barrel. Hence it's not practical.

Plastic can be burned directly to fire steam generators to produce electric power. Honolulu is an example of a place that sorts trash and burns the combustibles to produce power.

Plastic burns a lot cleaner than you might think. Try burning a plastic container in a fireplace sometime. It goes up quite nicely. You might want to pick a time to try it when no one is around to stop you.
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2013 3:38:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 5:32:44 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
The article says a liter of oil from plastic costs $1.50. That means a barrel (200 l.) costs $300. The current price for oil is under $100 per barrel. Hence it's not practical.

Plastic can be burned directly to fire steam generators to produce electric power. Honolulu is an example of a place that sorts trash and burns the combustibles to produce power.

Plastic burns a lot cleaner than you might think. Try burning a plastic container in a fireplace sometime. It goes up quite nicely. You might want to pick a time to try it when no one is around to stop you.

The point is this. It does not have to be made into gasoline. It can be made into much more expensive derivatives. Such as acetone, naphtha, ethylene,propylene, butadiene, benzene, ammonia, methanol. The list goes on and on. 4000 different things are made from crude. All of which are in the $7.00 to as much as $50.00 a gallon range. And then lets not discount the environmental advantages of removing plastic from the garbage that lines or coastlines.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2013 3:46:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 3:25:54 PM, sadolite wrote:
Windmills solar and all that crap that doesn't work efficiently or serve the needs of everyone anywhere is a waste of time. They are OK for where they work but are in no way a solution to solving our energy needs. Now this is the way to go. It is a fuel source that can make itself. It produces more energy than it takes to make it. The single most important factor for a viable alternative. But alas it will be rejected by everyone because it works and does not provide 0 emissions.

http://www.flixxy.com...

Amazing technology.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.