plasma gasification

[Faralite]

Carbon neutrality is way over-emphasized. It's nowhere near threatening what they are reporting in the media. The small changes in climate are not really that detrimental to civilization, people will adapt and find new ways to live, like they always did.

HOWEVER...plasma gasification would reduce waste which in turn pollutes our natural resources decreasing productivity. This is what really matters, keeping our environment clear of toxic pollutants and reusing materials whenever possible.

[OaklandLYM]

Using fuel prices (which are dominated by speculation not production) is not a good reason. Nuclear fusion is the obvious route to efficient plasma torch use.

[BrunoBagina]

@OaklandLYM i absulty agree that when we achieve nuclear fusion, the the fusion torch will be the way to go untill we get there im happy if we could get a plasma torch powered by a once thought full burn fission reactor

[PukkPukk]

What happens to the collected Sulfur dioxides?

[BrunoBagina]

@PukkPukk there arent any sulfur dioxide first because there is no oxigen and second because its to hot you dont have any mollecules only ionized elements

[whereismymind87]

Wait.....why can't we just get NASA to shoot it at the sun instead? It's already burning that temperature.

[PukkPukk]

What happens when the rocket goes astray and rains garbage down on our cities. This would cause a stink. No pun intended.

[MrDatsunInsult]

@PukkPukk

Are you trolling? NASA used plasma to recreate temp to test rockets, the process doesn't use rockets.

[rollingcube]

is this less than carbon neutral?

[BrunoBagina]

@rollingcube it depends on energy source you use to power the plasma reactor also if you use the energy from wind solar or nucleae!?... but you are reducing the footprint and NO2 and CH4 its not all about the carbon....

this system uses massive amounts of energy but reduces all other inputs and can have the potencial no close the industrial cycle....

can you imagine a world whit no waste

[rollingcube]

basically i guess, turning complex chemicals to gaseous structures in order to separate them into controllable manifestations towards betterment.

[HeavyMetal1981Fan]

I heard they use this in South Korea to dispose of chemical weapons.

[jle727]

It would be nice if they made a sdcaled down version for single households. I know it would be a huge initial investment for a regular person to even afford a smaller version of this, but it would be amazing to just dump your trash in this once a week and use that power instead of buying electricity.

[NOBOX7]

im doing some testing to see if a bench model is cost effective i was on the steam reforming trail untill this vid it looks easyer

[sirHOAX]

Nice find.

[NOBOX7]

it would be possible for a group in a community to coa own a small gassification plant or perhaps small

home devices could be built but your looking at 20 grand here for a usable device and thats on the diy level but at least it isa way to obtain energy independence,the co2 can be stored and

electricly converted into co fore power station use ,we could work on a new carbon cycle power plants can convert

electricly co2 into co but im not shure if it can work on a thermal dynamic level

[NOBOX7]

using trash instead of coal keeps land fill

and ocean wast down this alone makes it co2 issue meaningless if we can use trash why the hell are we destroying the planet with trash?and co2 we could reduce caol consumption and oil consumption and reduce trash,and by the way when are scientist going to tell the world all these fucking oil wells are causing all the earthquakes,you cant just suck the fkn ground out from under ya and nothing happen????????????????????????­??????????????????????????????

[whereismymind87]

wow. where are you going to get the electricity to heat the effing chamber up to the temperature of the sun? genius.

[jle727]

if a power line isn't enough, I'm sure a capacitor could do it. The technology is here, obviously, but its just in large scale.

[inventsc]

very interesting video and well put togetehr.

what is the typical energy balance to transfer algae feedstock directly to biodiesel. does it require more energy than transesterification? thank you

[BrunoBagina]

well if you compare it this way, oil crops are always better in transesterification, plasma and gasification is better for other organic

[jesslessthemess]

Bruno's right, but if you take into account the cogeneration of dried algae pellet fuel (a possible byproduct), you might get a better result

[vilimaaman]

i take that bak....

[vilimaaman]

use coal as a fuel to use it??? isnt that the problem in the first case!!!

[alancj05]

It is cleaner than dirty coal in conventional pollutants. It is more efficient at generating electricity than dirty coal so that reduces CO2 per kWh. You can also capture the CO2 possibly and store it underground. Lipstick on a pig. Go nuclear... it would be cheaper than all that anyway.

[heymakerphd]

Every molecule of CO2 stored is 2 more atoms of oxygen lost to the atmosphere, which is at most 18 to 20 miles thick over the earth. And not thick enough to sustain most life over 6 miles high. How much atmosphere can we really afford to do without? Plasma tech. is potentially able to separate the C and the O2 to be reused, except for the energy deficit. Now add solar to the equation.....maybe.

[abram730]

@vilimaaman you can use MHD / steam generators... more efficient.

Personal I think gasification is a good start but the goal should be to sort elements for use as raw materials. Ionized plasmas can be better sorted based on how they turn corners.

We can get power from nuclear fission..

Fertilizers are essential and natural gas is limited... This technology is important to advance.

Also microbes have many uses. A bit of agitation and some waste heat.