Cold plasma in shipping boats?

[Arugela]

https://www.france24.com/en/20200805-lebanon-has-less-than-a-month-s-grain-reserves-after-beirut-blast

This is the other problem in lebanon.

This brings up a corona problem. Could we make massive ships that keep their stuff clean in the boat for cross country shipments of food and other goods. this could have redundancy in the boat and at port and all stages of transit. Or is the electrical cost too high?

The other idea is then to use the cold plasma to convert water and air into fuel and then use that to fuel the boat and or generate electricity.. Or minimize fuel/electricity. How far could this be taken. Could current boats be equipped to use it to keep food corona free? How much energy does it take to generate this and what designs could be made. What is the maximum that could be done? This could include other things along the way to help make it efficient. For instance are MHD generators useful with cold plasma? One idea is you could put them on the nozzles actually used to prep the food or along other areas of flow to generate electricity or other things. You could keep it magnetized to the boat or to various structures and even use the boat as a giant field or something weird. Maybe go to automated boats and get rid of crews. Or have crews go on a side boat or tug like boat that helps at port and not on the actual ship. It could have remote overrides and stuff. No idea. Just coming up with random ideas.

Even more random. Then you could make them into submarines and use them in shallow water and make them work like super cavitation missiles to get to port faster! Obviously it would have to stop along the way(or before hitting something), but the tech could make for faster travel and less fuel from longer trips. You are basically adding super aerodynamics, but the boat equivalent. This could be great for things across long ocean stretches like the major oceans. Assuming there aren't other issues.

Could the cold plasma be used to actually propel the boat? I'm assuming it's strong point is not heavy loads. Unless it's a lot in a very small burst with a prepared fuel load which it could generate itself from it's environment.

Any of this could lead to greater autonomy or functionality to existing fleets. Or newer greater vessels.

 

Edited August 8, 2020 by Arugela

[DDE]

On 8/5/2020 at 12:34 PM, Arugela said:

This brings up a corona problem.

Does it really? Last I heard, shipments of any kind were not a corona problems.

Hundreds of thousands of people stuffed into temporary housing, however, are.

On 8/5/2020 at 12:34 PM, Arugela said:

The other idea is then to use the cold plasma to convert water and air into fuel and then use that to fuel the boat and or generate electricity.

So, go from electricity to chemical energy and then back to electricity?

[snip] you're trying to achieve UNLIMITED POWER!

Edited August 7, 2020 by Vanamonde

[Arugela]

That isn't how that works. It's unlimited because it's freely available in realistically infinite amounts. Conversion energy means nothing if you can pump in more and convert it. You are missing how realistic things work.

Cold plasma is supposed to be very efficient at breaking down things. If it can do that efficiently then it's sustainable. If you want you can use solar or other things to start the process or another source. One being the existing gas tanks. Which is very realistic in a real world scenario. The primary purpose is decontaminating the food.

There are natural things at work doing the work for use we can tap into.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Arugela

[DDE]

4 hours ago, Arugela said:

That isn't how that works. It's unlimited because it's freely available in realistically infinite amounts. Conversion energy means nothing if you can pump in more and convert it. You are missing how realistic things work.

Still doesn't justify your attempts to turn it into a miracle solve-everything tool.

[Guest]

SARS-CoV2 does not survive more than a few days on any given surface. Decontaminating grain is pointless, because unless one of the ships' crew is sick (in which case the whole thing will be sitting on the anchorage flying the yellow jack), any virus particles in the hold will be inactive by the time the ship reaches Lebanon. 

An impossible solution to a nonexistent problem.

[mikegarrison]

6 hours ago, Arugela said:

It's unlimited because it's freely available in realistically infinite amounts.

Say what? I've never heard of "cold plasma" before, but nothing is "freely available in realistically infinite amounts". The closest to that, I suppose, would be sunlight. Even that's only available half the time, and only up to about 1350 W/m^2.

[Arugela]

2 hours ago, DDE said:

Still doesn't justify your attempts to turn it into a miracle solve-everything tool.

It's a real world engineering issue. It's not about justification. It could be done hypothetically. If it's efficient enough or useful enough it could get rid of fuel costs by using water and air and changing out the generators for the turbines. This would be good for fleets as they could gain versatility in case of emergencies or just in changing routes as they won't have to refuel and do as many things at port. Plus it's a universal decontamination method for anything. Corona is just a reason to look into it. The rest are just other things that could be done with it in order to hypothetically improve travel times or other things. No idea on feasibility. But we know it's already possible. It's a matter of realistic loads. And whether you use propeller or other things is just a matter of converting to the most efficient or needed matter of propulsion. Converting stuff is normal in designs. All real world examples do multiple times for everything from cars to boats. We already or can already use gas to potentially charge batteries. Strap a boat to an intake method with infinite air and water and you have potentially infinite fuel and travel. The rest is a matter of details.

They could even take on new methods of staying out of port and having ships come get goods that are then a part of the port. Depends on the ship and the load and the realities of what is being carried. And that is one example of potentially many new things(or old things) that could be applied or reapplied if needed or desired. It could open up lots of interesting things.

It's something real companies should be doing real world feasibility tests for if they haven't already. Imagine and airport with free fuel near an ocean and the lowered cost of travel. The planes wouldn't need the equipment potentially as it would likely be heavey unless it can convert air and water fast enough mid flight.(which it could by going into clouds to get water. Although I don't know if enough could be collected. Although it might be good for specialized functions). But you could remove fuel cost almost entirely from tickets. And install cold plasma in the airliner for safety and corona reason as an air filter. This would then make the going into clouds useful for an emergency refill for those safety features potentially. The fuel thing on the other hand would be a matter of the efficiency of the fuel developed. Can you produce a fuel as good as normal oils from resources at the airliner? Or even offsight and shipped in? Obviously it has to be cheaper though outside of other practicalities.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Arugela

[Guest]

Details like conservation of energy. Sorry, the only "infinite power" solution of that sort is a nuclear fusion reactor with integrated lithium and deuterium extractors (both abundant in seawater). That could, possibly just guzzle seawater to run, but it would be an incredibly complex machine, and there'd be nothing cold about the plasma inside.

Cold plasma is a thing, but it doesn't do any of the things you mention. It's especially useless for decontaminating stuff from a virus that dies on its own in three days.

[Arugela]

Since when did cold plasma not have the ability to break down water and air? And this stuff could be good for general safety in case of future outbreaks and other issues. It's a decontamination method for a ship.

Offsubject but on subject:

https://drexel.edu/now/archive/2020/February/cold-plasma-PFAS-water-treatment/

http://eeer.org/journal/view.php?number=975

If anything maybe water can be turned into a foam or gas mechanically and then broken down. This already happens in boats.

If anything maybe it can make an additive to current fuel in order to increase fuel efficiency at sea and save cost potentially.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Arugela

[Guest]

That's a household water purifier. It has nothing to do with SARS-CoV2 (an airborne virus) and it doesn't break down water, it purifies it of all the other things that shouldn't be there. It's a nice technology for making drinking water, but it can't make fuel.

[Arugela]

Then why has everyone else I've talked to about this said it can break down water and make fuel?

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_plasma_water_splitting_have_a_future_for_hydrogen_production

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330341968_Catalyst-free_highly_selective_synthesis_of_ammonia_from_nitrogen_and_water_by_a_plasma_electrolytic_system

Plasma splitting in general.

This is referring to ambient conditions. Is that temperature or something else? I'm pretty sure I've seen many things say you can use cold plasma. I have no idea on the efficiency. But I've heard it's efficient in general. No idea on scale or reference for that efficiency.

Quote

 

21st May, 2019

Michael Redwine

One Scientific, Inc. United States, Johnson City, TN

We do it! We call our proprietary process MHD Hydrogen and Oxygen Production. In general terms, our process uses pure water converted to a superheated steam that is routed through a Catalyst Chamber that ionizes the superheated steam creating a steam plasma. The Catalyst Chamber is surrounded by an array of permanent magnets. A mixture of Hydrogen Oxygen and some small amount of Water Vapor exits the Catalyst Chamber.

 

We have also developed a small Cyclonic Separator that enables us to spin the gaseous mixture that exits the Catalyst Chamber. The heavier molecules spin to the outside of the chamber and the lighter molecules pass straight through.

Is this cold or normal plasma? This is just making steam with MHD generators which could be used in line with other forms of plasma or cold plasma for other reasons.

Regardless, if cold plasma can be used it could be good compared to other methods for safety reasons. The Beirut explosion being an example assuming no other complexities. You are avoiding heat which means certain cargoes won't become an issue. I wonder if this method could be used in conjunction as a duel system to use the energy more thoroughly down the chain.

Or would this all be more useful for some sort of battery production and hybrids?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328438939_Application_of_plasma_for_efficient_H_2_production_A_realism_of_copper_electrode_in_single_dielectric_barrier_discharge_reactor

Quote

Effective transformation of moisture into hydrogen in argon containing 100% relative humidity employing dielectric barrier discharge cold plasma is reported. The coaxial reactor with a common outer Pyrex tube having an inner diameter of 14 mm accompanied by a central electrode combination is employed for H2 generation through water splitting. Three different central electrodes such as Pyrex (double dielectric surfaces), copper (Cu), and stainless steel (SS) [single dielectric (SD) surface] are used separately, investigating the H2 production efficiency with the variation of gas residence time (GRT), electric field, working frequency, electrode surface, and discharge gas-gap (GG). Optimal electric fields 3.5, 1.7, and 1.3 kV mm⁻¹ at 14.5 kHz are required for the highest H2 production at 45 s GRT for Pyrex, SS, and Cu reactors, respectively. The utmost H2 productions 2500 and 4500 ppmv are observed with 100 mm long, 4 mm GG and 290 mm long, 2 mm GG Cu SD reactors, respectively.

This is using cold plasma. Not sure if the argon can be replaced with stuff like oxygen for convenience.

 

Maybe it could lead to machines at home to make our own hydrogen peroxide! 8) Like those crappy juice machines. that would make it applicable for at least emergency kit usage. Either as machines or temp devices to produce it in air and maintain a supply. We'll probably produce ways to deal with the electricity over time if possible. Could make some interesting and futuristic tech. What if static charge can be used to power it. Lots of stuff on a boat to utilize. Just a matter of being clever enough. What about a very small device using static from it's materials to auto-generate until full. Stuff like that may just be a matter of time.

In fact a boat can in principle create huge amounts of electricity with it's hull.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Arugela

[mikegarrison]

1 minute ago, Arugela said:

Then why has everyone else I've talked to about this said it can break down water and make fuel?

Who are you talking to?

And in the paper you quoted, did you miss seeing "high voltage source" in the diagram for how it works?

[Arugela]

I know it takes high voltage. Just not sure how much. Or what ranges can be used. Maybe use of storms can purposely get hit by lightning and used in a system potentially. Or ground stations could be deployed in areas where it can be solved in other ways. Again assuming cost efficiency or other factors don't make it more convenient.

Some people were getting cold plasma in general down to like 4-5 watts also. Not sure if it looses it's ability to do anything at those levels though. Might be a matter of application and equipment.

How much electricity of voltage can be make using a large vessels hull. Or how much can it be made to create. If you get to unmanned vessels or can deal with safety issues the sky may be the limit. There are lots of means for electricity production in vary large numbers. We are currently doing lots of work to stop this from happening. That means there is lots of potential!! ;p

Even if you make the fuel only when the ship if empty. It's potential production for something. Real world application makes that a lot of things to look into for it to be useful. At minimum maybe large unmanned fleets. You could also make ships to have areas for generation even when full or convert ships for this purpose or simply do the work when convenient based on current ship cargo. Assuming equipment exists to do it. You could even use cold or hot plasma at that point or a lot of other things or in any of the other suggestions.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Arugela

[mikegarrison]

I don't know why you don't understand that you can't make fuel for free. The energy has to come from somewhere. Where do you think it comes from?

[Arugela]

Because it's not for free.... It's just freely taking resources(not freely taking energy wise but taking something that is free monetarily) as part of the production. And it could be free financially if done correctly. Or less than buying fuel. You still have to spend on maintenance and whatnot.

Sorry, there is nothing fundamentally wrong about what I'm saying. Look into real world subjects and you will see what can be done even with existing equipment. The potential is all their atm. If someone wants to. It's a matter of efficiency and applicability not whether it can be done.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Arugela

[Guest]

There's no such thing as a free lunch. Or free energy, for that matter. Water is essentially burned hydrogen. You cannot make fuel out of water without inputting a large amount of electricity, which you would have to buy from a shore-based power plant. Using hydrogen as energy storage for ship is not a bad idea, but you can't generate it onboard. A wind-powered hydrogen maker would not work too well, because it would induce aerodynamic drag, and it would not be able to produce enough hydrogen to compensate (because that drag is the exact source of energy used to make hydrogen). Unless, of course, the wind farm was on the shore. Which goes right back to having a ship that instead of normal fuel, takes on electricity or hydrogen. Only sunlight is free, but cargo ships don't have enough surface area to power them that way.

There is a way to get free marine propulsion. Namely, sails. They use wind alone, no need to fuss around with water, and they are a very mature, well-proven technology. The only problem is that you need a lot of them to push a significant load, so this is a very bulky solution. The real problem with that is that bunker oil is super-cheap. Unless eco-friendly legislation increases its price, we're unlikely to see anything else used for marine propulsion. Even then, it would take a huge increase in price of bunker oil for windjammers to make a comeback.

 

[Arugela]

Once again. You are missing too many things already present on a boat. You simplify things grossly. Your argument on free energy is completely convoluted and unrealistic. Two there are endless resource generated by a boat in the real world including static and other things that could be used. You are not considering a tiny slice of the current resources that could be used if desired in a real world scenario. You are just applying ground based wind turbines to a boat. And you probably could generate wind intake with minimal drag on top of it all. Or maybe 0 drag(or near 0) is you used reverse forces and used suction from something internal if you really wanted to.

Look up how much energy is produced by a ship hull going through the water. There is massive potential for electricity.

Remember, science theories are oversimplified and have thing to do with real world application. In the real world there are endless things that can be applied in endless ways to get results when desired.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Arugela

[mikegarrison]

1 hour ago, Arugela said:

Because it's not for free. [...] it could be free financially if done correctly.

What? You just aren't making any sense.

[mikegarrison]

1 minute ago, Arugela said:

Look up how much energy is produced by a ship hull going through the water. There is massive potential for electricity.

OK, never mind. It's obvious you believe in perpetual motion, so there's no point in further discussion.

[Arugela]

 

2 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

What? You just aren't making any sense.

Yes I am. You just need to learn more about the subject. Since you can't follow the subject [snip] I'll put it in simpler words. The taking of water from the ocean is free outside of maintenance cost and equipment and other things. The actual taking is not a cost in the most blunt sense. And the resource itself has no cost atm. Unless you apply one. Think out what is being said more please.

Please stop making [snip] comments about free energy. You have no understanding of what is being discussed. This is real world engineering. It's obviously far beyond your knowledge.

BTW, free energy isn't nonsense either. It's just something real world given another name that people with no understanding mock stupidly. It's literally just how you work on engine efficiency. It's real world applicable. It's the logical extremity of the thing and is actually something you are supposed to learn in school. The people who started free energy are making fun of [people] who never learned anything in practice. You are all too uneducated to realize you are being made fun of. Free energy is a joke. But a joke based on a real world subject. Get the picture!? IT'S AN ENGINEERING JOKE!!! You are the one taking the bait. engineers make jokes to catch logical failures. Free energy is one of them. You mock it on sight because you see something superficially that has one insignificant mistake because you don't know the first thing about it. But some of the subject is real. In fact 99% of it is real except for one part(That was purposely put there!!). Because that is part of learning things in practice.(And the world is full of these jokes and they are all around you right now and you don't know it!) And it has nothing to do with me or this discussion. You interjected it for no reason because you don't understand what is being said sufficiently.

Engineering is taking the stuff in the real word and using it and seeing the results over and over again(Real world level of making things.). That is 99% of all real knowledge. That is where scientist get it and their theories. Although they have a very thin to non existent understanding of any of it. There are things related to the brain(it's entire functionality) that require repetition to learn things thoroughly. That does not exist in sciences unless use sufficiently or primarily in conjunction with something more thorough. The other thing is supposed to be dominant or you won't learn anything. Degrees in science aren't even supposed to exist for this reason outside of classes for applied degrees.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Vanamonde

[Arugela]

[snip]

How much electricity/energy is generated by large metal ship hull while going through the water normally? How much of this is stopped/diverted to make the ship safe or currently utilized on modern vessels?

Edited August 7, 2020 by Vanamonde

[SOXBLOX]

Not more energy than it has expended to propel itself through the water. See " Laws of Thermodynamics".

[snip]

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Vanamonde

[Arugela]

Go over the number specifically. Your assumption is complete nonsense as it assumes a relationship on any level.

Laws of thermodynamics have nothing to do with this when it's not part of how the ship runs to start with. If more energy is grounded in the water it simply is. You lack any ability to think these things out in the real world. If the ship design came before the realization of the energy produced it's not proportional. The only way it is if it's completely considered in the design in an absolute way. Which is not realistic as many consideration of the time ships are produced could result in a 0 use such as not being able to utilize it or utilize it safely and it being consider a pure hazzard that has to be dealt with to the extremity. Everything you have said is nonsense. You guys need to stop mocking people when you don't have any understanding of the subject.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Arugela

[SOXBLOX]

What assumption?

 

[Arugela]

1 hour ago, SOXBLOX said:

What assumption?

 

Hmm, I don't know. maybe that all things start at a 1:1 efficiency. You act as if there is no variance to the existing equipment and that the laws of thermodynamics are constantly simply in play. That is not how the real world works. Real world can make inefficient things last a long time for varied reasons. In fact the most efficient thing is basically never used. Real world application even commonly make the most inefficient thing more efficient in given normal scenarios. Because what you call efficient is only in a given generalized math formula that never applies directly without endless other considerations changing what is best.

Not to mention all it minimally has to do is add needed function or improve the existing. You realize you are going to see more and more of this in the future as this stuff becomes more common.

And not to be rude. But you obviously also have lots of real world experience. In fact I wonder if you ever worked at Boeing.

This whole idea is feasible even if you stuck it to the toilet in two rooms and cleaned some drinking water(Or desalinated it. And no you don't have to use cold plasma to remove the salt, you possibly could, you just have to do part of the process.). You don't seem to understand how this works when applying to a real object.. But if you could do that much more it would be a bit stupid not to find out or possibly test it in real life. The whole point of this discussion was a verbal feasibility test. You know, an intelligent conversation. That requires as many specifics as possible and an open mind. [snip]

Edited August 7, 2020 by Vanamonde