This is one of the best showcases of why this game is so awesome. Multiple ways of achieving the same outcome and which one to choose depends entirely on your needs. It helps keep the game from being monotonous.
If your whole point is to get first steel if you go with the full start you get a canister of fuel that’s how I did it but if your going for long game your a smart man! I’ve been racking my head on this problem for a while now I guess I should play more before trying Venus. Also love your videos I’m glad I found you last year!
Solution: use a stacker to only feed 1 biomass into the centrifuge at at time. That should spread out the production so its not as bursty for the graph!
Problem is that to get the biomass out of the centrifuge requires slowing the centrifuge down to 0 RPM which takes forever. Better to do a large batch at once instead of spinning it up for every little piece.
i knew biomass gave more hydrogen, but i'm surprised the difference isn't greater than that. but a couple of points to add: the water you make to be consumed in the composter only needs to be liquid. So you only need to cool it down to Venus storm temp (365°C). and the nitrogen you gain from the composter is already cold, which removes the need to cool down nitrogen from the atmosphere. condensing 198 moles of water from 737°K is 2.981.088 Joules (free if you use storm help) and cooling down 490 moles of nitrogen from 737°K to 316°K is 4.167.058 so it's 30% cheaper (in terms of heat energy) to cool down the water the composter consumes, than it is to cool down nitrogen equivalent to what the composter outputs.
Thanks. Now I am undecided again. :P But the biomass does produce pollutant that can be used for some cooling. But I do have to cool a lot of nitrogen. I think I am going to have to build both and test them, there are too many things going on and it would take an impressve spreadsheet to min max everything.
4:15 spare potato's?! Isn't that a luxury with the plants and nutrients mod early on?😬 You have got me thinking now and that can be dangerous.😂 Regarding the charcoal I am wondering if it's worth to use the extra volatiles to make solid fuel out of the charcoal. Need to math it out to see how much mol of volatiles solid fuel actually takes to make. If it's less then the 30 mol extra to make a stack of biofuel out of the stack of charcoal it's a winner. Maybe the power generated from the solid biofuel can go towards powering AC's for the initial cooling stages. Yes you will end up with the same amount of water but alot more power then just using the composter. Told you thinking was dangerous, thanks for the video and happy building 👍
I prefer the arc-furnace route, it doesn't use water in the process, if you use a combustion centrifuge it will process massive amounts of biomass very quickly with very little fuel used, and the resultant charcoal can be fed into a solid-generator which makes the process energy positive on top of the volatiles you gain. Also the CO2 from the solid gen can be used to feed your plants after removing the pollutant. I will still set up a composter after that just to produce N2 for me.
One other aspect that I didn't hear covered is that using the centrifuge adds a bit of automation complexity. I figure that one IC could fix it; but not sure. Also, because each has its own advantages, perhaps doing both with some sort of automation to decide which way the biomass will be used. If the fertilizer and nitrogen are stocked up or you need more charcoal, then send it over to the centrifuge. I figure that you could stockpile the charcoal as part of a backup/emergency power source. Just run it to a stacker/silo to let it pile up until needed. If it ever gets full (and there is no need for fertilizer or nitrogen), just burn some charcoal for power. Even if it is a waste, it will at least allow the rest to continue to run. Just some ideas.... Lastly, I love your videos... instructional and inspirational....!!!
This is great! In stage 1 of the Arc furnace for every 50 stack processed you get 400 mols of volatiles + 200 mols of pollutant at 0 degrees, If you let the pressure go up over 5 MagaPascals you end up with low temp pollutant liquid (for cooling the water?) and about 30 degree Vol for mixing. Also for you graphing issue, could you use a stacker to release 1 unit into the furnace per second? Great video it really shows the differences in efficiencies between them. Thanks
great vid mick! its really nice to see the numbers via a side-by-side comparison! correct me if im wrong. the composter will take any temp water 370 to 0.1C, as long as its water? so would it better to go with a composter at, first biomass later after you have a more robust water-cooling sys? Personally, i would have no shame off gassing iron, nickel, silicon with Venus air, then smelt them with steam to get the water temp down. then cool it more with lead bars. Another great thing about the biomass way is it can be made in a reg/advanced furnace at 307C min. in a sense biomass will become "8 mol vol ice" Edit, or use the steam to make steel, with off gassed coal
The biomass doesnt take any water, so I would start with the biomass. And with the biomass being worth 8 cobalt for furnace heating, it will be handy early game before the furnace heating has been established.
@cowsareevil7514 God please yes, been excitedly awaiting your next playthrough and I've been banging my head against Venus for a while now, would love to see how you do! Are you planning it with plants and nutrition etc or just vanilla?
I want to do it without trade, so I need to be fully self sufficient. I want to use plants and nutrition but that needs more water and I havent managed to cool water fast enough so far.
@cowsareevil7514 that's fair, it really surprised me how much just the constant high temperature on Venus become a pain, especially with the pressures, cooling anything is a bit of a slog
Suggestion for graphing: Cant it be graphed on the avg rate of 'centrifuging' done by the centrifuge + chute + arc furnace time? Just checking the time for the centrifuge to open and how much charcoal was produced, added to when vol's are produced? Too lazy for MIPS rn, but there's a solution there somewhere, for the batching problem.
Well methinks that in the end you will still have both systems, both will be handy for water generation and the greenhouses. since the coal route can produce the carbon the plants need but like all things on Vulcan... it all needs to be cooled down. Although the coal route is very effective in power generation aswell... since it makes coal on top of not needing to be fed water.. it just needs power and biomass with the added bonus of generating coal for steel... Maybe use the volatiles and oxygen as a "coolant" to delete some heat before it gets used by the H2 combustor... since it can go to a little less than 573.15 K / 300 °C degrees celcius... would make for some intresting... moments :D
To tap into slightly cheesy territory, you can just degas the biomass in a regular furnace at 100°C to 300°C (or whatever the temperature for carbon from biomass is), then compost the degassed biomass
Oh wait. Did they fix the composter - or the H2 combustor? Because until recently it took an awful ammount of water to process stuff - which left barely enough to create excess water. However with the combustor having just an efficiency of 50% or so - it was a net loss on water.
the combustor has an efficiency of 66%. let's do the math. you need 20mols of H2O to produce 50mols of volatiles, 50 H2! adding 25 O2 will result in 50! H2O. but because of the efficency of the combustor you will get only 33mols (50 x 0.66) of H2O, still giving a net gain of 13mols of H2O per cycle. and this gasmix is at about 2300K so perfect for smelting even stellite or running a stirling engine
So if you're growing plants to make volatiles for water then the composer is the way to go, but if you're making volatiles for fuel then *maybe* the "dry" recycler process is better? The question then: at the point where the composter process has achieved water parity, how much volatiles are left? Is it more, less, or the same as the recycler process? Is it actually a better way to make fuel also?
One gives you more but with less plant speed since your missing the fertilizer, which "should" translate to a slow grouth over time? But once you are happy with how many plants and fertilize you have, then the excess should then go to the coal generation instead.... Would be some work to actually graph it over time, start with the 3 stander potatos, then checking how long to get to like 30, then a plus maybe 1 or 2 weeks to actually have some good numbers to compare with.
@@cowsareevil7514 Yah I guess it would be something like the minimum amout to fertilize all trays and everything else to coal, but honestly I don't think it is that relevant
well it is a bit cheesy but if you insert the biomass into a furnace with a temp of more than 300K and less than 580K (min temperature to form charcoal) you will degas the biomass, hence resulting in creating volatiles. but because charcoal is not formed, it will be ejected as biomass. running this through a centrifuge will return you the full amount of biomass, and here comes the catch... this new biomass is actually able to produce volatiles once again. one could say infinte volatiles. so you are actually just limited by the speed of the centrifuge, which i would suggest should be a combustion centrifuge, even if it uses a little bit of fuel.
A variation I never see mentioned is that if you off-gas the biomass to get your 8 mols per unit of biomass, you can then put it through the composter to get an additional 50 mols volatiles and 50 mols nitrogen per 3 units of biomass. Does not require running the degassed biomass through the centrifuge again.
I hated using water for composter. Unless you have a ton of overheated water, you'll feed it your precious drinkable reserves in exchange for a few spare drops in form of 2000C fog.
@cowsareevil7514 speaking of hot water, have you perhaps tried to use furnace as the first step of cooling the water mist to liquid state, by pumping it into furnace and then melting and degassing all sorts of ore and charcoal until the inside temp drops to a few hundred degrees?
Hey, cows are evil (but so tasty). Had my base reviewed by another, and im curious what you think. Or i could email it to you? ua-cam.com/users/liveWjmiHIv5Dp0?si=cgCfmWsAyBU7Ne6B
This is one of the best showcases of why this game is so awesome. Multiple ways of achieving the same outcome and which one to choose depends entirely on your needs. It helps keep the game from being monotonous.
Exactly. There is no other game like it.
So glad you are putting up these easy to follow videos!!! Cannot wait to see what the next series you have in store for us.
If your whole point is to get first steel if you go with the full start you get a canister of fuel that’s how I did it but if your going for long game your a smart man! I’ve been racking my head on this problem for a while now I guess I should play more before trying Venus. Also love your videos I’m glad I found you last year!
Solution: use a stacker to only feed 1 biomass into the centrifuge at at time. That should spread out the production so its not as bursty for the graph!
A graph is always worth the extra effort.
Problem is that to get the biomass out of the centrifuge requires slowing the centrifuge down to 0 RPM which takes forever. Better to do a large batch at once instead of spinning it up for every little piece.
i knew biomass gave more hydrogen, but i'm surprised the difference isn't greater than that.
but a couple of points to add: the water you make to be consumed in the composter only needs to be liquid. So you only need to cool it down to Venus storm temp (365°C).
and the nitrogen you gain from the composter is already cold, which removes the need to cool down nitrogen from the atmosphere.
condensing 198 moles of water from 737°K is 2.981.088 Joules (free if you use storm help)
and cooling down 490 moles of nitrogen from 737°K to 316°K is 4.167.058
so it's 30% cheaper (in terms of heat energy) to cool down the water the composter consumes, than it is to cool down nitrogen equivalent to what the composter outputs.
There you go being smart again, making me feel like a hammer. :) I use many of you mods in the workshop thank you for making them.
Thanks. Now I am undecided again. :P
But the biomass does produce pollutant that can be used for some cooling.
But I do have to cool a lot of nitrogen. I think I am going to have to build both and test them, there are too many things going on and it would take an impressve spreadsheet to min max everything.
i look forward to your next playthro :)
4:15 spare potato's?! Isn't that a luxury with the plants and nutrients mod early on?😬
You have got me thinking now and that can be dangerous.😂
Regarding the charcoal I am wondering if it's worth to use the extra volatiles to make solid fuel out of the charcoal.
Need to math it out to see how much mol of volatiles solid fuel actually takes to make.
If it's less then the 30 mol extra to make a stack of biofuel out of the stack of charcoal it's a winner.
Maybe the power generated from the solid biofuel can go towards powering AC's for the initial cooling stages.
Yes you will end up with the same amount of water but alot more power then just using the composter.
Told you thinking was dangerous, thanks for the video and happy building 👍
You cant make solid fuel from charcoal, only coal.
I prefer the arc-furnace route, it doesn't use water in the process, if you use a combustion centrifuge it will process massive amounts of biomass very quickly with very little fuel used, and the resultant charcoal can be fed into a solid-generator which makes the process energy positive on top of the volatiles you gain.
Also the CO2 from the solid gen can be used to feed your plants after removing the pollutant.
I will still set up a composter after that just to produce N2 for me.
On Venus you get a tank of -200C N2. As I use it for cooling, I extract the N2 gas from the liquid pipe to balance my greenhouse atmosphere.
@@ЯБезымянный-о5ф Pretty sure that Mick is planning to do a brutal start, that means no LN2 tank to start with
One other aspect that I didn't hear covered is that using the centrifuge adds a bit of automation complexity. I figure that one IC could fix it; but not sure. Also, because each has its own advantages, perhaps doing both with some sort of automation to decide which way the biomass will be used. If the fertilizer and nitrogen are stocked up or you need more charcoal, then send it over to the centrifuge. I figure that you could stockpile the charcoal as part of a backup/emergency power source. Just run it to a stacker/silo to let it pile up until needed. If it ever gets full (and there is no need for fertilizer or nitrogen), just burn some charcoal for power. Even if it is a waste, it will at least allow the rest to continue to run. Just some ideas....
Lastly, I love your videos... instructional and inspirational....!!!
Thanks. Some high level control should be reasonably simple to inplement.
So, the deciding factor is if you make a graph for it. Lol
Yep, typical Mick. It's not based on efficiency or survivability, but how pretty the graph is ! ROFL
Graphs are essential for base.
This is great! In stage 1 of the Arc furnace for every 50 stack processed you get 400 mols of volatiles + 200 mols of pollutant at 0 degrees, If you let the pressure go up over 5 MagaPascals you end up with low temp pollutant liquid (for cooling the water?) and about 30 degree Vol for mixing. Also for you graphing issue, could you use a stacker to release 1 unit into the furnace per second? Great video it really shows the differences in efficiencies between them. Thanks
True. I should be make better use of pollutant to help with the cooling. Will need to make some changes to avoid wasting that resource.
In the name of science!
Composter also gives you nitrogen for your soy
Nitrogen is in the atmosphere, but the composter is cooler.
The graph won't look bad if you increase the time scale. Instead of v/sec use v/min or v/hour.
You cant change the h-scale of the graph.
great vid mick! its really nice to see the numbers via a side-by-side comparison! correct me if im wrong. the composter will take any temp water 370 to 0.1C, as long as its water? so would it better to go with a composter at, first biomass later after you have a more robust water-cooling sys? Personally, i would have no shame off gassing iron, nickel, silicon with Venus air, then smelt them with steam to get the water temp down. then cool it more with lead bars. Another great thing about the biomass way is it can be made in a reg/advanced furnace at 307C min. in a sense biomass will become "8 mol vol ice"
Edit, or use the steam to make steel, with off gassed coal
The biomass doesnt take any water, so I would start with the biomass. And with the biomass being worth 8 cobalt for furnace heating, it will be handy early game before the furnace heating has been established.
Hey, im not sure if centrifuge is required...i think you can toss the reagent mix straight into the furnace, kinda like pure iron reagent mix
It wont off gas.
15:30 I didn't expect this video to become graphic...
Hello, you should definitely start a new series
I want to go to Venus. This is all part of figuring out how.
@cowsareevil7514 God please yes, been excitedly awaiting your next playthrough and I've been banging my head against Venus for a while now, would love to see how you do! Are you planning it with plants and nutrition etc or just vanilla?
I want to do it without trade, so I need to be fully self sufficient. I want to use plants and nutrition but that needs more water and I havent managed to cool water fast enough so far.
@cowsareevil7514 that's fair, it really surprised me how much just the constant high temperature on Venus become a pain, especially with the pressures, cooling anything is a bit of a slog
Suggestion for graphing:
Cant it be graphed on the avg rate of 'centrifuging' done by the centrifuge + chute + arc furnace time? Just checking the time for the centrifuge to open and how much charcoal was produced, added to when vol's are produced? Too lazy for MIPS rn, but there's a solution there somewhere, for the batching problem.
Well methinks that in the end you will still have both systems, both will be handy for water generation and the greenhouses. since the coal route can produce the carbon the plants need but like all things on Vulcan... it all needs to be cooled down.
Although the coal route is very effective in power generation aswell... since it makes coal on top of not needing to be fed water.. it just needs power and biomass with the added bonus of generating coal for steel...
Maybe use the volatiles and oxygen as a "coolant" to delete some heat before it gets used by the H2 combustor... since it can go to a little less than 573.15 K / 300 °C degrees celcius... would make for some intresting... moments :D
i like not having to use water to make water, but that's just my preference. even if i use the composter i will keep the furnace route as a backup
To tap into slightly cheesy territory, you can just degas the biomass in a regular furnace at 100°C to 300°C (or whatever the temperature for carbon from biomass is), then compost the degassed biomass
You can but biomass shortage is not the problem. Two centrifuges or two composters can produce enough volatiles.
Can you put the excess fertilizer into the recycler?
Yes you can
@@hadynhaynes78 and then you get more biomass, or what will be the product? If yes, then you can connect both setups and have even more gas?
The fertiliser is destroyed and nothing comes out.
Oh wait. Did they fix the composter - or the H2 combustor?
Because until recently it took an awful ammount of water to process stuff - which left barely enough to create excess water. However with the combustor having just an efficiency of 50% or so - it was a net loss on water.
Not sure, I have been using it sucessfully for quite a few series now.
the combustor has an efficiency of 66%. let's do the math. you need 20mols of H2O to produce 50mols of volatiles, 50 H2! adding 25 O2 will result in 50! H2O. but because of the efficency of the combustor you will get only 33mols (50 x 0.66) of H2O, still giving a net gain of 13mols of H2O per cycle.
and this gasmix is at about 2300K so perfect for smelting even stellite or running a stirling engine
So if you're growing plants to make volatiles for water then the composer is the way to go, but if you're making volatiles for fuel then *maybe* the "dry" recycler process is better?
The question then: at the point where the composter process has achieved water parity, how much volatiles are left? Is it more, less, or the same as the recycler process? Is it actually a better way to make fuel also?
Either way is good, it depends on how much you need the byproducts. ie. Nitrogen, fertiliser and charcoal.
do you need the centrifuge? can the recycler lead directly to the arc furnace?
No. The reagent mix is destroyed and doesn't off gas.
Is this leading up to a brutal Venus playthrough? Hope so
Brutal start forces you to trade. I like the stranded and alone survival, so normal start might be possible without trade.
Arrived after 22 minutes
Nice!
One gives you more but with less plant speed since your missing the fertilizer, which "should" translate to a slow grouth over time?
But once you are happy with how many plants and fertilize you have, then the excess should then go to the coal generation instead....
Would be some work to actually graph it over time, start with the 3 stander potatos, then checking how long to get to like 30, then a plus maybe 1 or 2 weeks to actually have some good numbers to compare with.
There are so amny factors happening for this. Fertiliser, growth rate, cooling, production, etc. I honestly cant say which is the best.
@@cowsareevil7514 Yah I guess it would be something like the minimum amout to fertilize all trays and everything else to coal, but honestly I don't think it is that relevant
well it is a bit cheesy but if you insert the biomass into a furnace with a temp of more than 300K and less than 580K (min temperature to form charcoal) you will degas the biomass, hence resulting in creating volatiles. but because charcoal is not formed, it will be ejected as biomass. running this through a centrifuge will return you the full amount of biomass, and here comes the catch... this new biomass is actually able to produce volatiles once again. one could say infinte volatiles. so you are actually just limited by the speed of the centrifuge, which i would suggest should be a combustion centrifuge, even if it uses a little bit of fuel.
A variation I never see mentioned is that if you off-gas the biomass to get your 8 mols per unit of biomass, you can then put it through the composter to get an additional 50 mols volatiles and 50 mols nitrogen per 3 units of biomass. Does not require running the degassed biomass through the centrifuge again.
I wasnt aware that the centrifuge could regas the biomass. Nice cheese.
I hated using water for composter. Unless you have a ton of overheated water, you'll feed it your precious drinkable reserves in exchange for a few spare drops in form of 2000C fog.
The composter does prevent to need to cool the water (which is the hard part) so there are some merits to using it.
@cowsareevil7514 speaking of hot water, have you perhaps tried to use furnace as the first step of cooling the water mist to liquid state, by pumping it into furnace and then melting and degassing all sorts of ore and charcoal until the inside temp drops to a few hundred degrees?
cooling water was more interesting :P
thaT WAS A GOOD ONE.. oops caplock, no going back noooooww~!
Using less water is part of the cooling.
Mick.... Needs....Graphs...... _=*^-#%_=*^-#%_=*^-#%_=*^-#%
Everyone needs graphs in their life.
Hey, cows are evil (but so tasty).
Had my base reviewed by another, and im curious what you think.
Or i could email it to you?
ua-cam.com/users/liveWjmiHIv5Dp0?si=cgCfmWsAyBU7Ne6B