Another Energy Thread

[Revoltingest]

Also adding in fantastical ideas here's a Popular Mechanics article about the possibility of 'Next-gen' computers that would work at 450C. With those you could combine power storage with data centers.
High-Temperature Semiconductor Computers - Next-Gen Semiconductors - Popular Mechanics

My preferred fantasies are superconducting electronics or photon based circuitry.
But the requirement of high temps doesn't require much energy. This is because
once a closed system is up to operating temperature, insulation makes energy
demands low. So I argue that it's better to recover usable energy from waste heat.
How best to store it? The market will sort that out. Right now, hydraulic potential
energy, lead acid batteries, lithium ion batteries & mass heat sinks work well.

 

[Brickjectivity]

My preferred fantasies are superconducting electronics or photon based circuitry.
But the requirement of high temps doesn't require much energy. This is because
once a closed system is up to operating temperature, insulation makes energy
demands low. So I argue that it's better to recover usable energy from waste heat.
How best to store it? The market will sort that out. Right now, hydraulic potential
energy, lead acid batteries, lithium ion batteries & mass heat sinks work well.

Recovering waste heat is the trick isn't it? I'll let the smart people sort that out.

 

[Revoltingest]

Recovering waste heat is the trick isn't it? I'll let the smart people sort that out.

It's been done for a long time. I have a circa 1895 GE steam engine generator
which was supposedly (per an expert I know) used in a cogeneration application.
The problem is always about the value of energy recovered vs capital & maintenance
costs. As energy increases in cost, I expect major changes the technology & products.
So I'm not a'feared of escalating energy costs. We'll cope. It'll be good for us.

 

[Avi1001]

Thermoelectric materials will be increasing in use:

Thermoelectric effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Brickjectivity]

It's been done for a long time. I have a circa 1895 GE steam engine generator
which was supposedly (per an expert I know) used in a cogeneration application.
The problem is always about the value of energy recovered vs capital & maintenance
costs. As energy increases in cost, I expect major changes the technology & products.
So I'm not a'feared of escalating energy costs. We'll cope. It'll be good for us.

the value of energy recovered vs capital & maintenance costs

In the short term I agree with you, but one problem with multi-tiered schemes to recapture waste energy is that too much maintenance is required. Without a large temperature difference you just cannot squeeze much energy out of any recapturing scheme. You can maybe scrape up the equivalent of your own pay that way.

Look at the consolidation of transistors in computer chips as a model of the future where all hot processes take place in centralized locations. All manufacturers would save $$ if they moved their hot processes together into gigantic large, hot, buildings. So instead of a lot of buildings churning out smoke you have one gigantic, hot facility where manufacturers rent space. Maintenance could be done remotely through robots doing all the hot dangerous work, making ceramics, storing energy, etc. If some equipment needed human attention it could be brought out of the heat. If products needed cooling they would be moved outside the building.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Of course the above idea is not practical for many reasons.

 

[Revoltingest]

In the short term I agree with you, but one problem with multi-tiered schemes to recapture waste energy is that too much maintenance is required. Without a large temperature difference you just cannot squeeze much energy out of any recapturing scheme. You can maybe scrape up the equivalent of your own pay that way.

It isn't too much for large scale applications, where capital & maintenance costs are
relatively low per unit of energy. The real question is when new products & higher
fuel costs will make this practical for small applications, eg, single family homes.

Look at the consolidation of transistors in computer chips as a model of the future where all hot processes take place in centralized locations. All manufacturers would save $$ if they moved their hot processes together into gigantic large, hot, buildings. So instead of a lot of buildings churning out smoke you have one gigantic, hot facility where manufacturers rent space. Maintenance could be done remotely through robots doing all the hot dangerous work, making ceramics, storing energy, etc. If some equipment needed human attention it could be brought out of the heat. If products needed cooling they would be moved outside the building.

Heat is expensive to store. It makes more sense to use it to do something
productive. Prices, technology & demand will determine what happens.
Example:
Increasing fuel costs caused some chemical processors to increase the
size of piping so that less electricity was used to pump fluids thru them.

 

[Iti oj]

Maybe in this thread I could propose my partial solution and get intelligent responses.


I think the US government should put a big tax on fossil fuels. Say, a phased in tax of $100 a barrel. The goal would be a tax sufficient to reduce US consumption to domestic production.

The upsides would be huge. Balance the federal budget, stop caring about ME political problems except for humanitarian issues, slash the flow of money propping up nasty governments like the Saudis, reduce greenhouse gases, lose the most environmentally dangerous extraction techniques.

There would be a great deal of economic dislocation, which tends to fall on the lowest economic rungs. But I doubt that it would be all that bad. The price of fossil fuels is very volatile. (Remember when the mere threat of Hurricane Isaac hitting Gulf Coast platforms sent gasoline prices up 20%? Well it works the other way too). I think that if the USA unilaterally took on a serious plan, the commodity prices would drop from the current $100 a barrel to less than $40. USA pump prices probably wouldn't go up to what the rest of the world pays now.

The downsides could be more easily managed than the downsides of the status quo.

Tom

you do not even need to add a tax, just remove the subsidies.

 

[Revoltingest]

you do not even need to add a tax, just remove the subsidies.

What are the subsidies?

Anyway, that & a tax would encourage free market conservation solutions:
- Smaller homes
- Higher efficiency HVAC systems
- Multi-family housing
- More efficient vehicles
- More staycations

 

[Iti oj]

What are the subsidies?

Anyway, that & a tax would encourage free market conservation solutions:
- Smaller homes
- Higher efficiency HVAC systems
- Multi-family housing
- More efficient vehicles
- More staycations

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change InternationalOil Change International

 

[Brickjectivity]

Concerning the re-use of the heat from computers, here's someone trying to do it:

BBC News - Heating buildings using computers

 

[Octavia156]

If you are interested in salt-water battery technology - check out my new start-up company www.circuitree.co.uk