Power Generation and Distribution Blog Blog

Power Generation and Distribution Blog

The Power Generation and Distribution Blog is the place for conversation and discussion about electrical power generation, designing and installing power systems, high voltage power lines, power distribution, design & installation services, and anything else related to the power generation industry. Here, you'll find everything from application ideas, to news and industry trends, to hot topics and cutting edge innovations.

Previous in Blog: Future Energy Sources 3.4 Direct Combustion of Plant Matter   Next in Blog: Future Energy Sources 4.2 Methane & Biogas from Waste & Garbage
Close
Close
Close
23 comments

Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

Posted August 19, 2007 8:59 AM by masu

The incineration of garbage and waste was once a very common occurrence, however, it has to a great degree fallen out of favour due to the air pollution it creates and in many locations has been legislated out of existence. Initially one might think that the burning of garbage would only compound the problem with green house gasses, but like anything you need to look at the problem as a whole and there are several mitigating factors:

  1. Biological Waste: Much of the household rubbish and garbage is made up of biological matter and the hydrocarbons in such material are CO2 neutral as the carbon they contain comes primarily from the atmosphere. Materials like plant matter, paper, cardboard, meat products etcetera all contain carbon that has primarily come from the atmosphere.
  2. Decomposition Byproducts: If garbage or rubbish that contains biological material is used in landfill the decomposition of this material releases gasses like methane. Methane and similar gasses are far more detrimental to the atmosphere than CO2.

It is also not as simple as just burning the waste and using the energy to either produce steam or hot water for heating use or generate some other form of useable energy. Unless the rubbish is sorted prior to incineration there is the risk that the process will release toxins and pollutants like SO2, NOX, CO, HCl, dioxin, mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, etcetera. While it is possible to add scrubbers and other treatment of the resultant products of combustion, they are not 100% efficient and the remaining ash will almost certainly contain similar toxins and pollutants.

The best way to minimize the risk and problems associated with toxic products of combustion is to remove anything that contains them prior to combustion and this makes the process less economically viable.

Another problem is the regulation and monitoring of the incineration process. The use of centralized incineration plants minimizes, reduces the cost of and simplifies the removal and monitoring of hazardous products of combustion but it increases the cost of collecting and transporting the garbage and distribution of the resultant energy. On the other hand a distributed system that incinerated the material close to the source reduces the transport and distribution costs but increases the cost of plant and equipment and makes it considerably more difficult to monitor and make sure toxins are not being released into biosphere either from the incineration process or the disposal of the waste.

The following links were used as the background for this thread and while some are fairly detailed they do present a good overview of the pros and cons involved in recovering energy from garbage.

With the population of the Earth steadily growing and the raising of living standards in underdeveloped countries it is clear that we cannot carry on with our wasteful ways. Not only must we reduce the amount of waste generated and recycle more but the recovery of the energy in the waste could have a real effect on the release of green house gasses. However, there is a considerable amount of disinformation being circulated by both proponents and opponents alike.. It is critical that not only the engineers, companies and society in general but legislators and governments look at all the factors and make decisions based on logic rather than emotive responses. Poorly thought through legislation can not only result in creating undesirable results but can often destroy the ideas and technology we are actually seeking.

Going back 40 years in the area I lived it was common for people living in medium to high density housing to incinerate almost all their rubbish and garbage leaving only the ash to be collected and disposed of in landfill. This has now been stopped by legislation and as a result trying to get an environmentally sustainable garbage incineration energy recovery system operational is pretty much an impossibility..

What are your experiences, are the EU legislators correct or have they got it completely wrong? Which is the best solution, the centralized incineration of garbage and the distribution of energy or a distributed local system that incinerates the garbage where the energy can be directly used? Can we really build garbage incineration systems that can eliminate the highly toxic pollutants that come from burning much of today's waste?

Reply

Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".
Power-User

Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 273
Good Answers: 3
#1

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/20/2007 10:17 AM

Back in the 1980's I designed a feed conveyor drive for a PYROLIZATION Plant in Redwood City, California. It was part of an automobile scrapping operation where the cars were put through a hammer mill, the output went into a cyclonic separator and the "Fluff", (non-metallic waste such as upholstry, plastic, etcetera,) was transported by conveyor to the pyrolization facility where the heat from that process was used to generate electricity.

The plant generated enough power to run the whole operation and still be able to sell excess power to PG&E.

I left California in 1991 and have heard nothing else about the project.

In the pyrolization process, organic and other waste is delivered to a combustion chamber where the heat of combustion is directed to the waste material so as to convert the waste into gases and liquids. Ultimately, the residue wastes from the combustion chamber are removed from the combustion chamber and delivered elsewhere for disposal. In the pyrolization process, it is necessary to obtain an extremely high heat of combustion in order to properly effectively vaporize the organic wastes into their constituent components.

Reply
Member

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7
#2

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/20/2007 10:40 AM

ABACUS MFG in Wilmington, N>C> has developed a smoke stack that virtually eliminates smoke and pollutants from entering the atmosphere!!

This is an amazing smoke stack. For information and specs go to abamfg@aol.com.

Reply
Anonymous Poster
#3

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/20/2007 11:48 AM

In the USA, for the developed communities, villages, towns, and cities, our wastes are normally collected and disposed of by incineration or burying in an excavated dump. Most rural locations tend to leave the individual to his own devices for waste disposal. I feel this is true for all of the world. It seems that the methods for waste disposal is as varied as there are individuals disposing of the waste.

What is important in this discussion is that all this waste contains energy in one form or another. The human being is about the most wasteful of all of God's creations. Our methods of disposing of our wastes is throwing away more energy than we consume. If one studies the engineering of septic tanks and sewer design, one discovers in his freshman year that our wastes actually produce 50 cubic feet of methane per day, per person. This is the natural gas that we use to cook our food, to heat our water and homes, and to produce much of our electric power. Methane is, too, 10 times more of a greenhouse gas than is carbon dioxide.

Notice, to, that there is s distinction between human waste and human rubbish. Wastes are one part of the biomass that can produce the useful fuels by the simple action of bio-digestion. Notice, too, that this same bio-digestion does produce alcohols in the effluence that is either dumped into our streams and rivers from the sewer treatment plants and from the septic tanks. In some countries, most notable, China, the methane are collected by the individuals from the septic tanks and used for cooking and heating. The off-gas is a mixture of 55% methane and 45% carbon dioxide, producing a 800 to 900 BTU per cubic foot fuel of the domestic use. This, then, becomes one powerful use of our human (and animal if used) waste.

As for our rubbish, this contains paper, plastics, metals, and glass, all of which can be recycled to save enormous amounts of energy that was used to produce the products from raw materials in the first place. This recycling is being done in some locations in the USA. I live in Houston, Texas, where we place our rubbish at the curb each week in a green bin for newspapers and magazines, empty plastic containers, glass bottles, and aluminum cans. We place our grass clippings and garden wastes in plastic bags along side the green bin. The rest of our rubbish is put in a four foot tall by three foot square wheeled container to set near the green bin and plastic bags, all for collection in three separate trucks that take this rubbish to the appropriate places for proper recycling.

All of these above mentioned uses of our wastes is what masu is talking about with his paragraph:

"With the population of the Earth steadily growing and the raising of living standards in underdeveloped countries it is clear that we cannot carry on with our wasteful ways. Not only must we reduce the amount of waste generated and recycle more but the recovery of the energy in the waste could have a real effect on the release of green house gasses. However, there is a considerable amount of disinformation being circulated by both proponents and opponents alike.. It is critical that not only the engineers, companies and society in general but legislators and governments look at all the factors and make decisions based on logic rather than emotive responses. Poorly thought through legislation can not only result in creating undesirable results but can often destroy the ideas and technology we are actually seeking."

We as engineers and as politicians must use our collective heads to stop the waste of our resources and the pollution of our world. If we can go to the moon and beyond, then we can also save ourselves from ourselves. Why not stop just talking about it and start doing something about is, right now. We can do it if we work as a team. The key is communication. If you have a good idea, why not publish it, discuss it, the design and implement it. This engineering forum is one of the best places to get started.

Reply
Guru
APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 570
Good Answers: 8
#6
In reply to #3

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 10:16 AM

"In the USA, for the developed communities, villages, towns, and cities, our wastes are normally collected and disposed of by incineration or burying in an excavated dump. Most rural locations tend to leave the individual to his own devices for waste disposal. I feel this is true for all of the world. It seems that the methods for waste disposal is as varied as there are individuals disposing of the waste.

"What is important in this discussion is that all this waste contains energy in one form or another. The human being is about the most wasteful of all of God's creations. Our methods of disposing of our wastes is throwing away more energy than we consume. If one studies the engineering of septic tanks and sewer design, one discovers in his freshman year that our wastes actually produce 50 cubic feet of methane per day, per person. This is the natural gas that we use to cook our food, to heat our water and homes, and to produce much of our electric power. Methane is, too, 10 times more of a greenhouse gas than is carbon dioxide.

"Notice, to, that there is s distinction between human waste and human rubbish. Wastes are one part of the biomass that can produce the useful fuels by the simple action of bio-digestion. Notice, too, that this same bio-digestion does produce alcohols in the effluence that is either dumped into our streams and rivers from the sewer treatment plants and from the septic tanks. In some countries, most notable, China, the methane are collected by the individuals from the septic tanks and used for cooking and heating. The off-gas is a mixture of 55% methane and 45% carbon dioxide, producing a 800 to 900 BTU per cubic foot fuel of the domestic use. This, then, becomes one powerful use of our human (and animal if used) waste.

"As for our rubbish, this contains paper, plastics, metals, and glass, all of which can be recycled to save enormous amounts of energy that was used to produce the products from raw materials in the first place. This recycling is being done in some locations in the USA. I live in Houston, Texas, where we place our rubbish at the curb each week in a green bin for newspapers and magazines, empty plastic containers, glass bottles, and aluminum cans. We place our grass clippings and garden wastes in plastic bags along side the green bin. The rest of our rubbish is put in a four foot tall by three foot square wheeled container to set near the green bin and plastic bags, all for collection in three separate trucks that take this rubbish to the appropriate places for proper recycling.

"All of these above mentioned uses of our wastes is what masu is talking about with his paragraph:

"With the population of the Earth steadily growing and the raising of living standards in underdeveloped countries it is clear that we cannot carry on with our wasteful ways. Not only must we reduce the amount of waste generated and recycle more but the recovery of the energy in the waste could have a real effect on the release of green house gasses. However, there is a considerable amount of disinformation being circulated by both proponents and opponents alike.. It is critical that not only the engineers, companies and society in general but legislators and governments look at all the factors and make decisions based on logic rather than emotive responses. Poorly thought through legislation can not only result in creating undesirable results but can often destroy the ideas and technology we are actually seeking."

"We as engineers and as politicians must use our collective heads to stop the waste of our resources and the pollution of our world. If we can go to the moon and beyond, then we can also save ourselves from ourselves. Why not stop just talking about it and start doing something about is, right now. We can do it if we work as a team. The key is communication. If you have a good idea, why not publish it, discuss it, the design and implement it. This engineering forum is one of the best places to get started."

I am sorry, masu, when I posted this reply yesterday, I was on another computer and had failed to login. The above comment belongs to me, chtank.


I have lost my Primary hard drive on my main computer and am forced to use my wife's machine until I can get to Fry's and get a new HD. My secondary HD on that machine contains all my old Windows files and I do not want to use that drive for Linux and I do not want to use Windows at all on the main machine, for security reasons. I have a LAN and my main machine is the hub. Oh well, in time I will be back online with the good stuff.

__________________
chtank
Reply
5
Commentator

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Cleveland, Ohio USA
Posts: 98
Good Answers: 2
#4

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/20/2007 3:43 PM

I have been aware of the TCP process for a few years now. They started with a prototype plant in Pennsylvania, and then they built a full-production plant in Carthage Missouri, next to a Butterball Turkey plant. I heard that the cost of the oil generated was around $20 /barrel. We have all these mountains of garbage that are oozing dangerous methane, and will do so for decades or centuries. This process seems capable of cleanly recovering the waste in the form of fuel oil and basic elements, which could then be recycled. It seems to be a much better process than "incineration". What I don't understand is why this technology seems to remain hidden instead of being aggressively supported and developed world-wide.

I got the excerpts below from their Website www.res-energy.com.

Carthage, MO, May 19, 2004 – Renewable Environmental Solutions LLC (RES) today announced that its first commercial plant is selling an equivalent of crude oil No. 4, produced from agricultural waste products. The Carthage, Missouri, plant is currently producing 100-200 barrels of oil per day utilizing by-products from an adjacent turkey processing facility.

RES is a joint venture of Changing World Technologies, Inc. and ConAgra Foods, Inc. established in 2000 as the exclusive vehicle for processing agricultural waste material utilizing CWT's Thermal Conversion Process technology, throughout the world.

TCP is the first commercially viable method of reforming organic waste into a high-value energy resource. The oil being produced by RES is being sold to a local oil blender and to customers who will use it as a heat source for their operations.

Cornerstone Technology
TCP succeeds in breaking down long chains of organic polymers into their smallest units and reforming them into new combinations to produce clean solid, liquid and gaseous alternative fuels and specialty chemicals.

The process emulates the earth's natural geothermal activity, whereby organic material is converted into fossil fuel under conditions of extreme heat and pressure over millions of years. It mimics the earth's system by using pipes and controlling temperature and pressure to reduce the bio-remediation process from millions of years to mere hours.

The process entails five steps:

1. Pulping and slurrying the organic feed with water.

2. Heating the slurry under pressure to the desired temperature.

3. Flashing the slurry to a lower pressure to separate the mixture.

4. Heating the slurry again (coking) to drive off water and produce light hydrocarbons.

5. Separating the end products.

TCP is more than 80% energy efficient. In addition, it generates its own energy to power the plant, and uses the steam naturally created by the process to heat incoming feedstock, In addition, TCP produces no emissions and no secondary hazardous waste streams.

Reply Good Answer (Score 5)
Guru
Australia - Member - New Member Fans of Old Computers - H316 - New Member Hobbies - Model Rocketry - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Port Noarlunga, South Australia, AUSTRALIA (South of Adelaide)
Posts: 3051
Good Answers: 75
#5
In reply to #4

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 7:42 AM

Hi Ray8,

An excellent post.

The problems we are currently facing are mostly of our own creation and by utilizing technologies like the TCP process we can reduce the impact we are having on our environment dramatically. The problem is the lack of willingness to act by the people that make decisions and control the finances and it is our job as individuals to put pressure on those people to change their attitude towards introducing and utilizing technologies like this.

__________________
An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Good Answers: 1
#7

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 12:32 PM

At 10K degrees, there is no polution, just energy, water and carbon.

Very clean, pure water and carbon; to be specific.

A separator on the front end of such a machine kulls the goodies. Great for toxic gas removal, also.

Dumps are gold mines.

Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bolingbrook Illinois, a southwest suburb of Chicago.
Posts: 367
Good Answers: 3
#15
In reply to #7

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/22/2007 11:39 PM

Lots of pre-contained nitrogen as a real mix of azo and nitrate compounds, too. And a lot of your carbon production is as carbon dioxide, but still a good investment. The nitrogen compounds are a very valuable fertilizer, too.

RichH

__________________
"People find it easier to forgive you for being wrong than for being right" J K Rawlings
Reply
Guru
APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 570
Good Answers: 8
#19
In reply to #7

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/24/2007 9:41 AM

10K degrees, by what scale? Actually, the process will work at much lower temperatures. The steam reforming process will work very well as 800°C (1400°F). 10K degrees (10,000), whether C or F, is way too high.

__________________
chtank
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Good Answers: 1
#8

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 12:34 PM

Yes.

Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Good Answers: 1
#9

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 1:04 PM

The cost of centralized collection will destroy the infrastructure and clog the roads with garbage collection / deliveries. NYC is the example. (How far is it to Illinios, from Manhattan, via highway; anyways?)

The cost of sulpher removal, will effectively change the current state of mind, which refuses to admonish change.

How about mobile garbage collection / recovery systems?

Someone has suggested plastic coatings instead of earth layering for staging containment. Polyurea "frosting".

The cost of manufacturing plastics will probably increase, rather than decline. Why not save some in the ground for tomorrow? Maybe we can figure out how to use it more efficiently later?

Reply
Guru
APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 570
Good Answers: 8
#11
In reply to #9

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 2:40 PM

Rather than thinking negative, let's think positive. It is far better to suggest improvements in an idea or design rather then to find fault and rejecting the idea or design. Even if the idea or design is not the best, positive suggestions to make it better is far more meritorious than is fault finding. The idea, how ever simple, shows thought and in this day and age of think tanks needs to be added to the list of ideas to be considered.

__________________
chtank
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Good Answers: 1
#13
In reply to #11

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 9:13 PM

One shouldn't have to sumize negativaty from the situation; just concern. Portable systems can acheive a greater goal, with a distributed hazzard management profile. Mobile units can seek out known situations on a schedule or remediate in a team, where required.

Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bolingbrook Illinois, a southwest suburb of Chicago.
Posts: 367
Good Answers: 3
#16
In reply to #9

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/23/2007 12:07 AM

The mobile plant would have no means of energy storage, and would end up melting our asphalt as well as being a mobile fire hazard. Hammer and slurry it, and add it to the mix at the local coal (or even gas) fired power plant, where they already should have most of the fluegas scrubbing and baghousing to handle it readily. Low tipping fees for the trash, generally a local plant, great decrease of the plants carbon footprint, and convert the ash into bricks and flyash as they do now.

Chicago was building a crusher/shredder plant to feed the Com Ed plant on south Pulaski, 1975-1976. I heard they closed it long ago, but maybe it could be fired back up. Use steam powered hammermills and conveyors, mix with the powdered coal slurry on the fluidized bed, scrub the nitrogen and sulfur compounds for sale, and you are in the green, ecologically and financially. Keep the tipping fees and charge the labor as the cost of the "fuel".

I remember a 1,000 c.y. heavily reinforced machine base that would have been a lot of fun demoing. A 3,500,000 pound piece that would be a career chipping away with a pneumatic hammer. I think that was an early use of epoxy-coated rebar, mostly #s 9 and 12. That was 1 1/8 and 1 1/2 inch bars. Now a 30 and 40?

RichH

__________________
"People find it easier to forgive you for being wrong than for being right" J K Rawlings
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Good Answers: 1
#17
In reply to #16

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/23/2007 3:23 AM

Why store what you can supply? Tie it into the DG grid and sell it to the local power authority. What you require is a surge protected input to the grid and a pad to create power on, for the mobile machinery. Guess what? It's also portable! The DOE just put a system online in Hawaii, two years ago. It's for the wind farm, so the variations of power do not create a harmonic and burn out the turbines at the local power company. Heck of a problem capturing that extra power without breaking a 26' turbine shaft, until just recently. Nobody wants to acknowledge that fact, though.

This technology exists. I'm not making it up. Yes, some of the technology is British which allows the dump to be recycled, because the gasses and leeachate must be remediated prior to excavation.

At 10K everything on the planet is recylable, even dioxin.

Just ask the folks outside The Redstone Arsenal.

Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Cleveland, Ohio USA
Posts: 98
Good Answers: 2
#10

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 1:24 PM

New Hampshire has a system that works great for rural areas:

Residents are responsible for taking their garbage to the local dump. They are required to separate everything into appropriate piles (clothes, appliances, furniture etc.). What usually happens is when dropping off your "garbage" you come across things that you can use (chairs, tools, clothes ...). Therefore many objects become "Directly Recycled" to a new home.

I think it would be worthwhile if some kind of "Exchange Depot" could be set up locally for city dwellers. Then only the residuals need to be processed (hopefully recycled) ...and they are already sorted.

Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Good Answers: 1
#12

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/21/2007 8:40 PM

My apologies, if I came across squarely.

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK, Midlands
Posts: 515
Good Answers: 2
#14

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/22/2007 9:59 AM

It sounds as though the current situation is similar both sides of the Atlantic. Actually I can't speak for Europe as a whole, but segregated rubbish collection is the norm in Britain and several other EU countries to my knowledge. We collect various forms of rubbish in seperate places. We have lots of 'targets' for it and every politician, local and national, will want to crow about the figures as if rubbish recovery is an end in itself. Are we looking at what happens to this stuff then? Is there a use and a market for it? It's all very well collecting plastic milk cartons here and geen glass there, but do we have processes that utilise all this and thereby which confers value on it?

My point is that maybe it's not good enough to collect stuff and process it into some other lower grade byproduct, as is mostly the case with plastics I believe. Or worse, to find we have collected such a mountain of it that all we can do is put it in a landfill site more concentrated than would have been the case before. Perhaps what we need is Rubbish R&D. It would be most interesting and heartening to hear from anyone involved.

On the subject of cars and the 'hammer mill', I find the concept of an umpteen megawatt machine churning up all the multitude of materials into one big mess only to be subsequently sorted out again absurd. I have a vision of an 'unproduction' line where vehicles are dismantled systematically into their material ingredients. The EU has already legislated to make sure the materials are marked. It would provide much work and use little energy.

__________________
Wish I was here more often.
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 182
Good Answers: 1
#18
In reply to #14

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/23/2007 3:32 AM

I was surprised to find out how much "recycled" plastic is thrown right back into the dump, with everything else, in spite of our feeble attempts to cleans the trash pile of plastics. Truth is, it works great as a catalyst for recycling at 10K. First thing to melt in the seperator, usually. A bit of regrind and wallah, it's a pellet for the furnace. Pass me that refillable hydrogen cylinder, please...

Reply
Anonymous Poster
#20

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/26/2007 6:05 AM

What about plasma technologies as a method of incinerating waste and getting energy?

I know these are little proven as yet but has there been any further developments recently?

Reply
Anonymous Poster
#21

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/26/2007 9:50 AM

We have discussed a number of things in reply to this chapter of masu's Energy from Garbage blog. It is refreshing to see that many have been involved in this topic. I have been promoting the use of biomass as a source of fuel for fuel cells, and one of the corporations I have used as an example of where to find fuel cells is with Siemens. My primary use of this corporation had been their work with fuel cells. As this thread's discussions continued to develop, I did refer back to the Siemen's site finding that the link I had sued in my blog was broken. So, when my Linux box hard drive is replaced, I will have to fix my own blog and work to correct the links. Also, as I revisited the Siemen's site, I found that I had overlooked an important item that applies directly to this discussion and thread, Siemen's Fuel Gasifiers. For those of us who are engineering toward green energy, leaning our environment, and providing cleaner, less expensive energy, this site in most important as a source for equipment to add to our power plant development. In fact, the entire Siemen's web site can provide us with a total outline for power generation. It would wise for us all to bookmarks Siemens Power Generation for reference. After all, they are a major player in the energy field.

Reply
Guru
APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 570
Good Answers: 8
#22
In reply to #21

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/26/2007 9:58 AM

sorry, I forgot to login before submitting my reply again: "We have discussed a number of things in reply to this chapter of masu's Energy from Garbage blog. It is refreshing to see that many have been involved in this topic. I have been promoting the use of biomass as a source of fuel for fuel cells, and one of the corporations I have used as an example of where to find fuel cells is with Siemens...."

__________________
chtank
Reply
Guru
Australia - Member - New Member Fans of Old Computers - H316 - New Member Hobbies - Model Rocketry - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Port Noarlunga, South Australia, AUSTRALIA (South of Adelaide)
Posts: 3051
Good Answers: 75
#23
In reply to #22

Re: Future Energy Sources 4.3 Energy from Garbage

08/26/2007 10:17 AM

Hi chtank,

I have just posted the latest installment in the Future Energy Sources blog. This one is on the generation and use of Methane & Biogas from Waste & Garbage which is more along the lines of what you are talking of. It will be in the next newsletter but you can post to it now and maximize the exposure.

__________________
An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.
Reply
Reply to Blog Entry 23 comments
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (3); chtank (4); innvader (1); masu (2); Moto (7); NoSciFi (2); prbarry (1); Ray8 (2); Wrenched (1)

Previous in Blog: Future Energy Sources 3.4 Direct Combustion of Plant Matter   Next in Blog: Future Energy Sources 4.2 Methane & Biogas from Waste & Garbage

Advertisement