Last Non-winter

[Succubus#2]

Lets look at some of the stages in the fuel from Co2 proposal.
First we need to extract Co2 from the atmosphere and to do that we need Co2 scrubbers.

Like this one. And this is just the bit we can see, there's a whole bunch of other hardware involved in the scrubbing process.




This thing produces ~50 tons Co2 per hour. Now to produce enough green fuel to make any sort of difference we will need millions of the bastards and they use energy to function, lots of it. This Fucking ugly web page goes into some detail.
Now we have to convert the Co2 into oil and to do that takes some sort of processing plant which again, will require a large energy input. The whole shebang with its supporting infrastructure is going to cover thousands of square miles. Roads, pubs, housing, bars, shops, boozers. And this is just one installation. But then we don't build oil production facilities in the middle of duelling banjo country we build them near the coast or whatever.

So now we need to move the Co2 from Arkansas to some place sensible and to do that we need thousands of these:



At 25,000 horse power apiece!?!?

If you're spending £15 in order to make a £10 note you need to go back to business school.

Straight out of the gate, the idea is bollocks.

---

Is that what makes energy production impossible, in your estimation?

I mean, IDK what to say...there's all kinds of energy still left on the table, even after loss, even with recycled fuels.  However...since not all of that energy is useful energy, and since the energy that recycled fuels produce is useful energy, it isn't much of a concern for us.

It would be nice to capture even more, don't get me wrong..but...?

Lets be very clear here...you do understand that there is no law of thermodynamics which states that we, personally, have to put more energy into something...or even the same amount of energy into something, in order to extract energy.  You do get that, right?  The whole reason that we can produce recycled fuel of this sort is that something else put alot of energy into something..and we're not using all of it, even when we consume the product.  Hell, we're not putting the same amount of energy into the primary fuel...

...what the actual fuck?

If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell’s equations — then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation — well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation.

Arthur Eddington.

---

We don't produce energy we convert energy from one form to another and if you try to convert it back again there will be a net loss. That's what laws of thermodynamics states.

Of COURSE there’s a net loss - there always will be, but that’s hardly the point of recycled energy.

Boru

See #67