Don't laugh yet <g> but "get-wind" of this new-and-improved
eco-scheme:
Yup - nitrous oxide - is a potential fuel with some unusual
benefits, especially if combined with wind energy into a total
package. Certainly, among the most attractive of those benefits is
that the raw materials are free...
Free-is-good... unless, that is, you are in the oil-patch.
First and foremost, there may be no other scheme on the planet
which is as ecologically sound as this one (in theory). Why ?
Air-2-Air-2-Air using air-power is the basic manufacturing and
conversion situation ! How cool is that?
At room temperature, N2O is unreactive with most substances,
including alkali metals, halogens, and even ozone. IOW is safer to
store than gasoline and easily liquefied.
It is therefore widely used as a propellant in aerosol cans in
place of the CFCs which can damage the ozone layer. When heated
sufficiently, however, N2O decomposes exothermically to N2 and O2.
If this reaction occurs in the combustion chamber of an
automobile, 3 moles of gas would be produced from 2 moles,
providing an extra psi boost to the piston, more torque - as well
as liberating more heat. It also has a number of other benefits
including the oxygen content which provides more efficient
combustion of fuel, and the latent heat of vaporization of the N2O
reduces the intake temperature allowing a higher compression
ratio. It is win-win (except for $$) and therefore N2O is injected
into the intake manifolds of racing cars and dragsters to give
more power and unsurpassed acceleration. Because of low demand,
however, N2O has never been mass-produced in the quantities that
would make it attractive price-wise, as a prime fuel... but then
again, gasoline was never pushing $4/gallon before. Plus the
vehicle would need to carry quite a lot of N2O even liquefied -
but that is just an issue of spatial-utilization which pales in
comparison to the beneficial ecological issues.
The $64 question is: can modern catalysts, combined with computer
control and perhaps sono-chemistry (and/or ... all of the other
modern advancements of organic chemistry) provide a way to make
N2O from "just" compressed air (and wind energy).
Without getting too much into "echo-ecology" (as in repeating
oneself) - let me reiterate that in past postings (if anyone reads
them), I have related this persistent vision of a fleet of
offshore, drift-floating, large catamaran wind-farms (of the
ladder-mill or improved Winged-Ferris-wheel variety) which use
wind energy to make liquid air (or preferably O2-enriched liquid
air, where the O2 content is 40% or more, of the end-product).
In this scheme, this liquid fuel/oxidizer would be picked up
periodically from the floating wind farms by cryo-tankers, and
transported onshore - to be used in regular gas-fired electric
plants - to increase the efficiency of combustion and reduce
hydrocarbons by as much as 1/3 for the same kWh. There is still
too much CO2 in this scheme for the Sierra Club- but much of the
energy usage has now been shifted one small step toward an ideal
wind-only situation. At least in the short-term, a wind-only
energy basis, even in a windy area, is logistically impossible as
a practical matter.
IOW this is just another alternative way to store and convert wind
energy - from the physical location where the available
wind-energy is far and away the most robust (offshore) ... but in
a situation where anchored wind farms are impractical, due to
water depth. One huge advantage of this concept is that the farms
are not permanently anchored, and the second is that the energy is
stored using the giant heat-sink of the ocean and the Linde
liquefaction process (which has a COP of at least 4) so that there
is a net gain at the gas-fired-plant from "just" the expansion of
the liquid - not even counting the oxygen. Catamaran hulls made
from ferro-cement will not add significantly to the overhead of
this kind of wind-farm, as they also serve as the place to store
the manufactured product of the wind and provide a stable platform
in high winds. That "manufacture product" may - as of today- have
a shifting self-identity... even though the "ore" is still the
air, and the power to convert it is still the moving air.
That is to say: if liquid N2O can be produced - instead of
oxy-enriched air - for not much more in overhead - then the
economics of the scheme could be enhanced considerably - and the
gas-fired plant itself - even eliminated in most cases.
N2O is itself a potential transportation fuel... (and don't laugh
at that one ! at least not until you think about the many
advantages, and few disadvantages) ...
Jones
The real humor in all of this nitrous-talk is the "painless" part
of dentistry, at least according to my laugh-consultant - the
inimitable "Painless Potter" (RIP- Bob)
