Heat to electricity... new material.

[NeverEnoughFuel!!]

http://phys.org/news/2016-11-thermoelectric-material-high-power-factors.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000618

Well your opinions and expertise's required... :-).

[Scotius]

Wonder how much ths new material costs It might look good in laboratory conditions, but industry will not use it if economical gains will be too small - environment be darned.

[cubinator]

I think it's an interesting concept, but finding ways to make fossil fuels slightly less bad is way worse a strategy than finding ways to ditch them altogether. If we are to use this, it should be converting the heat from the sun or the Earth directly.

[wumpus]

They keep talking about "waste heat" and >1000C.  Why can you stuff a thermocouple in there and not a heat engine (water pipes and whatnot)?  Auto cylinder temperatures are less than that, so I'm pretty sure that any such "waste heat" is for industrial use, where adding a turbine could be economically justified (you can do the same on a car and improve mileage by 20%, the real kicker is if you cool the water afterwards (lots of water, heavy) or keep adding water (inconvenient needs to be pure/filtered).

Thermocouples make good sensors, and might generate some power if you don't want to run a wire (for power) through the firewall.  But I don't think anybody takes them seriously for real power generation.

[problemecium]

UNOBTANIUM

Seriously though, any of you guys seen "The Core?" UNOBTANIUM

[hms_warrior]

11 hours ago, wumpus said:

...  But I don't think anybody takes them seriously for real power generation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator#Multi-Mission_Radioisotope_Thermoelectric_Generator

so NASA is anybody now? :-P But i guess you mean nobody trying to make money with it...and on that i agree, there are far better options here on earth.

[Tullius]

11 hours ago, wumpus said:

They keep talking about "waste heat" and >1000C.  Why can you stuff a thermocouple in there and not a heat engine (water pipes and whatnot)?  Auto cylinder temperatures are less than that, so I'm pretty sure that any such "waste heat" is for industrial use, where adding a turbine could be economically justified (you can do the same on a car and improve mileage by 20%, the real kicker is if you cool the water afterwards (lots of water, heavy) or keep adding water (inconvenient needs to be pure/filtered).

Thermocouples make good sensors, and might generate some power if you don't want to run a wire (for power) through the firewall.  But I don't think anybody takes them seriously for real power generation.

It is manufactured at >1300K, but it produces electricity  in the range between 293K (20°C, i.e room temperature) and 868K.

11 hours ago, cubinator said:

I think it's an interesting concept, but finding ways to make fossil fuels slightly less bad is way worse a strategy than finding ways to ditch them altogether. If we are to use this, it should be converting the heat from the sun or the Earth directly.

Even if we ditch fossil fuels (which will still take many years), we won't stop producing waste heat. If we only think of electric power plants, both nuclear and solar thermal plants need to dump waste heat, since turbines work only above a certain temperature threshold.

The main problem of this kind of stuff will always be making it cheap enough to use it on industrial scales.

[cubinator]

4 hours ago, Tullius said:

 

Even if we ditch fossil fuels (which will still take many years), we won't stop producing waste heat. If we only think of electric power plants, both nuclear and solar thermal plants need to dump waste heat, since turbines work only above a certain temperature threshold.

I  agree, it still can be useful technology, but using it on waste heat from nuclear or solar plants is a far more worthy application than on fossil fuel plants. 

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, cubinator said:

I  agree, it still can be useful technology, but using it on waste heat from nuclear or solar plants is a far more worthy application than on fossil fuel plants. 

Nuclear, solar thermal and coal power plants uses steam and its unlikely you can get much more cheap energy out of this. Gas uses an steam second stage. 
This is probably smarter for smaller stuff like cars where the exhaust is hot. 
Probably other places with an good thermal gradient, if the gradient on solar panels is large enough it would be an nice use. 
Smaller scale its nice for sensors and perhaps wearable electronic. 
 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Smaller scale its nice for sensors and perhaps wearable electronic. 

Wearable electronics get me interested. A watch that converts body heat into electricity would be cool. Wouldn't need batteries, but you'd have to keep it on all the time.

[magnemoe]

Just now, Aperture Science said:

Wearable electronics get me interested. A watch that converts body heat into electricity would be cool. Wouldn't need batteries, but you'd have to keep it on all the time.

Wireless headsets would also be an idea. the problem here is the low temperature gradient. lower who higher temperature is.
You would need batteries but they would recharge. 

[wumpus]

7 hours ago, Tullius said:

It is manufactured at >1300K, but it produces electricity  in the range between 293K (20°C, i.e room temperature) and 868K.

Even if we ditch fossil fuels (which will still take many years), we won't stop producing waste heat. If we only think of electric power plants, both nuclear and solar thermal plants need to dump waste heat, since turbines work only above a certain temperature threshold.

The main problem of this kind of stuff will always be making it cheap enough to use it on industrial scales.

Cascaded steam engines are an old trick to get more work out of your steam.  They were mostly obsoleted by the steam turbine, but I'm pretty sure cascaded turbines are still used (if not always needed).  To really get the dregs out of your power you might need to use something like a freon-substitute, but you can still get real power if you are willing to pay for that last bit of efficiency.  In the end, it all comes down to $/Watt.  I wonder if you could make a "thermocouple glass" material like "fiberglass" (connecting the right ends sounds like a pain) that makes adding a thermocouple that easy.  Much like PV solar panels, efficiency really isn't the point (at least until the roof is covered) it is all about the manufacturing issues and $/Watt (note that added temperature range *is* critical, and the researchers wisely dismissed efficiency issues).