Induction Heater

[Blam!]

I want to show this awesome video if anyone don't know this technology of Induction Heating. More details on Induction Heating, Wikipedia.

This is scientific achievement - this technology that doesn't require fossil fuel to produce the thermal energy necessary to melt Aluminum, Iron, Cobalt, Nickel, Germanium, Gadolinium, etc. Fossil fuel has advantages over Induction Heating by the terms of cost-efficient. But... Electric Bill > Pollution. I'm rather to have nasty electric bill than producing the waste of fossil fuels potentially damage Earth's environment.

[Welsh cake]

Induction furnaces have their serious shortcomings though with their lack of refining capacity. They and electric arc furnaces available to industry can't reach the higher temperatures needed for modern process reactions to take place. We still require blast furnaces for steel-making and the chemical process for extracting impurities and producing molten iron remains the same despite increasing efficiency with modern technologies and carbon capture, we still NEED coal for this reason.

Fact of life, without fossil fuels such as coal and without steel we're utterly screwed.

[Autumnlicious]

Induction heating is totally useless for most consumer applications, as the usual behavior for many of the cited consumer goods involve insistence on rapid power up and sudden power down.

For example, an induction heated stove top would not last terribly long unless built out the correct materials, because the sudden temperature shifts caused by, let's say, ending the act of cooking a meal would cause the metal to undergo limited induction hardening.

So any stove top, for example, would entail different materials and better manufacturing processes.

Nothing so far has managed to meet or beat the energy storage capabilities and simplistic structure of fossil fuels, where even marginally longer and more complex molecules require different engines to take advantage of such (diesel engines are heavier, have different timings and endure different conditions than a gasoline engine, for example).

[Blam!]

Induction furnaces have their serious shortcomings though with their lack of refining capacity. They and electric arc furnaces available to industry can't reach the higher temperatures needed for modern process reactions to take place. We still require blast furnaces for steel-making and the chemical process for extracting impurities and producing molten iron remains the same despite increasing efficiency with modern technologies and carbon capture, we still NEED coal for this reason.

Fact of life, without fossil fuels such as coal and without steel we're utterly screwed.

The electricity can produce extreme high temperatures. The advantage of Induction heating is more controllable transfer of amount of heat energy - unlike fossil fuels such as coal. Extracting Impurities progress are simple - if we design the furnace [if there is such thing] with function similar to the distillation. The elements of periodic table have their different boiling points. Sulfur, in its boiling point, can be extract out of fine dust of Iron, due to their difference of boiling points.

For your information, there is steel producing electric arc furniture - which means, the fossil fuels are not necessary to push the temperatures to melting point of Iron. However, carbon is vital to make the traditional steel out of Iron.

They and electric arc furnaces available to industry can't reach the higher temperatures needed for modern process reactions to take place.

It depends on the furnaces' design of structure and its ability to contain the extreme high temperatures.

---

Induction heating is totally useless for most consumer applications, as the usual behavior for many of the cited consumer goods involve insistence on rapid power up and sudden power down.

For example, an induction heated stove top would not last terribly long unless built out the correct materials, because the sudden temperature shifts caused by, let's say, ending the act of cooking a meal would cause the metal to undergo limited induction hardening.

So any stove top, for example, would entail different materials and better manufacturing processes.

In other words, to smith the sword out of the Iron - the impurities are necessary to increase its strength - but result the brittle. The sword goes under the progress of heat treating [which requires naturally, fossil fuels] to produce the tensile in the sword?

That kind of metallurgy which Induction heating can't produce [correct me if I'm wrong?]

Nothing so far has managed to meet or beat the energy storage capabilities and simplistic structure of fossil fuels, where even marginally longer and more complex molecules require different engines to take advantage of such (diesel engines are heavier, have different timings and endure different conditions than a gasoline engine, for example).

And there is another reason of usage of fossil fuel are cheap - and profit.

There is alternate energy within grasp of our current technology - like solar energy, RTG, rechargeable batteries, for example. Surprisingly, fossil fuel based vehicles are still producing in USA. Perhaps because there is millions of tonnes of crude oil available to be profit. One of reasons I don't like economy - it's nothing but man-made concept like religion.

Anyway - I think humanity should invest into non-pollution producing technologies like Induction heating, solar energy and etc.

[Welsh cake]

The electricity can produce extreme high temperatures.

The process can, but the current furnaces available to industry for mass-production cannot reach those sustained temperatures. They've only been able to reach higher temperatures in laboratory conditions.

The advantage of Induction heating is more controllable transfer of amount of heat energy - unlike fossil fuels such as coal.

Which requires an INSANE amount of power to run for induction or electric arc furnaces. We're talking millions of gigawatts here for a steel works. Electricity is not cheap. They're only around 70% efficient even when running at optimum capacity. The nation grid in the UK will not allow any such technology to operate during the day, only at night.

Ever heard of Anglesey Aluminium? Its the only example I know of near where I live. Their aluminium smelters were aforementioned induction heaters. The plant was powered from the National Grid, receiving most of its electricity from Wylfa nuclear power station in North Wales. The only way the plant could function and remain commercially viable was to have cheaper power, that deal ran out, and the joint venture could no longer afford the staggering electricity bill to run induction, even with government grants to keep the business afloat.

The plant closed on 30th September 2009, much to the dismay of the people of Anglesey. It was all over the news at the time:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglesey_Aluminium

For your information, there is steel producing electric arc furniture - which means, the fossil fuels are not necessary to push the temperatures to melting point of Iron.

?

Electric arc furnaces reprocess scrap metal back into new steel. Blast Furnaces are chemical reactors. They do NOT make steel, they make molten iron. Neither of them make steel. NO furnace anywhere has ever made steel. Argon oxygen decarburization (BOS) takes place afterwards to make steel.

Furnaces cannot be shut down once they are started up. They need a constant source of energy to stay operational. They NEED fossil fuels such as gases, coke from coal to run.

[Blam!]

I thought Induction Furnaces are more effective than Electric Arc Furnaces in the terms of electric consumption. Anyway, the link of Anglesey Aluminum didn't mention the details of their type of furnace. The assumption if Anglesey Aluminum had Induction furnace or not - the main reason of shutdown of that industry was financial issue [or electric consumption?]. The shutdown of Anglesey Aluminum saved United Kingdom a lot of money. Although the economy is nothing but delusion.

Honestly, I prefer the electric based furnaces without polluted exhaust of any kind, so less pollution for the Earth's biosphere. I am more concerned our Earth's environment rather than clinging on the delusion such as an economy. If the problem was electric consumption, why don't we build another nuclear factory? Why don't we invest more resources for more effective method to reduce the electric consumption?

[popeyespappy]

Depending on where you live the production of electricity can require burning large amounts of fossil fuels. Yes you can produce electricity using nuclear, solar, wind, and hydro but with the exception of nuclear and maybe hydroelectric you can run into issues producing the power you need when you need it.

Industrial induction furnaces can and do produce the temperatures required to melt any type of metal I’m aware of. They aren’t used much for things like smelting or steel production because they aren’t practical at the thousands of cubic meter scales usually seen in those industries. You do see plenty of electric arc furnaces at those scales though.

Induction furnaces are used for producing a lot of alloys. They provide a high degree of control over temperature and chemistry, and the current causes circulation in the melt which produces a good mixing effect.

Induction furnaces are also in widespread use in the heat treat industry. I’ve never seen an induction carburizer or nitrider but the induction process works well for surface hardening without adding additional carbon. Any process that gives you a hard outer layer while leaving softer but more pliable inner core is applicable to things such as making blades. If that industry isn’t using induction furnaces for heat treating it is because it is cheaper to do it another way not because induction wouldn’t work for them.

Induction welding is used to make a lot of metal laminates, but I don’t think that type of process uses anything that might actually be considered a furnace.