Possible Solution for Foreign Oil Dependency?
February 18th, 2008 Posted in News, VideosI found this video on youtube about a company who could have the answer to the worlds oil problem. Let me know what you think!
I found this video on youtube about a company who could have the answer to the worlds oil problem. Let me know what you think!
23 Responses to “Possible Solution for Foreign Oil Dependency?”
By Tazed on Feb 18, 2008
Great video. I look forward to hearing more about this facility that could change how we deal with oil.
By Topher on Feb 28, 2008
The key question, of course, is how much energy they have to put into the cooking process, compared to how much they get out. Making ethanol from corn, for example, is right around a break-even level. Using other fuel sources (coal, hydroelectricity) to produce liquid fuel might reduce our dependency on middle east oil, but isn’t a real solution. I hope these folks are doing as well as this video makes it appear.
By Geoff on Feb 28, 2008
It all sounds great, but what about on a larger scale? Is it feasible to simply throw bags of trash into the machine? Tires seem like they would “work” better than heaps of lettuce and cocktail napkins. Who knows, but this has the feel of an “in depth” local news report that just looks at the positive. Then again, I’m a cynical bastard. Here’s to industrializing hemp- which far outpaces ethanol and this magical garbage solution.
By Dens on Feb 28, 2008
They say in the video that the plant uses extracted gas to power the process, so one can assume it’s self-sufficient. If it’s all true, of course …
By Carter on Feb 28, 2008
The volatile vaporized gasses power the plant? Hee yeah! That’s some mighty *potent* garbage. :)
Bottom line, this is basically hype — but it’s still good technology. Nothing new, variations on this are very old. Over a million vehicles were powered during WWII with syngas for example, a simple gassification similar to this.
Anyhow even if this operates at an energy deficit it’s still a good play — get rid of that garbage!
I wish this guy every success in the world. It’s not his fault the reporter is mindless.
By Chris on Feb 28, 2008
Isn’t this kind of adding to the problem of air pollution? Would we rather have piles and piles of old tires or extra car exhaust? Aren’t they BOTH bad? On the other hand, I guess this would be helpful for ending oil politics…
By Kevin on Feb 28, 2008
Another Failed attempt just like Ethanol. How many barrels of oil does it take to A. Get the trash to the site. B. Operate the machines to make the trash. C. Power the facility.
America needs to wake up and realize that the consumerist society it has created is going to collapse if they continue to consume at the same rate. No solar, wind, hydrogen, or ethanol can keep up with the worlds rate of consumption. Are we smarter than yeast? I do not think so. Watch the Documentary Oil, Smoke and Mirrors.
http://digg.com/world_news/The_Party_s_Over_Peak_Oil_and_Life_After_the_Crash
The Party is over America and its time to wake up. What are we going to do if oil ever hits 150$-250$ a barrel? How are we going to feed ourselves? For every ONE CALORIE IF FOOD YOU CONSUME IT TAKES 10 CALORIES OF HYRDOCARBON ENERGY TO MAKE THAT FOOD. Do the math. Just think if the 300 million people in America got a 2000 calorie diet. For every 1 1 food calorie = 10 calories of hyrdocarbon energy
20,000 calories of energy used to create 2000 calories if food. Now think of the 1 BILLION Chinese and Indians that are going to Want cars and want food. The industrial world has built itself on the availability of cheap and easy access oil. Hubbards peak is here. What are we going to do about it. Do not believe me our own state department has even done reports saying that they believe GLOBAL oil production will peak in the 1990-2010 time frame.
In 1982, the State Department released its own report which stated: world petroleum production will peak in the 1990-2010 interval at 80-105 million barrels per day, with ultimate resources estimated at 2,100 billion barrels.
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net
http://www.theoildrum.net
htt://www.endofsuburbia.com
By Cartoon Robot on Feb 28, 2008
Topher, you make a good point. We don’t want the same problem with this as we have with making ethanol. Though, if the trash is just sitting there anyway, why not do something with it?
By Tristan on Feb 28, 2008
Amazing! Few people realize how wasteful our agricultural processes are; if we could use the discards from animal and crop farming, it would help minimize those industries’ carbon impact on the planet.
Wish I was a scientist so I could make some dough off the impending green industrial revolution (and help save the earth too, of course) :)
By Nau Lemmozi on Feb 28, 2008
This is great, but I think efficiency is a more important solution, especially in the short term.
By thorndike on Feb 28, 2008
Discover magazine has done several articles on this process and this company. From their point of view the process is quite viable.
Thorndike
By Jill on Feb 28, 2008
What an amazing idea, this should be good for the environment alone never mind the economy.
By JPhil on Feb 28, 2008
I think it’s probably a good technology but we know that they can’t reuse 100% of water so what is the recuperation % of water? How many solid rejects there is after oil extraction? Is there any toxic substances in exhaust (they are using tires!)? I think it’s good but we need more informations!
By J-A on Feb 29, 2008
This is not a scientific view of this process, probably a promotion video to get more money from uninformed people in gouvernement. Stay realistic… is there ANY carbon in METAL waste ?? Ok there is carbon in tire, waste water, poultry waste etc..
To date, the technology to transform agricultural waste INTO energy IS NOT established. How much energy it takes to transform some waste into oil !?? moreoften, it take MORE energy to convert mixted waste, than to take directly the energy. This is not a solution, sorry I’m sure they filmed an other plant… to impress people
By JakeH on Mar 1, 2008
To those who responded to:
“Possible Solutions for Foreign Oil Dependency?”
To Topher – Apropos your “key question” of how much energy they have to put into the cooking process,” all of the energy is obtained from the feedstock (the material introduced to the process). Approximately 15% of the energy contained in the feedstock is used to put out about 85% in the form of oil and other byproducts, all of which are environmentally benign, and ultimately discharges potable water. No other outside source of energy, such as coal, hydroelectric power, etc., is needed to operate the system.
For more information I suggest you look up Changing World Technologies, Inc. (CWT) and review their site thoroughly. With the proper support in the form of tax credits to entrepreneurs (not to CWT) to build facilities, just as the government has done with ethanol, this system could quickly reduce our dependence on foreign, which is the alleged goal for ethanol.
To Geoff: No, it is not possible to simply throw bags of trash into the machine. Feedstock must be an homogenous mass of the same material. In other words, you don’t introduce paper products with turkey guts, and you don’t combine cattle guts with vegetation. Think of a cook making a pie or a cake. He has to use different mixing and cooking times to achieve the desired results. This is no different in that different feedstocks require different temperatures and pressure to break down the molecules to be reformulated into the desired end product. If it contains carbon, it is doable, but they must be homogenous.
To Dens: Yes, the system is self –sufficient. See the above.
To Carter: First of all the reporter is not mindless. That term might better be applied to your comments. The reporter you refer to is well qualified and has done numerous articles for Discover researched the process before he wrote the article, which you have apparently not read. So before you take it upon yourself to opine on something you have not researched, I suggest you do so. I have researched the energy field for five years, and having lived considerably longer than you, and seen the implementation of most of the inventions moving today’s economy, and I can assure you that although the government has obviously favored ethanol over a better system for political reasons, which I will be glad to explain to you if you are interested, this system has the power to change how, not only the U. S. , but the whole world perceives where oil comes from and how it will be priced.
I suggest you look up Discover Magazine and then search for two articles entitled “Anything Into Oil”, You may just learn something.
To Chris: The thermal conversion process (TCP) which converts carbon bearing material into oil, does not in and of itself pollute the atmosphere. However, the system is unique in that, and here it gets a little complex, it does not contribute to pollution even when burned. Consider: everything that grows on this earth contains carbon. If no oil were ever extracted from the earth, whatever carbon bearing materials were burned would be part of what already exists above ground. Growing plants would have to extract their carbon from the atmosphere just as they did for millions of years before humans started drilling for oil. If we stopped drilling and used the carbon already in the atmosphere and hence in the vegetation and animals we consume, we would effectively achieve a zero balance with nature, and we would no longer pollute. In other words, this is a non-polluting system. If there is pollution created by burning oil it must come from the oil which has been extracted by the oil companies. This system merely recycles carbon which is already above ground and stays there.
If ever there were a system which should receive a tax credit, this is it!
To Kevin: I suggest you look up and read some of the articles described above. If you want a real eye opener, use your computer to look up a Cato Institute report entitled , “ Archer Daniels Midland: A Case Study In Corporate Welfare”. This is an article written in 1995, and is even more relevant today then when it was written.. It will also reveal why ethanol is favored over the (TCP) system. Don’t expect a one pager. It’s about 25 pages in length and reads like a spy novel.
For the rest of you who responded to the article or video, I thank you for your interest. There should be enough info. above to answer your questions. I wish I could answer them all individually, but the above answers and the source information they contain should be helpful if you are really interested. Once again, my thanks for your interest
JWH.
By J-A on Mar 3, 2008
Do you have any acticle or reference more serious then the 2 in Discover magazine ?
People can’t believe facts without solid proof, your data and pretention are, to date, unbelievable for me. You talk about using only 15% for energy and the rest is oil and trash ? what is your % of efficacity, in real. Thank you very much.
By JakeH on Mar 15, 2008
To J-A re your coments of 3/3/08.
First of all your two commentrs are welcome in that you at least show an intersst in or oil problem.
Secondly,they also reveal that you have not done y0ur own research to verify the claims mane for this system. I suggest you look up Changing World Technologies, Inc.(CWT) to get some first hand info. on the company and its product. There are numerous sources you couold use to inform yourself concerning the eergy/oil conundrum this country faces.
Contrary to your posting of 2/29/08, the film you viewed was done by a reputable TV show and was not a request for money. CWT is not looking for investors, but the owner is looking for entrepeneurs who will invest in facilities using the thermal conversion process(TCP).
I am obviously s strong supporter of this system as the qu;ickest means of reducing or eliminating our dependence on foreignn oil.
Your expressed concern for this systems efficiency is, if you will pardon the expression,naive. Do you haveany idea how much money the government spends on support for ethanol? And ethanol is a dead flat loser, because for all the billions of dollars spenr on government subsidies, a gallon of ethanol does not retrurn as much energy as it take to produce it. To getr some sense of proportion regarding the costof ethanol I suggest you also look up an article called “Archer Daniels Midland: A Case Study In Corporate Welfare.” Ii’s a real eye opener.
Now I thank you once again for your interst. And, oh, yes, the efficiency of this system is approximately 85%, and trheree is no ‘trash” because everything emenating from this system is useful ans benign to the envirinment, and it ultimately discharges potable water.
Enjoy you research.
Jake H.
By RayG on May 22, 2008
Hmmm . . . . I was intrigued by the original Discover article in 2003, and then I read this and I realized that maybe I needed to do more research.
http://www.mindfully.org/Technology/2005/Changing-World-Technologies-Palmer9apr05.htm
By Jeremiah Sweeney on Nov 12, 2008
zhozbinlf4dekw1y
By snake28be on Dec 11, 2008
Thanks for the post, I have been having the same problems.
By ????? ????? on Oct 18, 2009
? ????? ??? ????? ????, ?????? ??? ????? ??? ????. ????? ? ?????????:)
By Luis Arevalo on Nov 22, 2009
How long do we have to wait fot this technology to come to my country (El Salvador, latin america)
By Anonymous on Apr 11, 2010
why was the video deleted I wonder….or do I/We?????and also your email contact link????!!! hmmmmm…..