The Americans have gone industrial on this and it's up & running in Italy too.

Best, Peter
On 29 Nov 2010, at 17:23, Stephen Watson wrote:

> Indeed - I'm with Phil.
> 
> It says that the machine needs 1Kw of (probably fossil fuelled electricity) 
> to make 1litre of oil from 1Kg of plastic (not PET bottles which form an 
> enormous amount of our plastic). Also Phil's point about the gases is 
> pertinent - there may be safe gases simply from processing Hydrocarbons but 
> what about the stabilisers, plasticisers, colouring agents, etc
> 
> However, the real issue in my view is far deeper - it's our entire 
> philosophical and dare I say it, spiritual, approach to what we want, expect 
> and demand from our lives. As a species we use WAY too much of everything as 
> it is and if we are to create a future with any kind of worthwhile life we 
> are going to have to use less of everything. A LOT less. The chief thing we 
> need to use less of is energy. Without a change of mind and heart, current 
> mass human behaviour is simply to dream up ever more inventive and 
> "essential" ways to consume energy (just look at all those LCD panels in 
> almost every Estate Agent's window now or on the London escalators where we 
> used to have paper posters to see how clever we can be). So, having extracted 
> the oil, turned it into plastic, thrown it away, it will then be turned back 
> into oil in this machine to be burnt releasing CO2 in addition to that from 
> the original processing.
> 
> Look at the number of electric appliances in a home in 2010 and compare (if 
> you're old enough) to 1970. Try to imagine how many there will be in another 
> 40 years, assuming we can still produce the energy and extract the raw 
> materials and all the other caveats. A machine like this will prompt an 
> approach where instead of thinking "Let's not take that oil out of the 
> ground, let's use this oil from plastic instead" we will think "Let's take 
> that oil out of the ground AND then let's use this oil from plastic as well. 
> Then we can have even more things using oil - fly to our holidays for less, 
> drive our cars for less, and yes, keep the cost of Macs lower, so that we can 
> continue with our current lifestyle for longer after North Sea oil is gone". 
> They are all distractions from a lower energy world that we should be moving 
> towards. Mostly we share a need to believe that the life we have now is not 
> simply some one-off fossil fuel powered blip, but the natural and "God given 
> birthright" for any advanced human society. The extraordinary energy 
> liberated for our use by the burning of fossil fuels to provide our modern 
> way of life is the result of a one-off geological event in the very, very 
> distant past and when it's gone it's gone. Of course even if there is plenty 
> left we can't use it really because to do so simply increases the already 
> dangerous levels of CO2. Because of fossil fuels, we believe, that unlike 
> every other species living on this planet, that we are immune to all the 
> restrictions placed on the way of life of EVERY other single creature on this 
> Earth. It just so happens that we're the only ones who had the savvy to have 
> plundered the ancient stored sunlight for our benefit and in less than 100 
> years we have used over half the planet's oil.
> 
> And of course nature doesn't give something for nothing. When the first oil 
> was was struck in Pennsylvania in 1896 you got a "gusher". It took the energy 
> of one barrel of oil to get 100 barrels back. Now it takes around 1 barrel to 
> get about 10 back. On a good day. Oil is getting harder to find physically as 
> well as in terms of energy. As Colin Campbell ( 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Campbell_(geologist) ) has said "It is 
> axiomatic that nobody would look for oil in 3,000 ft of water if there were 
> anywhere easier to find it". Hence Deepwater Horizon. Hence permits to drill 
> in the Arctic ( http://tinyurl.com/29xtph4 ). Hence proposals for deep sea 
> drilling off the coast of Scotland ( 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-11443880 ). 
> We are utterly addicted to oil and we will not let it go without having it 
> prised from our cold, dead fingers.
> 
> 
> Very long and very off topic, but very on topic for machines making more oil 
> ...
> 
> Clambers down gingerly from soap box! ;-)
> 
> Stephen
> 
> 
> On 28 Nov 2010, at 21:14, Phil Ward wrote:
> 
>> GIlly,
>> 
>> I hate to raise it but isn't there an old maxim that says something that 
>> appears to be to good to be true probably is?
>> 
>> There's so little hard data to be had about the oil from plastic machine 
>> that it raises far more questions than it provides answers. Questions that 
>> occur to me are to wonder how much energy the conversion process consumes. 
>> Heating a significant mass of plastic to well past boiling point requires 
>> significant energy. Quite possibly more than is then available from the oil 
>> generated. I'd also have serious worries about the safety of the machine in 
>> terms of its "exhaust" gasses. Modern plastics are full of numerous 
>> additives, some of which are pretty nasty once heated and released. Bubbling 
>> the gas through water will I fear not scrub-out the nasties so what happens 
>> to them – either short term or long term? Also, what happens to the plastic 
>> residue, a soup of potentially nasty stuff?
>> 
>> There's also the fundamental point that converting waste plastic into oil, 
>> while potentially extending the life of our oil-based economy, does nothing 
>> to combat warming. It will likely make it worse. We need to burn less oil, 
>> not more. Plastic, waste or otherwise, locks-up a fair bit of carbon. 
>> Converting it to oil (and using significant energy to do so) which is then 
>> simply "burned" in CO2 producing processes is surely the last thing we 
>> should be doing.
>> 
>> Sorry this is so far off-topic. I'll pipe down now.
>> 
>> Phil
>> 
>> --
>> Phil Ward
>> Skype: aphilw
>> E: [email protected]
>> W: www.philward.biz
>> W: www.myspace.com/philwardmusic
>> 
>> • Freelance writer and product designer.
>> • Exclusive UK distributor for Veillette Guitars. www.veilletteguitars.com.
>> • Consultant Designer of the Acoustic Energy AE22 nearfield monitor.
>> • Regular contributor to Sound on Sound and Performing Musician magazines.
>> 
>> On 27 Nov 2010, at 15:34, Gillian Snoxall wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> I have Jason's permission to send this non-Mac subject to the list – just 
>>> this once!
>>> 
>>> This wonderful invention is the best news the world has had for a long 
>>> time, and it deserves to get as much publicity as possible. Please do your 
>>> bit by passing it on to all your families and friends, and ask them to do 
>>> the same.
>>> 
>>> http://ourworld.unu.edu/en/plastic-to-oil-fantastic/
>>> 
>>> Best wishes,
>>> 
>>> Gilly
> 
> 
> "We need to be hungry for life and less hungry for money" - Unknown
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Sussex Mac User Group" group.
> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/smug?hl=en-GB.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Sussex Mac User Group" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/smug?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to