| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: US Navy will make fuel from seawater |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 8
|
|
| Author |
|
|
twilyth
Master Cruncher US Joined: Mar 30, 2007 Post Count: 2130 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I had to search this on a couple of different sources before I would believe it but it seems to be for real.
----------------------------------------Article US experts have found out how to extract carbon dioxide and hydrogen gas from seawater. Then, using a catalytic converter, they transformed them into a fuel by a gas-to-liquids process. They hope the fuel will not only be able to power ships, but also planes. That means instead of relying on tankers, ships will be able to produce fuel at sea.  This April 2, 2014 US Navy handout image shows a beaker of fuel(right) made from seawater by scientists at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC (AFP Photo/Mc3 Gregory Pickett)   [Edit 1 times, last edit by twilyth at Apr 9, 2014 3:07:02 AM] |
||
|
|
keithhenry
Ace Cruncher Senile old farts of the world ....uh.....uh..... nevermind Joined: Nov 18, 2004 Post Count: 18665 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
As Spock would say - Fascinating! I suspect it may take some time to get this implemented unless they start retrofitting existing non-nuclear ships (though nuclear could use it for fueling aircraft). I have to wonder if the process allows them to make fuel faster that they would burn in during high demand times like hostilities. If the process is fast enough, SOP would end up being keep the tanks topped off I suppose. If this ends up spreading to commercial shipping, I wonder how this fits in to the "water cycle". Once the fuel from seawater is burnt, how does it get back as water. Yes, there's a lot of water in the seas but still I have to wonder.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by keithhenry at Apr 9, 2014 5:25:01 AM] |
||
|
|
Jack007
Master Cruncher CANADA Joined: Feb 25, 2005 Post Count: 1604 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Even if it didn't get back to water, with sea levels rising who cares?
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
branjo
Master Cruncher Slovakia Joined: Jun 29, 2012 Post Count: 1892 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Even if it didn't get back to water, with sea levels rising who cares? Well, maybe already our great-great-grandchildren?   Crunching@Home since January 13 2000. Shrubbing@Home since January 5 2006  |
||
|
|
ryan222h
Senior Cruncher Joined: Sep 4, 2006 Post Count: 425 Status: Offline |
By the time it would make even a speck of difference in seawater levels (100's of years), we'd presumably have better technology by then.
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
KWSN - A Shrubbery
Master Cruncher Joined: Jan 8, 2006 Post Count: 1585 Status: Offline |
When you burn fuel it creates water.
----------------------------------------That's why it takes so much energy to separate the oxygen and hydrogen. Creating that potential energy is what makes fuel work.  Distributed computing volunteer since September 27, 2000 |
||
|
|
keithhenry
Ace Cruncher Senile old farts of the world ....uh.....uh..... nevermind Joined: Nov 18, 2004 Post Count: 18665 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks Shrub! I was imagining this crossing over into the commercial shipping industry and boating in general. Obviously, we're talking a much larger volume of water then. I tried to think in terms of my own vehicle burning gas and didn't think of water coming out the tailpipe. Regardless of what sea levels are or aren't doing, I try to think in terms along the lines used at Yellowstone - take only memories, leave only footprints.
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
twilyth
Master Cruncher US Joined: Mar 30, 2007 Post Count: 2130 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
It's probably too expensive to use for shipping since they use bunker fuel - the cheapest and dirtiest fuel on the planet. Currently the lowest grade looks like it sells for about $600 per metric ton .
----------------------------------------From what I was able to google, it seems like there are about 1000 or so liters per metric ton. We're talking about 60 cents per liter. That probably seems shockingly low but this stuff really is awful. Take a look.  According to the article, the cost for the seawater fuel would be $3-6 per gallon or between 80 cents and $1.60 per liter. If it comes in at the low end of the range, it might be feasible for int'l shipping, especially if improvements in technology can lower the cost. But initially it wouldn't be able to compete. It would be great if ships did use this though. It would be carbon neutral and infinitely cleaner. |
||
|
|
|