For all the doom and gloom sayers (oil/power related)

[Glaucus]

Thermite engine ? could get messy

, this is the fuel I think should take over. There's already a working prototype.
Nearly 100% recyclable. And requires only miner adjustment to cars. So doesn't need new manufacturing plants etc. Obviously the Infrastructure to deliver, collect and process is lacking though.

 

[Defcon5]

Is there anything that can resist Thermite?

Something with a melting piont above the temp of the reaction.

 

[Glaucus]

I think i've covered the most likely ones. If anyone knows of any others. Let me know And I can add stuff.

Now as other people have said. At the moment it is mear economic reason why these aren't being mass produced. We shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket, which Is why I said we don't need 7000 wind turbines of the shore. If we used a variety of these, including nuclear it should easily provide most of our national grid requirement. And provide cheap energy we produce and control ourselfs.
The good thing iwth the nano metal engines. Is it can use a variety of metals, metals are plentifully. The system can also recycle nearly 100% of the fuel. So wants it's mined and refined. You only have to provide more when supply increases.

 

[Glaucus]

Is there anything that can resist Thermite?

Yes, and it's not like a thermite reaction.

 

[malfunkshun]

I think i've covered the most likely ones. If anyone knows of any others. Let me know And I can add stuff.

Now as other people have said. At the moment it is mear economic reason why these aren't being mass produced. We shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket, which Is why I said we don't need 7000 wind turbines of the shore. If we used a variety of these, including nuclear it should easily provide most of our national grid requirement. And provide cheap energy we produce and control ourselfs.
The good thing iwth the nano metal engines. Is it can use a variety of metals, metals are plentifully. The system can also recycle nearly 100% of the fuel. So wants it's mined and refined. You only have to provide more when supply increases.

I think it is as important to reduce our energy consumption as it is to find new sources of energy. Beyond the obvious power saving lighting and appliances, things like solar water heaters/pre-warmers can have a great effect as can ground source heat pumps/pre-warmers where viable. There are many possibilities.

Edit; Iirc a ground or air source heat pump can be set up to warm your whole house, but good ones can also cool it in summer.

 

[SiriusB]

I am really interested in Metal Fuel. Never heard about it before. If it is as good as the article claims then imagine the savings in emissions, even if just a fraction of cars took it up.

Just been watching the news and there was a story on the decline of rainforests. The reporter said something along the lines of deforestation is responsible for a greater increase in carbon dioxide than all forms of transport combined. If we could remove emissions from transport we could restore some of the balance. Although it should not be an excuse to carry on cutting down the rainforest [if anything we need to do more replanting].

 

[Glaucus]

I think it is as important to reduce our energy consumption as it is to find new sources of energy. Beyond the obvious power saving lighting and appliances, things like solar water heaters/pre-warmers can have a great effect as can ground source heat pumps/pre-warmers where viable. There are many possibilities.

Yep I love Ground heat pumps, there amazing. Also think researched should be piled into saving energy. Uping things like minimum insulation. Increasing tax on conventional light bulbs while decrease tax on energy saving and led lights. Same principle could be applied to white goods. the better the energy effecency the less tax it is subject to.
Also things like the X10 network, could save loads of energy, whilst keeping things simple. But it hasn;'t been invested much in the UK. so the sockets are big, clumsy and expensive.

Just been watching the news and there was a story on the decline of rainforests. The reporter said something along the lines of deforestation is responsible for a greater increase in carbon dioxide than all forms of transport combined.

Which is one reason why I don't agree with bio fuels atm. Most are produced by cutting down rainforests.

 

[malfunkshun]

I am really interested in Metal Fuel. Never heard about it before. If it is as good as the article claims then imagine the savings in emissions, even if just a fraction of cars took it up.

Just been watching the news and there was a story on the decline of rainforests. The reporter said something along the lines of deforestation is responsible for a greater increase in carbon dioxide than all forms of transport combined. If we could remove emissions from transport we could restore some of the balance. Although it should not be an excuse to carry on cutting down the rainforest [if anything we need to do more replanting].

I would be interested in the total carbon footprint of such a system. I mean refining metals isnt going to be a low power operation surely, and neither would dealing with filter waste?

 

[Glaucus]

I would be interested in the total carbon footprint of such a system. I mean refining metals isnt going to be a low power operation surely, and neither would dealing with filter waste?

The carbon footprint, all depend on what you use to mine, refine and reprocess it. If you use renewable energy to refine it, the co2 footprint will be very low. Due to the fact you can re-use and re-use it.

Although I'm not really interested in co2 emissions. I'm more interested in energy security and other pollutants such as smog and particulates.

 

[SiriusB]

Was having a conversation with my Dad last week about how LEDs have made it everywhere. We wondered how much energy has been saved on Christmas decorations, now that the vast majority are now LED [especially outdoor decorations].

We could save lots of energy on street lighting if we used LEDs. They would have to be fairly powerful, given how high the average street light is, but that shouldn't be difficult given just how bright they are getting. You could definitely use LEDs for lighting on road signs and other short-distance lighting.

The only reason we aren't using LEDs at home is because they tend to be a little unreliable, or rather the transformer required to lower the voltage coming from the mains. If/when they sort that out we'd jump on the chance.

 

[Glaucus]

The only reason we aren't using LEDs at home is because they tend to be a little unreliable, or rather the transformer required to lower the voltage coming from the mains. If/when they sort that out we'd jump on the chance.

You can, buy them which fit directly into normal light sockets. However they are expensive and ugly. They look like a torture device. But the potential is being realised slowly.

 

[malfunkshun]

The carbon footprint, all depend on what you use to mine, refine and reprocess it. If you use renewable energy to refine it, the co2 footprint will be very low. Due to the fact you can re-use and re-use it.

Although I'm not really interested in co2 emissions. I'm more interested in energy security and other pollutants such as smog and particulates.

Now I'm no chemist but surely the reusable part would be metal oxide, which would require de-oxidisation (eh?) so that it can be reused? probably creating more pollutants?
I think that I shall be looking into this a lot futher

 

[SiriusB]

I would be interested in the total carbon footprint of such a system. I mean refining metals isnt going to be a low power operation surely, and neither would dealing with filter waste?

Many of the big mining machines are Electric, and if we are using renewable energy sources this isn't a problem.

Mining equipment that uses petrol/diesel can be replaced with Metal fuel. So again, no problem.

Besides, we already mine huge, huge amounts of metal anyway, so I can't see there being any huge increases in mining operations, especially given the fact the fuel is highly reusable.

I know all this is speculative, but one has to remain optimistic

Now I'm no chemist but surely the reusable part would be metal oxide, which would require de-oxidisation (eh?) so that it can be reused? probably creating more pollutants?

The article on the Metal fuel says it is treated with a small amount of hydrogen to make it reusable. It also states the emissions from the combustion are almost non-existent. It certainly couldn't be any worse than the processes involved in creating petrol and diesel and burning it.

 

[Glaucus]

Now I'm no chemist but surely the reusable part would be metal oxide, which would require de-oxidisation (eh?) so that it can be reused? probably creating more pollutants?
I think that I shall be looking into this a lot futher

Yes it would. But the power needed can come form renewable sources. The chemicals and process I am unsure of and probably depends on what metal you use.

 

[malfunkshun]

<snip>
Besides, we already mine huge, huge amounts of metal anyway, so I can't see there being any huge increases in mining operations, especially given the fact the fuel is highly reusable.

I know all this is speculative, but one has to remain optimistic

Indeed, but, metal consumption just for contruction and industry has seen demand soar and prices rocket. So adding more of a burden to this would drive the price of metals even higher.

 

[SiriusB]

I doubt it would be that massive. Think about it, most metal goes into construction. Which means once used it stays there for the life of the building [which can be a long, long time]. Metal fuel cells/cartridges/whatever are reusable. If you can reuse the metal you are digging up, you need less of it.

I am not saying there will be no increase, but I suspect it wouldn't take much to handle it.

 

[Glaucus]

Indeed, but, metal consumption just for contruction and industry has seen demand soar and prices rocket. So adding more of a burden to this would drive the price of metals even higher.

But unlike other sources once it's mined and refined. There's little need to keep supplying huge amounts, thus the price hike would be short-term. It also Depends on what metal you use. Iron for instance has a very low price at the moment. You could even use a three tier system. Cheap, medium and expensive fuel. Depending what metal you use.

 

[SiriusB]

And how much you spent on that Porche

 

[malfunkshun]

While I really do want to see less dependence on fossil fuels, for monetary, diplomatic and enviromental reason, I think that if this system took off then the amount of metal that would need to be in circulation at any given time (in supply chains, warehouses etc to feed the supply chain, in millions of engines and so on) would be astronomical. Also the fact that metals used in contruction remains there for a long time takes that metal out of the loop.

 

[aardvark]

Now I'm no chemist but surely the reusable part would be metal oxide, which would require de-oxidisation (eh?) so that it can be reused? probably creating more pollutants?
I think that I shall be looking into this a lot futher

i am a chemist and i can tell you that this idea simply won't work on an economic basis - its interesting and may work on a prototype scale but i would bet money that it won't get past the development stage.
Hydrogen fuel cells are more viable.
Biofuels are also out of the question simply because the lack of farmland - we already have grain prices going through the roof because of the small amount of biofuel production that is being tested.
Solar panels are not very efficient and i'm not sure they will be for a long time yet - i like that quote - lol - covering 0.5% of the worlds deserts indeed! that would cost trillions of pounds!

Some of the other ideas are good. Wind power and tidal power are good, although a bit expensive and will require significant government subsidy.
Fast breeder reactor have been known to be a good idea for decades but there is the stigma of nuclear power - but nuclear power is still the best option in my opinion.