Most traditional generators (think CCGT, nuclear, hydro) run in synchronous mode. Which means the generators spins with rpm proportional/equal to the network frequency. For 50Hz that would be 3000rpm.
When the total electricity demand exceeds the supply, the kinetic energy of spinning generators is converted to electricity which slows down the generator rpm, which reduces the frequency. All synchronous generators on a given network spin at the same frequency, so when the demand is too high all of them slow down a bit.
There was a comment once on HN that once a power generator was hooked to the network without the phases being aligned, and the resulting mechanical forces were so large that the generator got unbolted from the floor and flew through the air. Not sure if true or not.
This is kinda unrelated (it involved a line frequency slowdown from 60 Hz to 51 Hz), but I always found this radio recording of the US northeast blackout of 1965[0] fascinating as the DJ is grappling with records/tape cartridges slowing down and lights dimming live on the air https://www.musicradio77.com/images/ing11-9-65blackout.mp3
If I listen carefully, I can tell the difference between 48 and 50hz using a sine generator (although it's very subtle), so I'd guess that you possibly could.
Interesting proposition.
1. Why would your process be more cost effective and/or efficient than the commercially available processes for alcohol production?
Surely if the magic sauce is the nanotube alcohol/water separation then conventional alcohol sources from fermentation will start using it at some point and will be able to produce same fuel but cheaper and/or more efficient.
Maybe you can show that [photosynthesis -> organic matter -> fermentation] is less efficient than your process using renewables as input?
2. Why use CO2 from Air?
At 400ppm, there is 500 times less CO2 in air than in any powerplant exhaust, so using the same state of the art separation, for the same throughput, your equipment should be ~500 larger? That seems like a capex waste.
The cost of the agricultural feedstocks to biofuels are not easy to reduce further, whereas renewable electricity is getting less expensive and likely has much further to go. I think CO2 to fuel will have a decisive cost advantage over biofuels.
The reason to use direct air capture rather that going for higher concentration point sources is one of scale. We want to produce fuel at scales much larger than can be accommodated by any other means that capture from the air.
Why not go for the higher concentrations now? Why not target agricultural ethanol plants now? I grant that long term they are limited, but why not use them now?
Higher CO2 concentration seems like it ought to make your initial testing easier.
Likewise, if you are really more cost effective than distillation all the existing ethanol plants would love to replace their boilers with your system. It seems like a simple way to get a small cash infusion selling to them. They can convert their ethanol to gasoline as well, and have infrastructure in place.
What I'm saying is don't bite off more than you can chew. If any piece works now push it while getting the others working.
I was just wondering if we had technology available at that time for a self-sustaining mission that could last 350+ days, while supporting the crew of 3 (or 2?) and fitting the weight limits...
There's a clever way to destroy data on SSD: just overwrite your (encrypted) hard drive encryption key, then even though the data remains, the key is lost forever. I think most modern SSDs come with the feature.
It was obvious since the last referendum results were published that SNP will push for another referendum whenever they see that as politically benefical, this time riding on the anti-tories wave that partially helped the Brexiteers. And the independence campaign may even be successful. Even if it isn't, it will help SNP to gain a majority in local government in 3 years time...
I understand that the article is mostly PR, but to demonstrate effectiveness of the filter, why not also present null hypothesis, where no A/C is activated in the car and/or a common car A/C filter.
