Dr Kallend and Bill Von

[Squeak 17]

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qGGabrorRS8?rel=0


What's the story behind this?
Is it as simple as it seems?


If so why are we not doing this on a more local scale?

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[quade 3]

True? Yes.

However (there's always a "however" isn't there?), it takes energy to turn the plastic back into oil. It's a good way to reduce waste, but not a complete solution to all the world's problems with either oil or plastic, but . . . it's something.

Also, it doesn't turn all plastics back into oil. PET, seems pretty good. Others? Maybe not quite as well. Again, it's not a total solution, but it's something.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Squeak 17]

Thank you for your non helpful rhetoric.
I titled it specifically to John and Bill for a (hopefully) more factual, informative response. One grounded in a little more science, not just Google extracted.
.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[quade 3]

Exactly what more did you want to know? Did you want the "secret recipe" for doing this yourself?

You asked if it works. It doesn't actually take a Phd. to say yes. High-school chemistry is about all that's really required to grasp the obvious answer of yes.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[oldwomanc6 38]

Squeak

Thank you for your non helpful rhetoric.
I titled it specifically to John and Bill for a (hopefully) more factual, informative response. One grounded in a little more science, not just Google extracted.
.

I got this in an email, today.

p.s. I even thought about posting it, but wasn't sure which forum in which to do so, because it came with a highly politically charged agenda.

lisa
WSCR 594
FB 1023
CBDB 9

[quade 3]

oldwomanc6

. . . because it came with a highly politically charged agenda.

And what would that be? If anyone is selling it as the solution to the world's problems or trying to get you to invest; run. It would be a scam.

That said and as I said above, it does work, just not as well as some people might be lead to believe by that video. It takes energy to run and that has to come from somewhere.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Arvoitus 1]

Squeak

What's the story behind this?

Pyrolysis

Squeak

Is it as simple as it seems?

Yes

Squeak

If so why are we not doing this on a more local scale?

Just because it says 'oil' on it doesn't mean you can drive your SUV with it.

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

[shropshire 0]

Arvoitus

Just because it says 'oil' on it doesn't mean you can drive your SUV with it.

Don't stop there..... WHY?

Because I KNOW that my diesel engine will run on all kinds of crap oil.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[HighJB 0]

shropshire

***
Just because it says 'oil' on it doesn't mean you can drive your SUV with it.

Don't stop there..... WHY?

Because I KNOW that my diesel engine will run on all kinds of crap oil.
Because you need a certain level of quality of your fuel in order not to damage your injection system. There are many countries in the world were modern cars cannot be sold as is due to the low quality of the fuel you can find in the gas stations.

edit>spelling

ça passe ou ça frotte

[shropshire 0]

Cool and thanks - see this is the sort of information that is useful.

'Maybe' we're being led by the nose again by the big manufactures who need us to keep buying their new techno engines (read Over-engineered). Diesel engines have been running on low quality fuel since they were invented ... (Rendered Fat, old cooking oil etc) ... Oil companies HATE this fact (as do Government Tax collectors!!)

You should see the 'sludge' that they run ships on when they have warmed it up!!


So, don't use 'modern' hyper advanced Diesel engines - use a Landrover :-).

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[shropshire 0]

Squeak

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qGGabrorRS8?rel=0


What's the story behind this?
Is it as simple as it seems?


If so why are we not doing this on a more local scale?

http://technorati.com/technology/gadgets/article/is-plastic-to-oil-for-real/page-2/

been hunting around the interweb for more information ....

Quote

Just like the free energy idea, it seems too good to be true, but unlike the other video, it holds up to scrutiny and doesn't violate any physical laws. In fact, Blest isn't the only company with a machine that is able to turn plastic waste to oil.

The Envion Oil Generator does exactly the same thing, but it may not be as efficient. It turns plastic into oil for less than $10 a barrel, so the days of throwing plastic into the trash or burning it might be quickly running out. These are the encouraging breakthroughs that the environment needs and in fact they are so groundbreaking that it creates some hard work to determine the scams from the real progress.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[HighJB 0]

shropshire

'Maybe' we're being led by the nose again by the big manufactures who need us to keep buying their new techno engines (read Over-engineered).

Quick answer : NO
This, for 2 main reasons : regulations and market expectations.

Regulations : every 4/5 years in Europe a new regulations should be respected to decrease the impact on the environment (€5 was mainly to decrease small particles / €6 is focusing on the decrease of NOx). In the meantime you have the CAFE regulations which request C02 emission decrease in addition to all the incentives (or taxes) on low C02 emission vehicle. You need high performance systems to meets thoses requirments and they usely don't like poor quality fuel.

Market : customer wants to have efficient and high performance engines. Nobody wants (or very few people) to have a car with the performances that you had 20 years ago with old diesel engines, and people want to have fuel efficient vehicle due to the price of the fuel nowadays.

All thoses new engines represents an huge amount of money for car makers that they would prefer to invest on the launch of new vehicle models. Between €4 and €5 engines, there is a increase of the cost par car, but the customer does not want to pay because it meets a more severe regulation on emission.

PS : I have limited knowledge on US market and regulation

ça passe ou ça frotte

[shropshire 0]

Love ya post - thanks.

Not saying that you're wrong but looking for Another Way....

What if you could drive a diesel car at a max of 110k.p.h for €0.50/l but filter out the particulates and CO2 at the exhaust. would you go for such a vehicle or do you still need your 200k.p.h multi-computer, expensive to buy, expensive to run modern car?

Total cost of ownership would be less .. might even have more Cool points

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[HighJB 0]

Add 20 kph and I sign, my preferred DZ is far enough, thoses 20 kph are making a difference

There is a market for "basic cars"; just look at the sucess of Dacia brand since it 's owned by Renault. It is clearly a market trend. But all thoses cars are powered with modern engines to meet the same regulations.
Particles are mostly treated in the exhaust line, but as far as I know there no post treatment technology for C02. Every car/engines is the result of multiple engineering compromises between cleaning up at the source and post treating the emissions (plus performance, reliability, driveability ...).
The max speed is not a target by itself for main stream market , it's just a resulting performance of other customer performances (availability of the engine, payload ...).

Edit to add > what you'll see in the market in Europe in a close future is a decrease of the market share of Diesel cars in favor of gasoline cars, especially due to TCO considerations

ça passe ou ça frotte

[kallend 1,621]

shropshire

***
Just because it says 'oil' on it doesn't mean you can drive your SUV with it.

Don't stop there..... WHY?

Because I KNOW that my diesel engine will run on all kinds of crap oil.

Rolls Royce once claimed to have an engine that would run on peanut butter.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,621]

Squeak

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qGGabrorRS8?rel=0


What's the story behind this?
Is it as simple as it seems?


If so why are we not doing this on a more local scale?

Not my field of engineering, but I have no doubt that it works.

Looks like the machine needs a new flux capacitor though.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[HighJB 0]

kallend

Rolls Royce once claimed to have an engine that would run on peanut butter.

This is the case with Stirling engines. Anything that produces heat can be used, meaning anything that burns can be used.
I guess this was not the case anyway

Edit >spelling

ça passe ou ça frotte

[shropshire 0]

HighJB

***
Rolls Royce once claimed to have an engine that would run on peanut butter.

This the case with Striling engines. Anything that produces heat can be used, meaning anything that burns can be used.
I guess this was not the case anyway

I seem to remember one that ran on Coal Dust .. not sure what the fuel cycle would have looked like tho..... [googling......]




WOW ... seems GM had a Turbine prototype care running on coal dust too http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/10/gms-own-turbine-car-program/

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 2,384]

>What's the story behind this?

It's thermal breakdown of plastics; in general the process is called thermal depolymerization. Plastics are polymers, which are long chain hydrocarbons. Break them into shorter chain hydrocarbons and they become lighter solids/fluids/gases. In general heating them in a vacuum or in an inert gas atmosphere will do this. You can't heat them in air because they will burn far before they will decompose.

>If so why are we not doing this on a more local scale?

If you mean "why isn't this a great solution to energy problems and trash?" there are a few reasons:

1) There's just not that much plastic waste. Less than .5% of the oil we pump goes into plastics; over 50% goes into gasoline. So even if we converted all plastics to fuels we'd make a tiny dent in overall amount of oil we need.

2) You can't use a lot of plastics. In general cheaper/simpler plastics (bags, bottles, styrofoam) work OK but "better" plastics (i.e. car fenders, housings, synthetic rubbers, nylon) don't. So you don't solve all the plastic-waste problems.

3) The energy in is close to the energy in the oil you get out. Thus it's not a great source of energy.

4) You still have to dispose of the solid waste that's left, and it's more toxic afterwards since the decomposition process liberates things like sulfur, which then recombines after exposure to oxygen/water into things like sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide.

All that being said it's still a pretty good way to get rid of some plastic waste and produce some usable product.

Also of note is that that process - thermal depolymerization - is now being refined to handle more and more kinds of materials. One such process can handle animal offal (i.e. slaughterhouse waste) and produce oil and solid waste. With enough energy input you can reduce most of the solid waste to elemental carbon which is easy to dispose of. At least one company now has a process which has an EROEI of around 7 (i.e. 7 units of fuel produced for every 1 unit that is needed) and can handle a wide variety of wastes.

[Squeak 17]

Thanks Bill, your post combined with a few posts on FB cleared it up nicely for me.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[oldwomanc6 38]

Thanks!

lisa
WSCR 594
FB 1023
CBDB 9