On 25 February 2014 12:20, John Mikes <[email protected]> wrote: > Liz, I will sign up for your 101 chemistry class. >
Sadly not my strong point, as I'm sure you realise. I just know that car exhausts produce CO2 and water vapour (plus a bit of lead etc) so I'm guessing one can in theory reconstitute these substances back into petrol, using a suitable amount of energy, catalysts etc. (If plants can do it, I figure we should be able to. Surely human ingenuity can match plants' ?! Maybe not...) > > CO2 + 2H2O make CH4 PLUS 2 oxygen molecules. Use a multiple of such to > make your 'petrol' (lesser ratio of H to C and even absorbing a little > portion of the O2) yet the surplus of O2 is still generated. > What I am driving at are CH3-CH2...CH2.CH3 types with occasional -OH ( > -CO-?) groups included). The Germans applied a better format in WWI (!) > for their 'Watergas' fuel, stopping at CO and H2 - (still worrying about > the excessive O2). > Nitrogen cann catalytically 'eat up' some of it into nitrous oxides etc. > (from the air again) but the proportions are still odd. Not that I would > call 'impossible'. > > Believe me, since Woehler (1828) who synthesized urea (NH2-CO-NH2) and the > WWII (!) German rush for butadien-based synth. rubbers, everything was > given a thought. > > Your idea is excellent, it will reap huge appreciation from Brent (who is > also FOR solar). > Well, if you have a working fusion reactor burning up 4 million tons of mass per second, it seems a shame not to use it. > I would be, too, had I better news of the delicacy, endurance and > maintenance of the soalr panels - and the hazard of occasional wind-blown > coverage (abrasions, breaks included). Of course not as in-flight 474s. > The plastic ones should be simple to replace I believe. I read about them some years ago in Sci American. The point about the 747s was to use the petrol obtained from the air, of course, assuming that's possible - not that they should be powered by solar panels in flight! > > John M > > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:21 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Solar cells are getting cheaper and easier to use (e.g. flexible plastic >> ones). It should be possible to stick them anywhere you want, e.g. on >> buildings or cars. This would mean at least some solar power could be >> harvested using existing infrastructure. As usual the technology is there, >> or almost there, but this needs political or commercial will to achieve. >> >> Personally I'd like to see a solar farm that uses the energy it receives >> from the Sun to power machinery that sucks CO2 and water from the air and >> turns them into petrol. (Then you really *could* run a 747 on solar >> power :) >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
