Court of Antiochus

Ahh but the current craze is not to improve efficiency of fossil fuel use, but to switch to new and unproven alternatives.

I used to have those crisises until I got tired, then slept.

 

Really though don't worry about it scientists are developing new ways to save the environment while researching alternate fuel sources. Hey we messed this place up the least we can do is tidy up for our grandchildren.

Ahh but the current craze is not to improve efficiency of fossil fuel use, but to switch to new and unproven alternatives.

 

The problem is that it is physically impossible to improve fossil fuel use, the laws of thermodynamics prevent us from being any more efficient than we already have it.

 

Efficiency = Work(output) / Q(heat) --- Deriving this equation to fit the problem would make it Eff = 1 - (Qc(output temp) / Qh(input temp))

 

The wider the temp gap, the more efficient the system. (Thermal Engines are abhorrently innefficient)

 

Standard steam to turbine temp is around 561*k-- any hotter and water becomes corrosive

Standard steam output temp is around 373*k --100*F, the water must stay in a vapor state.

 

Therefore eff= 1 - (373 / 561) = .335

 

eff @ ideal = 33.5% (this of course doesn't include all the shortcomings listed above.

You're correct... in 'standard' terms. Did you discuss supercritical and ultracritical coal power plants? BTW, I'm also talking about gasoline and the continued improvements to fuel efficiency.

If we must rely on coal based energy, will we be seeing a return to Victorian styles of living, with smog shrouded cities?

 

What host of other alternative fules have scientists being considering? According to some stuff I've read, windfarms might have to be constructed in coastal areas; although these won't provide a fraction of the energy provided by a nuclear power plant. We might even have to depend on Nuclear energy to provide most of the energy to a small country, even if we do use wind and coal energy.

 

Is this true or is it biased by the nuclear lobby or anti-enviromentalists?

You're correct... in 'standard' terms. Did you discuss supercritical and ultracritical coal power plants? BTW, I'm also talking about gasoline and the continued improvements to fuel efficiency.

 

We didn't discuss those yet, but we did also discuss gasoline and ethanol additions. So far it isn't economical since it takes as much energy to raise the grain as the grain gives off. Also, ethanol burns nowhere near as hot as gasoline.

 

I may look into the supercritical coal plants, I want to see how they employ that technology.

If we must rely on coal based energy, will we be seeing a return to Victorian styles of living, with smog shrouded cities?

I could be wrong but I think about half the power in the U.S. is generated with coal.

The supercritical plants must be very expensive, they'd need to use stainless steel or a very corrosive-resistant metal in order to contain steam that hot.

And what's the alternative?

And what's the alternative?

 

Duh, horses!