a new idea for power production
 

I was thinking at work today since I really had nothing else to do. I was thinking that there must be another way to make power that is both environmentally friendly and reliable or in other words always on. Wind power just is not reliable enough. I was thinking maybe the currents that exist all throughout the ocean. They are very strong and reliable; they do not change. We could build thousands of windmills like turbines on the ocean floor that would produce an amazing amount of power that did not deplete any resource.

This may not be as cheap as our current power system is but we have to change to something because it is well known we are peaking in oil production and coal will only be a cheap alternative for the next few generations. The way I see it there are three options nuclear, wind, or water.

I was just kind of spitballing an idea and wondered what all of you think.

Ah but the currents do change. They would have to on something that would allow them to turn with the current. Then again, you would have to watch out for all the environmetalists who would never allow you to put something down there that might injure a fish. Also I don't know if you've ever worked with anything in the sea, but crap grows on EVERYTHING underwater. Look at the ships that need to get the barnacles scrapped off every couple of years. We have a sea water system, that we need to chain flail the pipes every couple of months. Just not economically feasible. The maintainence costs would drive the price of that cheap electricity trough the roof.

There already exists something based on the principle of tides (tidal power) as oppossed to ocean currents.
I don't think that ocean currents would be quite powerful enough. Hydroelectricity uses massive amounts of water moving at very high speeds to produce electricity.
Although you certainly have a massive amount of water moving in the oceans, I don't think it is moving at a high enough speed. Hence, though you have a huge amount of energy there in the ocean, it is spread out over too vast an area to make harnessing it in an efficient manner possible.


On the other hand I am absolutely unqualified to make any kind of judement in this area so I could be completely wrong! :D

yeah, aside from the above reasons. The resistance of the water would not let the turbines turn fast enough to produce any real serious amount of power.

But how about this idea, Magnetic power. Get a series on magnets and align them inside of a double wheel with the opposing forces repelling each other. In theory, you would get constant movement, if it would be strong enough to move a big turbine. I really don't think so, but it should produce enough power for an individual household.

Tidal Power works....but has severe limitations.

Catch The Wave.

Tidal Power Generation.

The Annapolis Tidal Generating Station was completed in 1984. It was a pilot project sponsored by the provincial and federal governments designed to explore the potential of harnessing energy from the sea.

Annapolis Tidal utilizes the sea water of the Bay of Fundy. Tides, which can sometimes reach 21 feet in height, rise and fall every 12 hours and 25 minutes in harmony with the gravitational forces of the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon.

Annapolis Tidal Generating Station
Annapolis Tidal Generating Station

2004 Visitor Centre Hours
Daily: 10:00 am - 5:45 pm
May 16 - Oct 15

For information contact the Annapolis Royal Visitor Information & Tidal Exhibit Center
(902)532-5454
(www.annapolisroyal.com/)

This facility has the distinction of being the first and only modern tidal plant in North America. The station is located in Annapolis Royal by the Bay of Fundy, home of the world's highest tides. Twice a day, the tide comes in and out. Twice a day the turbine turns. Twice a day electricity is generated which is supplied to the provincial electric grid.

Annapolis uses the largest straflo turbine in the world to produce more than 30 million kilowatt hours per year - enough to power 4,000 homes.

Annapolis is one of three tidal power plants in the world. The largest plant is located in France, in the estuary of La Rance near St. Malo. With a capacity of 240 megawatts, it generates on the incoming and outgoing tide. The output capacity of Annapolis Tidal is 20 megawatts. The smallest tidal plant is located at Kislaya Guba on the White Sea in Russia. It has a 0.5 megawatt capacity.

The future of tidal power generation.

The operating experience of the Annapolis Tidal Generating Station has proven that the straflo turbine technology is sound with few modifications.

The potential for electrical generation in the Bay of Fundy is enormous. Large tidal plants in the Minas Basin and the Cumberland Basin could generate more electricity than is currently produced in Nova Scotia. However, the environmental impact of the huge barrages could be far-reaching. Further studies, for example, would be required to determine the possible impact of these barrages on the tides along the eastern seabord.

Some day the tides of the Bay of Fundy may be seen as the preferred source of energy. For the moment, however, large scale tidal power is not yet economically and environmentally viable.

How does Tidal Power Generation work?

Single-effect turbines generate electricity only when the flow of water is towards the sea. This is how the huge four-blade propeller turbine or "runner" works, generating up to 20 megawatts at peak output. As the runner turns, the rotors' magnets sweep past the wire coils in the stator creating an electromagnetic current which is tapped and converted into useable electricity at a nearby substation.

The electricity is then transmitted down the line and distributed to homes and businesses.

http://www.nspower.ca/AboutUs/OurBus...idalPower.html

Solar is the key for now...in my opinion.

Solar Steam Turbine, Examining the Curnutt Solar Furnace

February 25, 2004
Introduction

Last month we set the agenda for this year's work -- solar steam to turbine-electric power. I'd like to remind everyone that the purpose of this club is to inspire innovation in key areas of growth in the 21st century. It is absolutely necessary for all of us to develop real alternatives to overpriced sources of energy so we can regain control over our lives. As long as unregulated utility companies are allowed to gouge the general public, we'll never be free.

As founders and directors of the Global Motive Power Revolution, my small staff can set the tone & direction of the revolution from centralized utilities; it is up to all of our members to experiment and share what they discover.

Overview of the Curnutt Solar Furnace

Curnutt solar furnaceThis month we are going to take a look at the first of two solar reflector designs -- the Curnutt solar furnace. Basically this design uses an array of (100) 12" x 12" flat glass mirrors all tilted to focus solar energy to a point approximately 12 feet from east to west, and azimuth adjusted to account for seasonal changes in the sun's (north-south) path.

Charles Curnutt first developed this system in the late 1970's in 29 Palms, California for the same reasons we initiated this club effort -- to break the stranglehold of the government-big biz energy cartell, through decentralizing energy production. Charles' solar furnace design was first published in Mother Earth News magazine in their July/August 1978 issue, with further developments printed in January/February 1979, and finally in their Autumn 1980 "Guide to Home Energy".

After seeing Charles Curnutt's solar furnace in operation and producing electric power from a homemade piston steam engine-alternator arrangement, Mother Earth News staffers designed and built their own unit. Their results were quite impressive.

From a 10 ft. x 10 ft. array of mirrors, they reached temperatures of 1600 degrees (F) at the focal point, and produced about 6,000 watts of power.

In one test session they reached 300 psi of steam pressure! Normally, operating pressures are in the neighborhood of 80 to 100 psi, depending on the water inlet pressure. Pressures as low as 60-70 psi are usable with a disk turbine -- however, the higher the pressure and fluid flow, the greater the power.
Mount Construction
solar furnace construction - hole in ground
hole in ground hole with girder
hole with girder girder with cement
girder with cement
post on girder
post mount
mount cross arm
cross arm

The first thing to keep in mind with a solar tracking system is that the reflector must rotate from east to west on a substantial mount with a clear, unobstructed view southward.

The ground portion of the mount we have used in the past for our dish systems consists of either a heavy duty I-beam or 6-inch steel tube cemented into the ground with a couple yards of concrete. It's important to make sure that the concrete mass is sufficient for counteracting wind loading. A typical wind load on an 8-10 foot reflector at 60 mph is around 3,000 pounds.

The I-beam or steel tube may extend some 5-6 feet above ground, or may be capped with a 0.5-inch plate just above ground -- ready for bolt-on extension. Make sure the steel section is perfectly level, before the cement begins to set up.

On top of the steel post is the mount which holds the reflector array and allows it to rotate east to west. The mount must be lined up with the North Star, so make sure it is built with rotational adjustment in mind.
Reflector Frame

Next is the reflector frame. This frame does two things:
bullet holds the mirrors and steam generator head
bullet rotates on the mount to track the sun
reflector frame on mount
reflector frame mirrors on frame
mirrors on frame

The reflector frame is essentially a 10 ft. x 10 ft. square steel frame with eight vertical or horizontal legs positioned just slightly over 12 inches apart. One hundred (100) mirror holders are welded to the ten vertical/horizontal legs. The mirror holders must allow movement in two planes so they can be aligned to focus on the steam generator head.


with steam head
with generator head

The steam generator head is a steel heat exchanger, about 18" x 18" -- similar to a car/truck heater core. Pipe supports for the steam head can either run up the center or from the corners, both to support the steam head and to feed water/steam to and from the head.


tracking actuator
with actuator

Finally, a tracking actuator is attached to both the rigid post/mount and the swinging frame.

That about wraps up the basics of this Curnutt solar furnace. As we mentioned earlier, we are simply setting the course and direction of the project -- inspiring ideas for club members to act on. As with all of our projects, there are countless details in fabricating these systems. So let's get to work and see what can be accomplished this year.

Next month we are going to study a parabolic reflector design fabricted in FRP (fiberglass reinforced plastic). We intend to cover:
bullet basics of mould or plug construction
bullet FRP lay-up
bullet practical mount design
bullet reflective surfaces

Until then, let's hear from our other club members who undoubtedly have experience and practical knowledge in solar-to-steam technology.

http://www.phoenixnavigation.com/ptb...les/ptbc36.htm

there is a better design....I will research it later.

...And in reality you get physics. Friction, and, um, other things will conspire to make sure that a perpetual motion machine is at least much more difficult than that. If not impossible.

But, if you were able to harvest a decent amount of energy from the MagWheel (TM), you could "reset" it every so often by good old human power. Or maybe I'm just delirious since I woke up 5 minutes ago.

The Brits have been on this I think, or at least generating power from ocean waves.

Well, this is an interesting site about Tital Power.

http://www.calpoly.edu/~cm/studpage/...co/clapper.htm

I forgot all about Bay of Funday (on the US-Canadian Border; NE Coast of US), which has tital surges of 48ft (14meters) would be a most favorable for just such an site. It would produce about 30,000 MW in total (1/2 for the US) again, in thoery

http://www.highest-tides.com/tides.htm

Yeh, perpetual motion ideas usually run towards magnets first for some reason. The problem is that the laws of thermodynamics prohibit them from achieving the constant movement, and you want it to do actual work - magnets are just not that magic.

Why not Maxwell's molecule sorting Demon? Or Telluric currents for that matter?

Forgetting for a second that reliance on technology will doom us all to a postapocalyptic dystopia, this seems like one of the more promising ways to produce cheap, environmentally friendly energy.

(wikipedia seems to be having a bad day - give it a minute)

Well, I'm not qualified to declare that you are completely wrong but let me defend fuzyfuser's idea a bit.

I'm not saying that there aren't problems with "seamills" (well, you come up with a better term!) but I don't think the slow ocean currents is one of them.
It doesn't matter if the windmills turn slowly because you can simply use a bunch of gears to turn slow motion into fast motion for generating electricity. The only problem is if the fans turn with enough force and they just might, considering how dense water is.

By the way, where are the Niagra turbines? Are they at the top of the falls or the bottom?

they should be at the bottom, since the idea is to use falling water. If they're at the top, the water wouldn't be falling very fast.

You would think so. But the falls move to quickly (something like 7 inches a year. which in geological terms. is pretty damn fast) and the bottom on the falls is far to rocky. (At least on the American side and the Canadian side makes to much money as a tourist site to spoil it with a building)

The current on top of the falls is actually pretty quick. Plus they channel the water into a narrow area. Giving it even more speed. It's a pretty nice set up.

They aren't on the falls themselves... the water is diverted upstream and run through channels to where it can fall through tubes that have been bored into the cliffs...

Erosion makes putting the turbines on the falls expensive because you'd have to rebuild from damage of falling rocks... plus when you cannel it into narrow tubes it increases the velocity..

Okay, this makes the most sense. If I were to generate power from the falls then this is, in fact, what I would do.

Except that there is still plenty of water left. I would generate even more electricity by diverting all of the water through my turbines but people might complain that there are no more waterfalls...

Oh, and the idea that channelling water through narrow tubes increases its speed, in and of itself, is not true. It can be true but not in the way (I think) people are thinking. Unfortunately, I don't really have time to get into it now but, basically, the water has to already be able to travel a certain speed through the tube. Otherwise, the water will simply flood the surrounding area and it often does! Don't worry, I'll be back to clarify this point...

Considering that we now are capable of building nuclear reactors that are meltdown-proof, and can produce their own fuel (so there is significantly less dangerous waste), I think we've had the answer to our energy problems for a few years now.

Don't get me wrong, I am an outdoor nut, I love the environment. But the fundie environmentalists have pretty much doomed us to several more decades of fossil fuel addiction (and in the long run, causing more damage to the environment) by so vehemently opposing everything having to do with nuclear power production/research.

Oh well, in a couple of years when we reach peak oil and desperate for a quick answer, start mining the moon for Helium 3, I can become a space prospector. Sweet.

We have reactors that are meltdown proof? I find that hard to believe when you consider the amount of heat a reactor can give off. Can you provide an example or an explanation as to what makes them meltdown proof? I would be interested in knowing.

If we ever get the Helium 3 it would be sweet. Hmmm, a moon miner. Could this turn out to be this century’s gold rush?

The most commonly refered to type of unmeltdownable reactor is the pebble bed reactor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
Please remember, proponents of nuclear power are not claiming that nuclear power is 100% safe. They are claiming that nuclear power is the only climate independant source of consistently large power output that better than coal.

WOW, that's interesting. And it would make the need for Helium 3 even greater. Thanks fckm.

did you know that static electricity is actually a good resource for free energy.
although it is not as feasible here on earth, it is a very good resource in orbit...and the best part is that all you need is a long tether to gather the electricity.

now down here on earth, photo-voltaic cells are still a very good resource for solar energy (they even have a newer type that are flexible) although in our temperate climate (n.america) we need to use both solar(summer) and wind(winter) to stay off the power grid. it also helps to conserve as much energy too...using dense materials to trap the heat of the sun during the day and then slowly emit the heat at night. also, the typical american house has a combined air-leak the size of a basketball...so make sure all your doors close tight, make sure to caulk that crack by the window, and insulate everything.
i read this book a couple years ago..it's about a community in columbia that is near self-sufficient...and is actually thriving in a near un-inhabitable region...and i love their air-conditioning system
Gaviotas by Alan Weisman

Personally, I would prefer to see Earth embrace diversity in power generation. In my opinion, one of the biggest problems with our current hydrocarbon-based power generation / storage mechanisms isn't *just* that it looks as though we are / will be facing instabilities in supply and waste management, but that it's also instable in terms of allowing the whole structure to topple if any part of it fails.

Regarding the idea for using ocean currents, I will first say that I think it's an interesting idea. The main problems I see would be invariability of ocean current direction, maintainence and service (think corrosion, erosion, underwater service with highly experienced divers, keeping it free from plankton and marine animal carcuses (save the manatee!) etc), and how far you'd have to put it out from shore and at what depth, in order to not disturb beaches, estuaries, and rich people's vacation homes. All of these considerations can be designed around, should analysis yield favorable results in terms of power generation...it's the classic question of is it worth the investment? I guess we'll find out one day. Sounds like people are already more or less on the ball with the concept.

Hyrdo-electric and tidal power are really good sources of energy. Both produce massive amounts of it without any real noticable harm to the environment.
Just to give an example:
The Niagra Falls Hyrdoelectric Power provides power Toronto and most of eastern Canada that borders the US. It also provides power to Upstate New York and a lot of New England. The problem with hyrdo-electric power is that it can only be used in certain places (dams and waterfalls) Tidal power is obviously limited to coastal regions.

There is another interesting idea for power generation that I learned about in Physics class last semester. It uses electro-magnetic induction.
The basic idea is that the earth is sorrounded by a giant magnetic field. Magnetic fields are capable of inducing an electric charge by means of a change in magnetic flux. Magnetic flux is any component of the magnetic field normal to a surface in it.
The power is generated by a sattelite with large conducting surfaces (like large wings). It would be orbiting through the earths magnetic field and therefore would be changing the magnetic flux on its conducting surfaces and produce electricity.

Unfortunely the amount of electricity produced this way wouldn't be that much unless the satellite was really big (not sure how big we didn't discuss that). Plus harnessing the power would be difficult (imagine a giant power cable connecting to earth).

I thought it was a cool idea even though its rather unpratical. An electric generator works by the same principle of a clyinder rotating around a strong magnet.

supersix2,

Re : satelites. I heard something the other day, similar to this but involving photo-voltaic cells on satelites. The idea with these was to beam the energy back to Earth as microwaves...an idea I'm not particulary comfortable with, but the claim was that the radiation would be so diffuse that it wouldn't be noticable. I'm just thinking "Hey Melonoma. Sure is nice to see you again..." but then again, who knows?

Sustainable energy - nothing like it ;)

^ if the radiation is so diffuse as to be unnoticable, how do we get power out of it? You'd have to put collectors out over a huge area, and in the end, how is this different from getting solar power directly on the earth?

fckm:

I'm not trying to weasel out, but honestly you're asking the wrong guy. I work at a place where there is a lot of work on renewable, sustainable energy and I just overheard two other guys talking about the idea. I don't think either of them was a big proponet of it either, but more of a water cooler / coffee machine chat. One of them was bald, and I reminded him he might want to buy a hat. I had a similar reaction to yours, on the inside where I'm soft like a woman, thinking about how you would design something like that and make it safe, feasible, etc. If you're interested I'll let you know if I find anything out - I might ask the guy about it tomorrow. He's a pretty sharp guy, in general.

If I tried to give an answer that made any sense on this right now, it would sound like Red Man telling Dave Chappelle about how his toilet bowl cleaner works " It's got enzymes that collaborate and shit...."

Ah, ok. I was just wondering if there was a link associated with it.

I saw something on the discovery channel a while back about an unlimited power supply. People build these machines and they're supposed to supply power forever by some metal balls spinning in circles and the machine tilts back and forth generating power. I forget the name of the theory but it's never been developed. Some say the reason why is that it'll throw the world for a loop if we don't have to use oil anymore and the governments of the world supress it.

I still can't remember the theory though.....

If you want to power the world, put my mother-in-law on a tread mill hooked to a generator with a piece of cake in front of her. :thumbsup: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Uh... What you just described is using energy to create more energy than you put in. Similar to perpetual motion, it's impossible.

Sounds like a pretty good idea... i have always wondered if they could isolate and collect enough ATP from bacteria and other microorganisms and use that for power. Its pretty powerful and at least could heat the water to spin the turbines. And it would take very little enegry to make since bacteria and other small organisms don't require much nutrients and it would make any waste cause the cells would die pretty much recycle all waste.

No it's not...I was speaking to this unicorn last night and he told it was *soooo* possible.

So a basic reactor contains fuel, moderator, coolant, and control.

In the first reactors, all four were seperate. The moderator was graphite and the coolant was water. If you lost your coolant, the reaction continued, the graphite slagged, possibly caught fire, and you generally had a bad day (incidentally, molten burning graphite is still an effective moderator, so the reactor continues to operate, though wildly out of it's design parameters)

Then someone noted that water can function as a moderator. So, if you lose your coolant, the reactor automagically shuts down. They also figured out that if you adjust the fuel to moderator ratio (often refered to as metal to water ratio), you can change the way the core responds to changes in temperature. So rather than having the core become more reactive as temperature increases (leading to runaway supercriticality requiring operator intervention), you could have a negative temperature coefficient of reactivity... the hotter the core gets, the less reactive it becomes. So, for any given reactor design, you could work out some theoretical power level where it would be self-regulating without coolant. For the most part, the temperatures involve are far beyond the failure points for the core materials... ergo, melt down.

Newer designs and newer materials have brought the stable thermal output within the limits.
They're not really "meltdown proof"... It's just that lack of supervision of these plants will result in them shutting down after a while. You could still get them to meltdown, but you would have to take concious active steps to produce the proper conditions. Simple operator error wouldn't cut it.

Best thread ever! TFP needs its own Science section though. OK where to start... And I apologize if you are offended by some of my jokes about science. I just have a twisted sense of humor when it comes to things that are potentially dangerous.

-Fuzyfuzer: It's a nice idea but would cost some to keep running. There would have to be fields of these underwater props to gather the current's energy. It's good though because water is a viscous fluid, the props would be constantly spinning. Unlike Hard8s, I say just use a sonic system to repel the fish away, like those plug-in buggers that supposedly keep the bugs and rodents out of my house :steps on bug:. But like it was mentioned you'd need to keep it clean. There would have to be some sort of station with a crew that cleaned certain props daily. If nothing else this is an alternative to powering sea labs (when we would get them in mass numbers) without the aid of batteries. Even better is water:
2H/2/0(l) + electricity --> 2H/2/(g) + O/2/(g)
If the water is clean enough, electrolysis will produce hydrogen and oxygen gas from that water.

-Tecoyah: Nice. :thumbsup: I thought I was the only one that knew of that system. I say that the Ikarus from Die Another Day would be infinitely more interesting to use... :evil chuckle:.

-Hunter, Fckm, and Xandren: Fusing all the ideas into one. The "Space Elevator." Heard of it? If not I will explain (I do so because I have dial up internet... and lack the patience to wait 8 minutes to receive an error message). The idea is to run a giant tether into space that is anchored there by a large mass suspended from their rotational forces it spinning above the Earth faster than orbital speeds. If you build one of these tethers on Earth, and one on the Moon, you can have a completely automated recovery system that mines and ships. This tether is made from super strong nanotube technology--is 100x stronger than steel and is 1 inch wide by 1/10 of a human hair thick! But to prevent decay from O/2/ in our atmosphere, it would have to be coated with Platinum, so now its really expensive! But Xandren, there is your cable into space to harness static electricity, if you want to still.

-Supersix2: "The power is generated by a sattelite with large conducting surfaces (like large wings). It would be orbiting through the earths magnetic field and therefore would be changing the magnetic flux on its conducting surfaces and produce electricity." Also, back EMF would try to force your wings to slow down and that is a problem when satellites fall from orbit. :lol: I asked the same thing and I got the same response from my physics professor.

-Piglet: You have a novel idea with the microwave array. And there would not need to be a large array to collect the energy, a single LARGE ground satellite dish could capture all the energy in one short, POWERFUL burst. And if something were to go wrong, like a misfire or alignment error... anyone around won’t know it. You will have nuked that area. So I say put that collection dish somewhere in... Idaho. When that mishap occurs you have made the world an endless supply of baked potatoes. ...Not funny... And since you mentioned enzymes:
(This goes out to HeccubusIV too)
Microbes In Colorful Yellowstone Hot Springs Fueled By Hydrogen
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-05g.html
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/energy-tech-05f.html
;-) Nice touch with the Unicorn joke, Piglet.

My own idea that would screw with the environmentalists: Build a tether here, and one on Titan, where it looks like there are liquid oceans of hydrocarbons. You never need to worry about the environment again... It'll just go from bad to worse, then start over. KIDDING!

okay how about this for far out yet concievable.....

You have a large permanent magnet on the ground. Ontop of this you put an electro-magnet with one end of the coil attached to a lightning rod and the other attached to ground. When the lightening strikes the rod, the elctro-magnet energizes causing repulsion between the two magnets forcing the top magnet to be lifted. The top magnet is also attached to a ratcheting type thing-ama-bob (the design is not finalized yet) that will not let the magnet fall. Now you have converted the lightening's energy into potential energy, and the ratcheting thing-ama-bob slowly lets the top magnet fall, but as it does, it spins generators. :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
MR. SPOCK RULES!!!!!


kevin

Why not just store the lightning into a large capacitor? Or better yet, SOMEONE MAKE A FLUX CAPACITOR! STORE MAGNETIC FLUX IN A BOTTLE!!!

Yeah, we all wish.

GREAT IDEA!!!
 

FUZYfuser... Please don't ever stop trying... you have a great Idea. There are those above who will tell you why it won't work... take each criticism... one at a time (if it's valid) and find a solution. Then you will have made a world of difference if you concept can still work.

Fuzyfuser. I once worked as an engineering tech for a company that has Kaplan, bulb, wind and other generators (hundreds of them) ... there is no reason why your idea will not work.

Imagine millions of micro bulb turbines chained together and to the ocean floor (at one end). They would be drifting too and fro in the ocean current.

Except for the fact that a ship might hit them the idea is almost flawless, maintenance would be simple because they could be serviced one at a time.

All we would have to do is make them float about 50 feet down... Hmmmmmm

I heard of an idea a few years back that I liked; unfortunately I don't have a link anymore and am too lazy to put a big search into it. I will just summarize what I remember.

The beauty of the idea is that the fuel source is "practically anything containing carbon compounds". This covers pretty much all bio-waste from slaughterhouses and farms. You take this fuel and mix it with a lot of water, then subject it to "moderate" amounts of heat and pressure. You cook it like this for a few hours, and then boil it off to separate out what you made.

Ignoring the small amounts of other stuff, you end up with almost all of the input material (depending on carbon concentration, the more carbon the better) turning into a light fuel oil. This can go toward generating power, and the plant can skim a little off to run the next batch through the process.


It seems to me that the best power source is the sun, and the best gathering method is photosynthesis. The most efficient power generation methods should focus on harvesting that stored energy, perhaps by using modified bacteria (which have had billions of years to become efficient). Ideally we can just put some wide covered trays out in the desert and have a slow flow of water from one end to the other. Just seed the start with your algae and collect the mats at the end, then direct them into the vat with the appropriate bugs to make what you want.

Of course, soon after I mention something without a source it will jump into my lap. Take a look at this:
http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/2003...-Oil1may03.htm

85% efficiency using what was previously waste sounds really good.

That is quite impressive. I wonder why I haven't heard of this before, should be all over the science news. The only thing I don't understand is how in the world is this going to slow down global warming. Their argument that, since they are dot digging up any new compounds and burning them, there will not be more carbon released into the atmosphere is bogus. All the waste does not usually get converted into carbon dioxide and thus does not "pollute" the atmosphere. However, since we are now converting it to oil and burning it, it would only increase global warming (well, not really increase, since we are replacing fossil fuels, but it definitelly will not decrease it).

There was an article about this in either Pop Sci or Discover. Only they were using work bodies to make oil and wanted to use the process on humans. Would be a nice way to go knowing that you are fueling someone's car doing good even after you are dead.

However i still believe in finding the non-polluting way. I say go through Nikola Tesla's old notes and try to find something there. He was draining energy from the ionosphere during solar flares. Why can't we?