Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > Fossil Fuel Free
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-22-2014, 09:02 PM   #11 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
P-hack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,408

awesomer - '04 Toyota prius
Thanks: 102
Thanked 249 Times in 201 Posts
if the source of the co2 is fossil fuel, then we can entertain calling it pollution.

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to P-hack For This Useful Post:
Cobb (01-23-2014)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-22-2014, 10:00 PM   #12 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,018 Times in 1,302 Posts
I want a "tank" full of electric eels!

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to user removed For This Useful Post:
Cobb (01-23-2014)
Old 01-23-2014, 12:55 PM   #13 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,848

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,325
Thanked 2,858 Times in 1,796 Posts
If the carbon dioxide comes from plants, which pulled it out of the air as they grew, then it won't change the long term balance - and so it is not a pollutant. But if carbon dioxide comes from fossil fuels, which otherwise would have remained buried underground - then it is a pollutant.
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to NeilBlanchard For This Useful Post:
Cobb (01-23-2014), jeff88 (01-28-2014), UFO (01-23-2014)
Old 01-23-2014, 02:16 PM   #14 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
P-hack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,408

awesomer - '04 Toyota prius
Thanks: 102
Thanked 249 Times in 201 Posts
plus the use of fossil fuels in production, which makes all us mouth breathers polluters.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to P-hack For This Useful Post:
Cobb (01-23-2014)
Old 01-23-2014, 05:05 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,018 Times in 1,302 Posts
Plant more stuff that uses photosynethsis, suck that carbon out of the atmosphere.
The we can have a carbon shortage.

Separate the methane out of the atmosphere, let the termites make us fuel and deliver it for free.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to user removed For This Useful Post:
Cobb (01-23-2014)
Old 01-23-2014, 05:20 PM   #16 (permalink)
In the fasting lane
 
RedDevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Posts: 3,645

Red Devil - '11 Honda Insight Elegance
Team Honda
90 day: 51.36 mpg (US)

It - '09 Hyundai I10 Active Cool
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.58 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,456
Thanked 1,987 Times in 1,273 Posts
Think of it - we now produce sugar to make ethanol to burn it in ICE engined cars... What a waste!

Combined with the possibility to convert woodlike plants for glucose production - possibly turning the chaff of food crops into a primary resource - like I described in the polarizing ethanol thread - glucose is the way to go.
Maybe there's no need to polarize after all
__________________
2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut.
lifetime FE over 0.16 Gmeter or 0.1 Mmile.



Most people are in the longest queue.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to RedDevil For This Useful Post:
Cobb (01-23-2014)
Old 01-23-2014, 10:49 PM   #17 (permalink)
Dreamer
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 350
Thanks: 95
Thanked 210 Times in 150 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
If the carbon dioxide comes from plants, which pulled it out of the air as they grew, then it won't change the long term balance - and so it is not a pollutant. But if carbon dioxide comes from fossil fuels, which otherwise would have remained buried underground - then it is a pollutant.
Yes, looking at the long term cycle the total CO2 levels should even out.
But it does seem a shame when the plants went to all the effort of removing the CO2 from the air (both fossil and sustainably derived) that we would then throw it back into the atmosphere.

"Move over forests, we need room for our sugar crops"
"But we just squeezed over for your food crops!"
"Yeah, that was yesterday, today we need sugar and lots of it, so move over or move out"
"You will miss us when we are gone."
"Nah, we will just drive somewhere nicer in our sugarmobiles"
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2014, 04:08 AM   #18 (permalink)
In the fasting lane
 
RedDevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Posts: 3,645

Red Devil - '11 Honda Insight Elegance
Team Honda
90 day: 51.36 mpg (US)

It - '09 Hyundai I10 Active Cool
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.58 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,456
Thanked 1,987 Times in 1,273 Posts
The carbon needs to go full circle. If we have to store it, that would be to compensate for burning fossil fuel, not biofuel.
It is a matter of efficiency too; this technology promises to be much more efficient than turning glucose into ethanol to burn it in an ICE. So we'd need less glucose for the same power.
We may not need the edible part of food crops for glucose fuel production, as I pointed out earlier.

At some point in time there will be no more abundance of fossil fuel. Something needs to change or at that time we will not be able to drive anywhere.
__________________
2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut.
lifetime FE over 0.16 Gmeter or 0.1 Mmile.



Most people are in the longest queue.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2014, 11:50 PM   #19 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: World
Posts: 385
Thanks: 82
Thanked 82 Times in 67 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astro View Post
Umm... I don't think it could be called pollution free if one of its main by products is CO2.

Or did i miss something?
If the maltodextrin is biologically derived, it's closed loop, assuming there's no emissions from the agriculture.

0.8mW/cm^2 seems pretty low. How much surface area can be packed into a reasonable tank volume for a car?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2014, 12:13 AM   #20 (permalink)
XYZ
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: nowhere
Posts: 533
Thanks: 31
Thanked 86 Times in 69 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Mechanic View Post
I want a "tank" full of electric eels!

regards
Mech
Methane power! I want a car that runs on chicken s**t!

Don't scoff - it actually was done during the gas shortages of the 1970's. It may not be politically correct these days, but it would save the world from the pollution of unused farts. (Pardon me while nature calls... I wish I could can my flatulence... and be careful, don't strike any matches nearby!)


Last edited by XYZ; 01-26-2014 at 12:19 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com