On Mar 4, 2011, at 12:46 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I wrote:
No common chemical and very few exotic chemicals can produce more
energy than gasoline . . .
By volume or by weight, as far as I know.
Even aluminum, silicon, and anthracite beat gasoline in MJ/liter. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg
Lithium borohydride beats it in MJ/kg.
As you can see from the above chart, silicon has a huge potential for
energy storage and long distance transport of energy. This was noted
in the following,
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BigPicture.pdf
and not a new idea as can be seen by the the reference:
http://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/
PROD0000000000079095.pdf
Gasoline produces ~45 MJ/kg according to most sources.
Wikipedia, which is sometimes good for something, says methane
produces 50 MJ/kg. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_of_combustion
I did not include "hydrogen" among common chemicals. As far as I
know it is the most energy dense chemical fuel by weight, at 142 MJ/
kg. That's why they use it for rocket fuel.
In my book, in chapter 1, p. 12, I discussed this issue by
comparing a hypothetical cell filled with hydrogen and oxygen to a
cold fusion cell. I was assuming that hydrogen and oxygen has more
energy by weight than any other chemical fuel. I am ignoring the
weight of the container, and problems with compressing the gas, and
all other real-world considerations.
- Jed
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
