Wood is the New Coal
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- Chris Hopkins, a doctoral student in forestry at NC State University, is part of a team of researchers working to turn woodchips into a substitute for coal through a process called torrefaction.
They've developed a portable torrefaction machine on campus. Woodchips go into a large funnel at the top of the machine and come out as hard, dry, black pellets at the bottom. In the process, they've changed more than just their appearance. They've been physically and chemically altered - through heat and pressure - to make them denser, drier and easier to crush.
The pellets are lighter than woodchips but retain 90 percent of their original energy content. That makes them an ideal feedstock for electric power plants that traditionally use coal to generate energy for businesses and residential neighborhoods.
"This process could help us build a bridge to more energy independence," Hopkins says.
Hopkins and his NC State colleagues are working with Progress Energy to test torrefied wood in some of the company's coal-powered generating stations this year.
For a transcript of this video, visit tinyurl.com/njyxry
For more information about torrefaction, visit tinyurl.com/nsdvjl
Produced by News Services at NC State. newstips@ncsu.edu 919-515-3470
Twitter: / ncstatenews
Facebook: tinyurl.com/lxzjnm
Flicker: tinyurl.com/mgbsl5
@dhunganaalok if they know the math then demonstrate that by showing the amount of energy it took to produce the equipment and the fuel and all other energy expended just to get to the point where they get energy out of their product. But as with all of these types of videos we are to assume everything before is free so that all of the energy coming out of the system is efficient but it is not.
The mantra is that we will always need fossil fuels and else we will use hydrogen for steel. But hydrogen is a Trojan horse to me, brought in to force continuous use of fossil fuels.
Now if through torrefaction and compression, a kind of biocoal briquette is formed, usable for steel and cement production then the problem becomes the nature of that biomass. I am almost certain it doesn't need to be wood. Something like bamboo might be perfect too. Most likely other fast growers will do too, I think about Asian knotweed. but not something soft and leafy.
Of course cutting down trees far away, sawing them, chipping them, transporting the chips eats already much of the energy. That's not the way to go. We must have local fields of plants.
I also question a bit the way heating happens. A better way could be microwaving but I have no idea if a room size microwave oven is technically possible. With microwaves the moisture inside the plant is used directly for heating. Normally that should save energy and the released gas might be purer, containing more methanol etc..
This is important work, torrefaction can give pellet fuel the same energy per volume as heating oil. This makes fuel storage and transportation easier and more competitive.
I am sorry, this seems silly to me. I am trying to understand how this could be efficient. There were no figures given on the amount of energy input vs output. How long will we continue to spend tax dollars for research when math would answer the question in a few minutes.
@ewfleisc Your kidding right? If they retain 90% of the "original" energy content that means they have lost 10%. This is simple math dude. This is just the energy loss of the wood chips due to his process. This does not include all of the energy used to ship, process and ship again. Are you suggesting that there is an increase in efficiency, lol, Sorry, no more time wasted due to your lack of objectivity.
@ewfleisc It is a free country. He can do whatever he likes. I am an objective person. Bring the energy studies and we will see. This was a year ago. What happened? No Nobel prize yet? :)
@ewfleisc It does not take a PHD, just a little common sense, to see that this is not an efficient process. The description says 10% loss in energy of wood chips. The wood chips have to be produced and delivered to a site. It takes a good amount of HEAT and chemicals to produce the end product. The end product has to be shipped back to user. It is an easy equation. Efficiency = output/input * 100%. If he has built a better mouse trap the world will come knocking. Let's see.
@ewfleisc You mean material density not energy density. Energy will always be lost through a process or system not gained. This is the law of physics. And I do understand what his statement means. He is stating there is a loss of potential energy but the mass of the material is more dense than before. I am sure he would argue like a school girl like you are about the laws of physics. No more about this silly subject. I checked your channel. You obviously are just trolling.
Can some one give me the cost of one output machine. Who shall i contact.
We can supply such biomass carbonization furnace. Please contact darren@simecpellet.com.
Hmm you can take wood, put it in a retort, set it alight, then seal it up, use any volatile gases to further heat the wood. Bingo it's charcoal. So Torrefaction is the same? but at a lower temperature? The stuff coming out the end looks just like charcoal. Comments on energy efficiency vs retort manufactured charcoal briquettes?
Very Nice... but I suggest to use or test also other than woods based biomass, like straw, roots, cornstover, rice husks, fruitpulp residuals, recycled urban stuff etc.., because wood can be used/applied for many better, sustinable construction purposes. !
@ArtisanTony Dude prof and doctoral students knows math. Its similar to whether to refine petroleum or directly use it. when you upgrade the quality of energy, there will definitely be some losses but gains are higher.
Could this be achieved with dung?
How much energy in and how much energy out?