It is manufactured easily, using two separate methods.
Coal produces 12,500 BTU/pound and this new stuff goes from 8000 to perhaps 10,000 BTU per pound, not bad for using harvest waste.
It would allow getting rid of coal and using this stuff in its place and there are none of the polluting minerals in the man made stuff V coal. Net result would be much less pollution world wide.
It would allow using presend day coal fired power plants and metal production but just substituting these new products.
Originally posted by @sonhouse http://www.sciencealert.com/renewable-instant-coal-the-fuel-of-the-future
It is manufactured easily, using two separate methods.
Coal produces 12,500 BTU/pound and this new stuff goes from 8000 to perhaps 10,000 BTU per pound, not bad for using harvest waste.
It would allow getting rid of coal and using this stuff in its place and there are none ...[text shortened]... esend day coal fired power plants and metal production but just substituting these new products.
Now, if you could just find a bio - Trump to replace the present one, our President wouldn't be trying to drag America back to the 1950's.
Originally posted by @mchill Now, if you could just find a bio - Trump to replace the present one, our President wouldn't be trying to drag America back to the 1950's.
Originally posted by @sonhouse http://www.sciencealert.com/renewable-instant-coal-the-fuel-of-the-future
It is manufactured easily, using two separate methods.
Coal produces 12,500 BTU/pound and this new stuff goes from 8000 to perhaps 10,000 BTU per pound, not bad for using harvest waste.
It would allow getting rid of coal and using this stuff in its place and there are none ...[text shortened]... esend day coal fired power plants and metal production but just substituting these new products.
How renewable is it really? What is the energy cost to produce?
Originally posted by @wildgrass ...What is the energy cost to produce?
This is an important question because if it takes more energy to produce it than the amount of useful energy (i.e. minus the energy loses from energy conversion) that can realistically be extracted from it after it is produced, there's no point in it. I don't know the relevant figures on that. But obviously there must be some net gain in usable energy from it for it to be of any use.
Many years ago, I once heard of a research project to produce biofuel from sugar beet crops.
At first many peopled thought the research project seemed to be going very well with lots of biofuel being produced until it disastrously all completely fell apart when someone noticed that the amount of fuel the farm machinery needed to grow the sugar beet was more than the amount of biofuel that was being produced from the sugar beet; -they really hadn't thought that one through at all.
...and those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Bio-coal, replaces natural coal
14 Nov '17 17:20
Back to Top