Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 11:48 AM Oct 2014

An Industrial-Sized Generator That Runs on Waste Heat, Using No Fuel

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/531526/an-industrial-sized-generator-that-runs-on-waste-heat-using-no-fuel/
[font face=Serif][font size=5]An Industrial-Sized Generator That Runs on Waste Heat, Using No Fuel[/font]

[font size=4]Startup Alphabet Energy has its first product: what it says is the world’s largest thermoelectric generator.[/font]

By Kevin Bullis on October 9, 2014

[font size=3]Power plants waste huge amount of energy as heat—about 40 to 80 percent of the total in the fuel they burn. A new device could reduce that waste, cutting fuel consumption and carbon emissions by as much as 3 percent and saving companies millions of dollars. (Three percent might not seem like much, but for context, air travel accounts for 2 percent of worldwide carbon dioxide emissions.)

The generator makes use of a novel, highly efficient thermoelectric material discovered recently at the University of Michigan (see “Thermoelectric Material to Hit Market Later this Year”). Thermoelectric materials, which convert heat into electricity, have been around for decades, but they have always been too expensive to use outside extreme situations—in spacecraft, for example.

Matt Scullin, the CEO of Alphabet Energy, the startup that developed the new device, says connecting it to the exhaust pipe of a 1,000-kilowatt generator will yield enough electricity to save 52,500 liters of diesel fuel a year, for a reduction of about 2.5 percent. For smaller engines, the savings would be slightly higher, Scullin says.

The first customers will probably be oil, gas, and mining companies that use large generators to produce power in remote areas. The generator could save those companies millions in fuel, Scullin says. “There aren’t many levers these companies can pull to reduce costs that much,” he adds.

…[/font][/font]
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
An Industrial-Sized Generator That Runs on Waste Heat, Using No Fuel (Original Post) OKIsItJustMe Oct 2014 OP
And, connecting this to the Jevons' paradox thread... hunter Oct 2014 #1
Following the “logic” of Jevons’ paradox through to its obvious conclusion… OKIsItJustMe Oct 2014 #2
Jevons' observation is not really a paradox. hunter Oct 2014 #3
“Quitting fossil fuels is like quitting smoking. You quit smoking by quitting.” OKIsItJustMe Oct 2014 #4
No, you are correct, you have to keep the car running. hunter Oct 2014 #5

hunter

(38,337 posts)
1. And, connecting this to the Jevons' paradox thread...
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 02:04 PM
Oct 2014

... this same technology will be utilized in three billion portable smart phone chargers and home power units, thus negating any reductions in carbon dioxide emissions.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)
2. Following the “logic” of Jevons’ paradox through to its obvious conclusion…
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 02:19 PM
Oct 2014

The key to decreasing energy usage is decreasing efficiency.

hunter

(38,337 posts)
3. Jevons' observation is not really a paradox.
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 03:14 PM
Oct 2014

The root of the problem is simple. The "efficiency" of the physicist is not the same as the "efficiency" of the economist.

Look at the problem this way:

How efficient was the earth as a solar collector storing energy as petroleum so we could someday zip around in our stupid cars?

The actual efficiency of our fossil fueled engines is utterly dismal, a tiny, tiny, infinitesimal fraction of 1%.

Here's another question:

How important is "efficiency" in natural systems? If efficiency is so important why are tree leaves green? Shouldn't they be black?

Quitting fossil fuels is like quitting smoking. You quit smoking by quitting. The "efficiency" of your cigarettes isn't the problem. It's the damage done to your body by smoking that kills you.

If we want to quit fossil fuels we must eventually outlaw them. When you are on the road to hell, you have to turn around. Driving at 50 miles per hour instead of 100 miles per hour delays the time it takes to get there, but only prolongs the misery. It's getting hotter and hotter outside. The car is starting to overheat. We need to turn around while the car is still running. From this point, most of us wouldn't survive the walk back.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)
4. “Quitting fossil fuels is like quitting smoking. You quit smoking by quitting.”
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 04:09 PM
Oct 2014

This is quite a different matter from Jevons’ paradox.

You seem to be advocating quitting “cold turkey.” That can produce violent reactions in the system.

hunter

(38,337 posts)
5. No, you are correct, you have to keep the car running.
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 05:54 PM
Oct 2014

I once quit a notoriously awful but very effective crazy-med cold turkey, AMA (against medical advice) and it was an extremely unpleasant experience. Fortunately my overwhelming OCD always kicks in before the suicidal ideation. If I'm dead then how am I going to follow through on my useless and not-so-useless compulsions? There's still code to write and hairs to pluck from my face.

It's a bloody miracle I didn't revert to my unmedicated dumpster diving feral human state. The social safety nets I've built for myself held, so I'm not living by the creek under a tarp with my stuff in a stolen shopping cart, or in a shack in someone's backyard pissing in the compost pile. Fixed nitrogen! Been there, done that.

I stand by my explanation of Jevons' paradox. The various religions of economic theory are not reality.

We must quit burning coal and tar sands and fracking gas however we can.

Otherwise this civilization dies.

It's a simple problem with a simple answer.

Just stop.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»An Industrial-Sized Gener...