UK firm develops jet fuel made from human poo | The starting material is generated in excess and available in plenty. It is a win-win for everyone that the waste is repurposed.::undefined

  • arandomthought@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    Is this another one of these “eco-fuels” that take about ten times the energy they store just to produce them, and no one will tell you where that energy will come from?

    • 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean if you can get it from actually good sources (solar, geothermal) where that type of energy is in excess then use ships powered by it to transfer it around the world is that a huge problem?

      • 4am@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        No, see if it’s not the perfect solution to literally everything then it’s just not gonna work. /s

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I mean, if we can’t build more high speed rail, planes will be used. And they’re the largest contributor in transportation, right? Or at least the highest output/least efficient means of travel. Eliminating a huge contributor is a good thing.

          Of course there would be other things that are worth curbing, but I don’t think we should shit on (eh?) killing emissions from a large contributor.

    • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The energy comes from excess generation in renewables for load balancing, that base load thing people mistakenly say they can’t do.

      It’s clever and simple, you put a whole load of potential generation in knowing that to meet your essential and desired demand on low generation days you’ll need excess capacity which will over produce on high generation days. You then plug that in to a system which has tanks of feedstock in this case poo and empty storage capacity so that in peek generation periods it can run at maximum, when it’s only a little over the requested load it runs at limited power and if there’s a time with no excess power it turns off for a bit.

      That’s why all the carbon capture and processing facilities are focusing on modular parallel design, it’s very easy then to create scalable production tied to excess load.

      Of course this is only one of the many possibilities, the nuclear lovers want to build nuclear powered sequestration and processing facilities, Iceland made one using geothermal, the American one is wind and the proposed Saudi one trailer about being solar thermal.

      Oh and actually the efficiency is incredibly impressive now, with some of the active catalyst chemistry they’re developing we’re getting into heat pump style efficiency gains and it’ll looking more likely we’ll be able to go below parity in cost per gallon Vs mined hydrocarbons.

      I know it feels like people never explain the complex side of things but that’s because journalists are bad at their jobs, there’s whole organisations out there dedicated to this sort of planning and a lot of the stuff they talk about and work towards ia incredibly well thought out and sensible.

  • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is a fantastic idea, here in the UK we’ve just been dumping raw sewage in the rivers and poisoning the coast because it’d cut into water companies record profits to treat it (also Brexit chemical shortages or something)- if we can turn the poop into something useful that can sell then the won’t let a drop off that precious filth go to waste.

  • kurcatovium@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Idk if it’s bad idea or not, but I’ll happily provide them with some of the precious material to experiment on. For a small fee, obviously, for science!

  • chitak166@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’ve always thought about how cool it would be to find a use for cat shit.

    Imagine if every time your cats used the litter box, it made you money.

  • iquanyin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    let poo return to the earth. jets also. we don’t need poo jets adding to the crap in the air.

    • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      You’re not going to stop people living their lives, visiting friends, family, and having meaningful life experiences. If we can make flying more ecologically sustainable than rail and boats then it would be a hugely positive thing in the fight against climate change.

      • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        To be even more doomer, people will have to stop living their lives when we run out of everything, so we might as well start winding down now.

        • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I’d argue that private jets would have to be banned before I’d accept any regulation on economy flights to visit my family that I see every two years

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    They way you have environmentally friendly planes is by replacing them with trains. I doubt burning shit just to fly will be good for the environment.

    • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Trains aren’t the solution to every problem. They are slower than planes, don’t work on water, and need infrastructure (tracks). They are great where they do work, but where electric planes work, there’s no need to put them down.

      • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        They seem to be since electric planes don’t really exist for passanger flight and are unlikely to exist in a future near enough to be meaningful. For water we got boats so that’s the one place where trains aren’t the solution.

        Tracks are a lot cheaper than airports as far as infrastructure is concerned while also going to more places and the speed of travel is a worthwhile sacrifice to stop pollution from planes. Plus sleeper trains are so comfy compared to the hell that is the cramped airplane seat with less leg room than you need to actually fit your legs there.

    • Exocrinous@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Let’s replace all intercontinental flights with high speed rail and sleeper trains, and only use planes for long haul flights over water. For those planes that do stay in the sky, let’s fuel them with renewables. Poo based jet fuel does not add carbon to the environment.

  • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Even if it works … Human waste is so heavily contaminated by medications I don’t think this is a good idea

    • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Read about thermal depolymerization. Not only will there be no medication, there won’t be anything more complicated than some moderately long carbon chain oils. That system can even break down the prions from mad cow disease, so it’s safer than most methods for getting rid of biological waste.

        • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Cool, you go be unconvinced. That has no bearing on reality. If you can’t tell the difference between open fire burning and closed vessel pyrolisis (or more advanced methods of chemical decomposition), nothing I have time to present will correct that misconception.