Koen announces an patent about an CO2 converter with an thermo-chemical reaction. CO2 converter is very interesting device if used as Carbon Source. My question to Koen is if yours CO2 converter can use the exaust gas from the engine generator creating an CLOSED LOOP ENERGY SYSTEM and if charcoal can be completely eliminated from the process. Koen claims also that Troy Martz Has authorized US license for the CO2 converter patent. This means that Troy Martz knows how to work this new device? Here attached the diagram, any reply is appreciated.
http://driveonwood.com/forum/1649 all about the co2 converter in this topic available
since your question does not match your statement wich said you fully understand the co2 converter and i am not putting in doubt your intelligence, …
i am calling you a troll
i will no longer be feeding the troll, period.
to the other readers of this,… carefully read all his other postiings and the no sense in many of those
for me, i call that trolling
Sorry Koen but your answer is similar to the game of Battleship … it seems to have sunk all your fleet.
Troll or not I don’t agree about your comportment… initially you want save the world sharing informations for help people on charcoal gasifier and after ,because you think to have find an fantastic device, you stop to share in the name of moneys… Returning back to the CO2 CONVERTER… an CLOSED LOOP ENERGY SYSTEM is the solution but with different design of gasifier… no need large quantity of charcoal if you can recycle the exaust gas from engine producing new fuel. Of course that isn’t perpetual motion but you are near. Three factors are important: HEAT, TIME and CATALYST. Actually charcoal is our MEDIUM for obtain the reaction but is consumed during the process… the idea is use CO2 as carbon source and H2O for obtain enhanced molecules like methane. What we need is just an low cost catalyst that absorb from one side oxygen and from another the carbon and hydrogen. From this new concept we can start to think about new gasifier design…
Langbeinite is a naturally occurring inexpensive mineral used in the fertilizer industry. It contains potassium and magnesium sulfate, and it comes in a crystalline form. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-132910069.html
I believe it would be mixed in with the charcoal pieces. I was going to buy some, but thought it was too expensive… http://www.amazon.com/Down-Earth-Langbeinite-Potassium-Fertilizer/dp/B00KO4L76I/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1415553989&sr=8-3&keywords=langbeinite
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Suppli-Mate-Potassium-Magnesium-Sulfate-K-Mg-SO4-Organic-Fertilizer-50-lbs-/321441615743?pt=Fertilizer_Soil_Amendments&hash=item4ad769cf7f
In the description this is what you are looking for. Much less money.
Garry
The catalyst must be part of gasifier … must be an alloy and need to be heated >300°
sounds something like this:
very electricity heavy though…
We need to think differently from old charcoal gasifier… charcoal must be used as starter and just for mantain the reaction and after the exaust gas must be recycled inside the new gasifier. An better solution are charcoal pellets, simple to admin with an standard wood pellet coclea. The main problem at today is eliminated air as oxygen source using another solution. An simple solution that I have tested with success is oxyhydrogen gas. A pure stoichiometric mixture may be obtained by water electrolysis, which uses an electric current to dissociate the water molecules:
electrolysis: 2 H2O → 2 H2 + O2
combustion: 2 H2 + O2 → 2 H2O
In this way charcoal can be heated to white point with water gas and after you have the water vapour source needed for obtain secondary reaction with the catalyst.
Using that solution you eliminate completely the nitrogen inert gas inside the process and you obtain an simple water vapour source. I have been tested this solution and work great…
The next step is found an low cost alloy catalyst that absorb oxygen and carbon/hydrogen producing methane and carbon monoxide.
Well… Good luck
Good Morning All
I for one do not consider Marco Cioni a troll.
He has been a member here in good standing on the DOW putting up relevant reading back for nearly two years.
His four stages of gasification full color graphic that he put up and can be seen in his photo album is an absolutely great one I refer the visual people to.
MarcoC knows the sciences/maths and thermalchemical balances well. Pictures that he does know these from actual working and chooses to work in the one of only TWO gasification fields that has not been done over and over again, and well documented for the last 200 years - plasma gasification.
He mearly is challenging why a fellow who says he wants to make gold would go with seawater distilling out and consentrating for very diluted trace gold versus just using ANY solids higher gold bearing ore consentrate. Why?? Indeed…
Easy answers. He’s not actually looking for gold at all; but by fishing for Invester, Idealistic, Belivers to “crowd source” dog plié on and feed him. Fishing in any place there may prove futile grounds for easily swayed sucker fish.
Cheap source of “bio-mass” cataysts? Easy. And free. In wood already in the soils up-taked potasiums and calcium componds.
Read the Mark Papworth half of the Skov-Papworth team.
Read the Earst E. Donath contributor into the Producer Gas: Another Fuel for Motor Transport team. 60 years working experiences there.
Wanna change your potasuims and calciums in fuel ratios reactivty ? Use a different wood spiecies. Add more bark. Source the same wood off of differet soil plots of lands.
Any real farmer knows this. My chickens know this. Wild critters know this. Ask your horse.
Hyrogen/carbons/oxegen balances in solids fossile fules consentrates VERSUS the trace minerlas and sillicates in these is why these are classified from poor quialyty peat/sod to anthracite. Takes diffnert refining handling stove configured for each. Liquide dino crudes get claaifed out the same way. A 1% sulpher versus 4% sulpher can make or break a refinery. Certainly drive up cost and disposal problems.
Same with woods for fuels. Using higher percentages of actual barks for fuel really streaches my “hand”. Benefits if done right.
Regards
Steve Unruh
HI Steve… thanks for support me… there are inventors that initially want change the world but when they sniff moneys they change opinion… However if really we want change the world we need to open our minds and find different solutions. I am convinced that the wood will be the fuel of the future but will require new methods of combustion or gasification… the old ways must be abandoned. Normally Plasma Gasification need an big amount of electricity… my method not. We can not do without carbon but we need a new system that does not send it into the atmosphere. An CLOSED LOOP ENERGY SYSTEM is the future of the world and the end of the oil companies. If I told you that I found a solution to convert exhaust into new fuel you simply would not believe me … all the great inventors in history were inspired by nature and its laws. Light and dark, hot and cold … all we need is to look around and think about the future with love.
2 Likes
Gentlemen, things are getting a little wild in here. Interesting. I also, personally, believe that wood is the fuel of the future: FOR INDEPENDENT MINDED, LOCAL, NOT-MUCH-MONEY-DEPENDENT, HARD WORKING PEOPLE. However, I am satisfied that for other sorts, such as corporations and money-dependent (both getting and spending) people, petroleum is still the fuel of the future. Seems like there is more of it all the time (wonder why) and it’s all in the hands of the MAN. But wood, bark, straw,etc, the waste products of that MAN, are still available for the hard working folks to explore and to use wisely. And what a “blast”!
JohnS
1 Like
Thanks Steve U and John S for keeping this a friendly site.
Marco, although I’m interested in what you are saying, I just don’t understand. A year ago I didn’t understand much about wood gas either, but eventually caught on.
1 Like
" TWO gasification fields that has not been done over and over again"
What is the other one?
Thanks
Marvin
The charcoal pellet can be produced inside the reactor starting from standard wood pellet using an coclea.
All gasifiers use large quantity of biomass inside … is wrong… as is wrong use an bigger quantity of charcoal…you dirty the syngas created in bottom zone… you must process the wood pellet in smaller quantity and extract all the energy … more than 15Kw /Kg… more power more pellet… During the process is transformed in charcoal pellet… normally all gasifiers remove the charcoal … but why don’t use also this bigger amount of energy?? If you recycle the exaust gas or better you add steam produced outside you consume the charcoal mantaining internally to the reactor an high temperature with the result of an stable process.
No more air must be used just for obtain an partial oxydation. Remember… air = high percentage of nitrogen= inert gas=heat absorbed
Of course… if you use nitrogen actively as plasma flame you can use air in abundance inside the reactor.
I am really interested in your topic of generating more then 15Kw energy per Kg biomass…
This 15 Kw energy, is that a nett value ? if yes, what is then the potential ?
Do you use chemical plasma ? how much energy does this absorbs per Kw energy produced ?
Using external heated steam, how much energy does this consume per Kw energy produced ?
According to you, a lot of people are doing wrong with using large quantity’s of biomass inside, can you explain how we could do better ?
I haven’t seen a gasifier that removes the charcoal without using it as reduction zone in the gasifying process, what am i missing ? should we rebuild our systems so that it is more visible that we are doing wrong ? maybe we just can’t see it without proper explanation
How much more energy would we obtain if we did use this charcoal ?
Making this woodpellets, how much energy it takes per produced Kw energy ?
If we not use air, but recycle the exhaustgas, or even better steam, how does the energy balance ads up ? is the oxygen set free in the decomposition from the steam sufficient ?
Creating new energy from exhaust gasses in your opinion, is there a viable way ?
Do we have to separate the nitrogen first from the other gasses before we can use it in plasma generation ?
How much energy is there involved ? per Kw produced energy ?
How much kelvin can you reach with your chemical plasma ? do we need a special reactor ?
Can we build one that fits in a car and deliver sufficient power for driving it or is there a better way to do so ?
How much energy is absorbed by the nitrogen in our gasifiers ? maybe we should find a way to dismiss that nitrogen, any suggestion that we can implement ?
How much would you ask for a set that can deliver 100 Kw /hr shaft power ?
Could i deduct this investment as “renewables” ?
Can i apply for subvention ?
How much waste does this set generates ? how to be treated ?
I have so many more questions, i really want to learn…
ahahahah … using that technology Im able to extract 15Kw per Kg using wood pellet. I use charcoal just for absorb oxygen from air … final fuel is ammonia… the process use two catalysts, one metal (the same of Haber process) and one chemical at low cost… water cold dry steam is created outside… no high pressure is used as Haber process but I use the second catalyst… there are three stages in serie… charcoal is produced in lower quantity directly from wood pellet… the wood pellet is gasified only with the primary air for reach the temperature needed for start the process… you can find simply on wikipedia how many energy is released from the ammonia. About your gasifier… nothing of new inside… no evolution because all is based on primitive gasifier… maybe good for Thailand but not for the new world.
Marco up to this point I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt since Steve U who’s opinion I respect immensely vouched for you. Even if what you say is true your dismissive and quite honestly condescending attitude towards what other people have actually built in the real world makes me completely tune out everything you post. Build a machine that does work, release it to the world and see if it catches on…
David Baillie
Using that technology = chemical plasma without electricity ? cold plasma ?
Does charcoal absorb oxygen from air in an exothermic or endothermic reaction ?
The cold dry steam does heat up the process at what temperature ?
Is that temperature not to hot for the process ? 300°C for gasifying the pellets to make charcoal…
How to take care about the smell of ammonia ? is that smell cracked in the cold fusion from the chemical plasma ?
I know that my gasifier is primitive, that why it can not work good without cold fusion plasma…
but now again, because i am realy curious…
I am really interested in your topic of generating more then 15Kw energy per Kg biomass…
This 15 Kw energy, is that a nett value ? if yes, what is then the potential ?
Do you use chemical plasma ? how much energy does this absorbs per Kw energy produced ?
Using external heated steam, how much energy does this consume per Kw energy produced ?
According to you, a lot of people are doing wrong with using large quantity’s of biomass inside, can you explain how we could do better ?
I haven’t seen a gasifier that removes the charcoal without using it as reduction zone in the gasifying process, what am i missing ? should we rebuild our systems so that it is more visible that we are doing wrong ? maybe we just can’t see it without proper explanation
How much more energy would we obtain if we did use this charcoal ?
Making this woodpellets, how much energy it takes per produced Kw energy ?
If we not use air, but recycle the exhaustgas, or even better steam, how does the energy balance ads up ? is the oxygen set free in the decomposition from the steam sufficient ?
Creating new energy from exhaust gasses in your opinion, is there a viable way ?
Do we have to separate the nitrogen first from the other gasses before we can use it in plasma generation ?
How much energy is there involved ? per Kw produced energy ?
How much kelvin can you reach with your chemical plasma ? do we need a special reactor ?
Can we build one that fits in a car and deliver sufficient power for driving it or is there a better way to do so ?
How much energy is absorbed by the nitrogen in our gasifiers ? maybe we should find a way to dismiss that nitrogen, any suggestion that we can implement ?
How much would you ask for a set that can deliver 100 Kw /hr shaft power ?
Could i deduct this investment as “renewables” ?
Can i apply for subvention ?
How much waste does this set generates ? how to be treated ?
I have so many more questions, i really want to learn…
is it possible to answer any of these questions without revealing the truth ?
This is the right chemical formula N2+4C+4H2O+HABERCATALYST+CHEMICALCATALYST=2NH3+4CO+H2+HABERCATALYST+CHEMICALCATALYST
Temperature of process= <750°C