Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Harold14370

Thread: Fuel cycle :}

  1. #1 Fuel cycle :} 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17
    With gasoline having approx 63 times energy density per kg compared to your bog standard lithium cell it is clearly the obvious choice and thus more favourable than lithium cells in cars. However with the technology for condensing the the bye-products of a range of fossil fuels, then applying energy (most notably in the form of heat) to create the initial fuel again- my question is why not continue to use fossil fuels inside a fully or partially closed system. e.g channelling the excess heat from combustion which is essentially wasted into the forming of more fuel. or even use in combination with electrical recharge stations, I'm thinking along the lines of combining mobile electrical generation to aid this, e.g solar cells solar heating, heat from friction between fro example the friction between moving metal axles?
    In any case this could potentially bring the efficiency of fossil fuels up to a much higher level, i don't' want to go into implications of this personally as well i would like to read others take on it.

    Also if I'm not the first to think of this, why hasn't it been mass produced already ? - costing is simply a matter of scale , so at first at use in power plants as more investment appears, so does the technology for a smaller, cheaper version of low maintenance unit. or is it something sinister the big oil companies don't want realised :}


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Part of the trouble may be operational temperature for the internal combustion engine. In order to work properly and efficiently, the engine must be warm. "Warm" being a relative measure, of course...
    This doesn't leave enough heat to be used productively, to say heat water and run a turbine, effectively. Especially considering the the most obvious fluid to use would be the coolant.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    The first thing that comes to mind is that the sheer bulk and weight of a chemical processing plant attached to your automobile would probably negate any possible efficiency improvements.

    Another issue is that any thermodynamic engine, like a car engine, operates between two temperatures, and has an efficiency which is limited by the difference in temperatures. The higher the temperature difference the better the efficiency. This means there has to be some waste heat in the process. Any attempt to capture the waste heat will probably raise the pressure of the exhaust and cut into the efficiency of the engine.

    I'm always amused by the suggestion that big oil companies have some all pervasive, shadowy global presence, presumably with secret agents who could track down any garage mechanic, and stop anyone anywhere in the world from building some energy saving device.
    Dave Wilson likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17
    OK so assuming the now large processing techniques/ equipment needed to get either heat from a source and use it effectively or decreasing photon wavelength to I.R from solar panels(the list goes on really) in order to make the bye-products back into fuel can be miniaturized.
    is it then possible to counteract this varying heat output; as the end result is to make an engine with the ability to last longer running on a good high energy density fuel. hows about having a lithium cell used as a starter for the reaction to take place. or perhaps during the cars recharge from an outlet (or other external source).
    then perhaps when the engine is running this difference in heat could be regulated to an extent at least, if you see what I'm getting at .

    p.s my suggestion that oil companies are watching our every move was intended as a subtle joke intending to stir up some debate
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5
    It basically refers to the entire flow that fuel follow from its origin to disposal, following link might help you.

    Fuel Cycle, Lecture Notes- Physics, Physics types work in - by hawking - Docsity.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    236
    However with the technology for condensing the the bye-products of a range of fossil fuels, then applying energy (most notably in the form of heat) to create the initial fuel again-
    I'm completely puzzled by this - I must have misunderstood what is being suggested. The combustion of fuels such as petroleum produces gases such as carbon dioxide, water vapour, carbon monoxide and a few oxides of nitrogen, etc - in other words, simple inorganic gases. How could these possibly be made to combine to form the original fuel? Can someone explain what I've missed here? Does "bye-products" mean combustion products, or something else?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17
    (sorry i haven't responded in a while been very busy)

    well just as surely as making organic compounds to inorganic why can't the opposite be true, yes it requires alot of research to do this but it can be done eventually.

    To get around the need to attachment of a chemical processing plant to your car :} , why not store the bye-products of combustion (including impurities,combustion products - the lot(i don't want to list all of them) , in a highly pressurized container then just as easily transfer this to storage at a refuelling station for collection and processing elsewhere.

    This article is essentially the basic idea Reverse Combustion: Can CO2 Be Turned Back into Fuel? [Video]: Scientific American however it uses only carbon to make basic fuel (it doesn't say what properties it has ofc) but it's getting there .in the article is uses sunlight, but i'm thinking you could just as easily use other forms, and if it's possible to do this processing on site, why not use the unused energy locally (if at all possible to harness and deal with the variant temperature change- which would be proportional to combustion energy input anyway , which then just needs a highly efficient energy transfer medium)

    other attempts have been made in the u.s to use other inorganic compounds

    (think that pretty much covers it
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Supercontinent Cycle
    By billiards in forum Earth Sciences
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: December 4th, 2011, 04:12 PM
  2. Oxygen cycle?
    By icewendigo in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 7th, 2011, 10:05 PM
  3. the vegetable thermodinamic cycle
    By luxtpm in forum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 13th, 2010, 01:34 PM
  4. overunity thermodinamic cycle?
    By luxtpm in forum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 28th, 2009, 11:57 AM
  5. Urea Cycle
    By Swish and Flick in forum Biology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 10th, 2008, 09:15 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •