JebKeb

Remove petrol from benzene?! That's a boatload of aromatics! Now, onto something more useful... Apparently when zinc, aluminium or silicon react with water they produce hydrogen gas and their respective oxide. This seems to be a better option than electrolysis to obtain hydrogen. But it is possible to deoxidise it efficiently?

Does anyone know any method of removing benzene from petrol? It exists, because they're already doing it, but I can't find any methods.

Our barely controlled explosion has been tested OUTSIDE of Jeb's copy of KSP! The first kerbal to ride this vehicle was Miti Kerman, a tourist. She is very not dead presently. Unfortunately we couldn't get any footage of the 1st stage landing because it tipped over and we lost the probe core of it. Because it's too cool to not upload ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

After leaving the Fischer-Tropsch reactor the mixture is first put in a still, draining out the water and removing most of the petroleum gases, light olefins and alcohols. Next, it is distilled. The the carbon number decides what happens next: C12+ dewaxing and hydrocracking into diesel C7-11 naptha catalytically reformed into reformate, aromatics then removed C5-C6 isomerised into isomerate C1-C4 olefins seperated and blended, then alkylated into alkylate other C1-C4 sold seperately The end products would be: Methane - back to the catalytic oxidisation reactor. Ethane - turned into ethylene Propane - LPG Butane - butane Ethylene - for plastics Reformate, isomerate and alkylate - petrol Benzene from reformate Hydrocracked gas oil - diesel and kerosene Waxes

I've been sorting out methane synthesis and stuff, so that seems sorted. Now, it seems we need to process the products of the Fischer-Tropsch reactor, because they aren't ready for use. In next post I'll explain, because IRL i have very little time right now.

Pretty much, you provide a link, and write up a respone. For example: We didn't land on the moon The cylinder was a fuel tank, not a cabin. The crew stayed in the capasule and the LM In 1959 we had barely gone past LEO. The VA belts aren't as strong as we though. And also, they only passed through them for a short time. There is gravity on the moon! There's a thing called insulation, if I presume you're talking about LOX. Anything else and you're just technobabbling. There is very little to transmit heat in space. Also, insulation and air conditioning. The moon is a vacuum, so liquid water would boil long before it heated up enough. That's why there's no liquid water on the moon! Short rebuttal: zomg. Long one: The resolution in these photos is too small to see anything useful. But you may have given me an idea for a science fiction story. See any stars during the day? Don't say the atmosphere, you can see them at night. The moon is highly reflective, so it's brighter than the stars. Umm...I don't know where to start. ^ ^ intensely There's a thing called recoil. The atmosphere is too fluid to push against. (That's why propellers are wings, not screws.) The fuel was in the rocket stages, not the capsule. And 1910?! I think you're a troll. You're still fun to dissect! Check urself b4 u shrek urself. Also, we kind of launched on Earth, y'know? Got any proof? Physics won't allow this. I've also looked at the moon through a telescope, in no way painful. What does this prove? Did this processing involve drawing? Eerm... Nixon was not president. Get me some proof he was. Rockets are flimsily constructed and hasty. Also, the stuff was ice, covers, bits of launch tower... Check urself b4 u shrek urself. And the department of Top-Secret Coverups. What a revealing name... It's a movie. You've never been in a rocket, so you don't know how accurate it is. It did not explode. An oxygen tank exploded. Just because there are two opposing views, doesn't mean it's fake. It's like saying because people believe in flat and round Earth the Earth doesn't exist. There's no moisture for it to go hard. Also, dust is quite slippery. No 25? You liar. Please don't get too political or ideological.

Sadly, the ads are creeping in. Sometimes you get one before startup. I play sometimes as i oppose the new ads. Although no, there aren't ads plastered all over it.

I have now!

I've found if you load up a vehicle, and when you're on a different program you rocket explodes and destroys the launchpad. It works fine other times, so is it just the rocket gets launched before it falls apart, or is it a bug? Sorry that I posted it here. I don't know where to put this.

I just don't think I'm very good at spaceplanes. Probably I just like the feeling of going on an adventure by launching in a barely controlled explosion.

Anyone got equations to figure out the heat produced by compression, and heat lost by expansion? It is kind of kritical in the CO2 capture/production machine. P.S. Hahahah kritical. I'm leaving it because it's funny.

Hmmm...bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

The teletubbies are actually deranged human prisoners sent back to a post apocalyptic world, as we ran away from the aliens. Their task is to try to fix the earth. Unfortunately, the aliens uses NooNoo to lower the mental age of the teletubbies until they were burbling babies.

Only one party involved. Also, a lot more assets are around suited for methane. Let's say $10K for the methane system, per house. There are around 2 million houses in Victoria, Australia (where I'm planning to start the business). That's $20 billion, and I still think I overestimated the price of the NG grid. I projected a price of around $500 million for the fuel plant. My philosiphy is, use what you've got. We have nearly 2 billion petroleum cars. Use them for 20 or so years. Electric cars still need more development thanks to oil companies, so ICE will probably continue another 15 years. I still like electric. I just think we should try to fix the problem now, not later. And we still need energy dense storage for rockets.

I'm planning on putting a huge roof over the complex, covered in solar panels.

I've been trying to make cost-effective rockets in my career universe for quite a while and came up with a reasonable design. Problem is, the landings are often rugged. I have enough fuel to land, but when I land, I tip over. I've been trying to make landing gear for it, but they all make the rocket wobble like crazy, tip over (I know about the new aerodynamics) and lose tonnes of delta v. So, anyone got any ways of getting the gear on? I'm thinking of offsetting the mainsail, but that might cause thrust loss.

Anyone know this game? Based off agar.io I think. It's been around for nearly a year and I like to play it after an extreme mission faliure. Then, after an extreme death in this game, I like to go on an extreme mission! If you find an orange one with a weird blade dangly head bit and it's named way of the worm, that's me!

Getting carbon (read carbon, not carbon dioxide) out of the air would take more energy. And we still have the electrolysis to deal with. Also, we're doing this to be carbon neutral, not be pulling coal out of the ground to turn it into methane. Charcoal is another option, though to produce methane and syngas. It'll probably only provide a small amount of carbon, though, because I don't think there's enough quickly replenishable biomass on the planet to do this. Now, to move onto the Siemens cycle again. Anyone got equations for how much a gas is heated as it's compressed? Quick side topic: do liquids and solids heat up as they are compressed?

OK, it looks like we've cleared up CO2 capture. Siemens cycle is locked in. Next, are there any other methods of producing methane other than the Sabatier reaction? I'm blank minded. This may come in handy outside my ludicrous device, because liquid methane could be a rocket fuel, with a bit of insulation. (I'm aware of the freezing point issues with LOX.)

Well, it looks like we've cleared mostly up CO2 capture. But are there any other methods for capture?Here's my list of viable methods. Air liquefaction Biomass burning Biomass gasification Another chemical method? So, anyone got any other methods of CO2 capture?

I wanted to make synthetic petroleum because it is something the world can use now. It's not the most efficient, it's not the cleanest, but it could be used now with no apparent infrastructure changes. I am trying to make a replacement for oil. Something that can be used by the present system easily without change and is reasonably good for the enviroment. Fuel cells are better. LPG and CNG are probably better. But it is very hard into action near-instanty worldwide. (It's probably time to admit this idea is hard, but only a few parties are involved, unlike the billions of car owners.) I don't like my idea, but it is a viableish method of fuelling today's vehicles carbon-neutrally. The grand plan was, go carbon neutral and slowly replace the ICE fleet with electric and maybe turbine? It is probably too hard to suddenly switch over all cars to electric in only a few years. I hope it'll happen, but you still need a backup and intermediate plan.

This thread appears to still be evolving, so don't lock it.

Firstly, can we please stop talking about boilers and wood gas and stuff like that?! Wood gas is too inpure and boilers are useless for the applications I'm talking about. Next, ever seen a weed in the desert? True desert, not just some field where cows trampled all the grass to death. I don't want to use fertilisers because logistics and production. Plants are just not going to be as efficient as what mankind can do. I'm sure if we put our minds to it we could make self building houses and stuff. Algae are a bit better, but still require lots of water and nutrients. Hydrogen: evil and bulky. Methane: bulky. What's the point in switching over to these cars? Electric cars are far better, but I don't see 2 billion owners just deciding to scrap their car for something else overnight. The change has to be gradual.

Far less efficient? Yay, I still get to have fun rockets!

I think this thought of thing would be an OK way to get to orbit, but spaceplanes should still be developed.