|
Post by principled on Feb 19, 2013 17:59:10 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Feb 19, 2013 19:31:33 GMT 1
So then what do we do with the carbon nanotubes and spheres?
|
|
|
Post by principled on Feb 19, 2013 19:40:26 GMT 1
From the linked page:
Applications and Industries
Electronics (lithium-ion batteries for cell phones, laptops, electric cars and more) Water purification (for adsorption properties) Tires (for heat-dissipation properties) Paint (unique spherical morphology with conducting nature) Computer inks and toners (highly suitable micrometer size)
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 19, 2013 21:43:28 GMT 1
Tires? Bloody tires??? Tyres...for goodness sake man! Been on the other side of the pond too long.
|
|
|
Post by principled on Feb 19, 2013 23:04:37 GMT 1
Nah, I'm now back good old Blighty. I know that because I've just heard on the news that because of our green policies, lack of new generation plant and completely inept politicians we should expect our energy prices to double. So that'll make my energy price 6 times what my daughter pays in Canada. Great!!!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 22, 2013 9:45:59 GMT 1
It seems to have passed the Greens and their fellow travellers by that the world is now awash with known shale oil and gas reserves of ginormous size. This is a game changer in the energy stakes both economically and geo-politically. The powers that be in the EU seem determined to put the telescope to their blind eye, however, and refuse to see anything but dearth of energy sources! The rest of the world will not be so crass.
|
|
|
Post by principled on Feb 22, 2013 11:17:31 GMT 1
Marchesa, they've been 3 programmes this week on how we are all going to pay more for our energy (especially gas). IN NONE of the programmes did the presenters question why this should be the case when the US is going to start exporting NG and its price is below what we currently pay. I get so angry because the programme's producers seem to go along with statements like "Energy prices will rise" without -apparently- providing the presenters with freely available info that could help them QUESTION and CHALLENGE that assumption. I personally believe that the whole charade is about changing the mindset of the public so that they believe that prices MUST/WILL rise whatever energy sources are found. Why? Well, I suspect the government are hedging their bets so that when gas prices fall they'll just add a carbon tax to bring it back to the original higher price. P
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 22, 2013 20:01:13 GMT 1
Although I am not prone to conspiracy theories, principled, one begins to wonder if there is not some serious conspiracy afoot here to protect the renewables cronies from competition. So many multinational interests and banks have their snout in the taxpayers pocket courtesy of the renewable energy scam that this juggernaut will take a lot of turning around. One can only rely on the good sense of the developing world to shunt the Western gravy train into a siding.
It's a scandal of huge proportions. Where is the discussion on the airwaves of this marvellous new shale resource waiting to be exploited? It would mean a boost to the world economy and help get Europe out of its self-imposed doldrums. But not a murmur about it in the media. That is SOME conspiracy of silence IMHO, principled.
the media are as quiet about this as they are loud about supposed "extreme" weather. Could the two be connected, I wonder?
|
|
|
Post by principled on Feb 24, 2013 18:40:42 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Feb 25, 2013 11:24:45 GMT 1
I don't come on here very often but by coincidence I have a man due here in about an hour to discuss a pilot plant for the pyrolysis of plastic waste.
I have the outline drawings on my desk, and it looks quite promising.
Anything I learn which is not subject to a commercial embargo I will share with you.
|
|
|
Post by principled on Feb 25, 2013 13:42:34 GMT 1
Jonjel, I always enjoy your contributions. The idea of converting mixed plastics into fuels is very interesting as it will hopefully (?) prevent large mountains made of bales of contaminated plastic being sent to landfill after they have been rejected by recycling countries such as China. I suppose that technically, burning it is not recycling it, but it's better than storing it or sending to landfill. www.enviro-news.com/news/china-rejects-british-plastic-for-recycling.htmlP
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 25, 2013 14:47:48 GMT 1
Hi, jonjel! (waves!)
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Feb 25, 2013 15:15:09 GMT 1
An interesting meeting (Hi Marchesa - waves!)
I can't tell you everything otherwise I would have to kill you! But it is interesting, and I am too long in the tooth to be excited at the prospect of every supermarket demanding a plant from us. Yeah, right, but you pay for yours first, and we will ignore the carrot of tax breaks for R&D, then we will see where it runs.
One interesting fact that did come out is that old 30 + year old plastic dumps in landfill are by and large stable. Then someone comes along and insists it is all 'biodegradable'. And what does that degrade into? Wow, the original components. And what is it made from? Oil. So in any quantity it degrades into a large pool of toxic sludge. Very toxic. Yes, the odd plastic bag in the hedgerow disappears, but not really, it just means that the pool of toxic sludge is smaller, and localised.
I looked at some of the videos on YouTube of people with home made kit. Some seems to work, but some I would prefer they keep in the woods of Eastern Europe or America as I would rather not to stand to close.
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Feb 26, 2013 1:06:12 GMT 1
Jut in case anyone thinks there isn't a conspiracy about plastic bags, it's worth looking at the real contents of hedgerows. How many actual supermarket carriers do you see? and how much other crap? Supermarket carriers are too useful and valuable for people to throw away until they've been used at least twice, and anyway who would chuck away a carrier bag before they had got it home or at least eaten the contents? So for every carrier bag floating about the countryside there will be at least a dozen wrappers from the sandwiches, biscuits, fruit and stuff that was inside the carrier bag, not to mention beer cans.
Driving out into real countryside, the hedgerows are mostly decorated with black plastic from silage wrap, odd bits of baler twine, and miscellaneous other plastic accoutrements of agriculture, plus even more condoms and beercans than you see in the suburbs.
On average I see one carrier bag per mile, and at least a hundred times its weight in other crud.
So why do politicians want to tax carrier bags? Because they can!
Apologies for the diversion. back to pyrolysis.
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Feb 26, 2013 8:19:14 GMT 1
You probably make a good point Alan, that most of the litter of countryside is not plastic bags but their contents, plus deliberate fly tipping of things like mattresses. However the plastic bags are more noticeable because of their size and shape, and the fact that they blow around in the wind, typically settling where it is caught visibly high in a hedge. The other rubbish tends to drop under a hedge, or be grown over by grass etc and made less visible.
As for the treatment of synthetic rubbish, why don't we just burn it and recover the energy? Can't all the fumes and ash be collected and disposed of safely?
|
|