Diesel from waste plastic

[bigegg]

i used to burn bricks of plastic in my shedstove at my old house: just plastic bags/pop bottles/meat trays/shrink wrap/bubble wrap etc.
Quick blast with the weed gun, and smashed flat with the flypress.

however...
i had some bread trays - used them for storing books - that i qanted rid of.
the bakery wouldnt collect, so i chopped them up with the demo saw, and filed the stove.
as soon as they melted, they went up like diesel:
melted the fire grate, burned through the chimney
the stove (gas bottle) was glowing yellow-white hot, and was starting to collapse.


anyway, short version:
burning plastics to generate electric makes more sense to me than converting to diesel.

 

[The_Yellow_Ardvark]

Burning waste recycled plastic to make energy is good.

The particle filters used to trap the nasty's can be burnt.

Plus, it is good for the planet.

As found in the Coal Gas production, the best filters were heather plant based
. In the big recycling place near Stonehouse, Glous. They are using filters of heather and gorse. I was told they are now growing it special and cropping it for the recycling industries. But I suspect in the UK the NIMBY's will complain and we will get from overseas.

 

[fizzy]

It's a long shot but do you know who the guy on the far left is? Man he looks like my old flat mate and training partner. Last time I heard from him he was living in the Hague, but he did work in HR in the mines in Oz.

Just a piccy I found online sorry.
I went down there a few times about 5 or 6 years ago - heat was horrid further down.

 

[Gareth J]

i used to burn bricks of plastic in my shedstove at my old house: just plastic bags/pop bottles/meat trays/shrink wrap/bubble wrap etc.
Quick blast with the weed gun, and smashed flat with the flypress.

however...
i had some bread trays - used them for storing books - that i qanted rid of.
the bakery wouldnt collect, so i chopped them up with the demo saw, and filed the stove.
as soon as they melted, they went up like diesel:
melted the fire grate, burned through the chimney
the stove (gas bottle) was glowing yellow-white hot, and was starting to collapse.


anyway, short version:
burning plastics to generate electric makes more sense to me than converting to diesel.

I wonder if those playing with reasonably complex and potentially hazardous DIY cracking/pyrolysis rigs would be better off trying to physically smash the plastics up to such a degree they could be mixed with fuel and burnt in a normal old diesel engine.

Dunno if it'd work or how you'd get plastic tiny enough.

 

[julianf]

There was someone years back who did some amount of work running static engines on waste motor oil.

He seemed to think that the bores and exhaust valves would suffer. This is on 24/7 running.

He put it down to the products of combustion, rather than contamination. Which, to me, made sense, as the pH buffers in motor oil are calcium compounds, which, you might imagine, could become abrasive post combustion.

The chap was on all the forums and not the easiest to talk to, but some of what he said was believable.

Anyway, I mention this in relation to your poat, in that it might not simply be a case of getting it to burn in a compression cycle, but also burn in a way that did not create undue ware.

 

[fizzy]

I wonder if those playing with reasonably complex and potentially hazardous DIY cracking/pyrolysis rigs would be better off trying to physically smash the plastics up to such a degree they could be mixed with fuel and burnt in a normal old diesel engine.

Dunno if it'd work or how you'd get plastic tiny enough.

Simple solution.
Use steam engines!

 

[bigegg]

I wonder if those playing with reasonably complex and potentially hazardous DIY cracking/pyrolysis rigs would be better off trying to physically smash the plastics up to such a degree they could be mixed with fuel and burnt in a normal old diesel engine.

Dunno if it'd work or how you'd get plastic tiny enough.

i think "diesel conversion" is a dead end - or at least the wrong path:

burning of plastics (in whatever form) releases fossil CO2 into the environment.
it would be better to bury it again.

conversion to liquid fuel ("diesel") reduces efficiency:
it adds an extra conversion cycle
its inefficient to transport
it spreads the products of combustion into urban areas, and exposes it to the vagaries of slapdash vehicle maintenance.

To me, if we *must* burn plastic as fuel, it would be better to convert it to electric in a large scale plant where the emissions can be controlled, and monitored.

But better to re-bury it.

 

[fizzy]

i think "diesel conversion" is a dead end - or at least the wrong path:

burning of plastics (in whatever form) releases fossil CO2 into the environment.
it would be better to bury it again.

conversion to liquid fuel ("diesel") reduces efficiency:
it adds an extra conversion cycle
its inefficient to transport
it spreads the products of combustion into urban areas, and exposes it to the vagaries of slapdash maintenance.
to me, if we *must* burn plastic as fuel, it would be better to convert it to electric in a large scale plant where the emissions can be controlled, and monitored.

It releases a lot more than CO2 - some very toxic stuff comes from burning plastics. Even in proper incinerators it can be dodgy.
The greens cause more trouble than the worth of it.
Tesco spent a fortune developing carrier bags that broke down under UV. The old free bags would fall to pieces if left in daylight. Then they introduce the bag tax and Tesco stop doing the free bags. The new ones don't decompose.

 

[rtbcomp]

Simple solution.
Use steam engines!

Apparently some waste to electricity incinerator systems use Stirling engines.

 

[fizzy]

Apparently some waste to electricity incinerator systems use Stirling engines.

I bet they do. You used to be able to buy gas boilers with Stirling engines and they are used in some nuclear subs.

https://www.renewableenergyhub.co.u...ormation/the-baxi-ecogen-microchp-boiler.html

 

[maz0]

the problem is we are told not to polute and warned about the dangers of releasing all the nasty gasses into the atmosphere but whith a bit of research you find that on avaerage per year volcanoes release between 180 - 440 million tons, and thats just the co2 you then have sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide and hydrogen halides in decent quantities, it becomes clear that all the carbon capture etc we as a race attempt is negated by mother nature. dont get me wrong i am all for recyling etc as we owe it to the future generations to try and leave them something atleast resembling a habitable planet but why not use the fringe technology to recyle whether it be by burning or super heating to extract usable fuels etc, ( ps i do not wear flip flops and a caftan or have any siblings called sunbeam or moon child)

It's a mine field when you start actively researching it with an open mind. You soon learn that the outcome of the 'research/report' will depend entirely on who is funding it..... I had a good read a few weeks back when I was a bit perplexed at my country bumpkin mate who throws used nappies into the log burner....what's worse, burning them up in 20 seconds or giving them to the council to chuck into a landfill for the next 100 years? It's also interesting to know that the top 16 shipping vessels create more pollution than all the worlds cars combined... I'm not really sure who to believe any more...I do think we are damaging the earth, but I'm not so sure that fossil fuels are the demon we are being sold.

Here is a similar video of another approach.....although I'm told by a friend studying chemistry that its probably a lost cause due to the amount of energy needed for the reaction..

 

[fizzy]

It's a mine field when you start actively researching it with an open mind. You soon learn that the outcome of the 'research/report' will depend entirely on who is funding it..... I had a good read a few weeks back when I was a bit perplexed at my country bumpkin mate who throws used nappies into the log burner....what's worse, burning them up in 20 seconds or giving them to the council to chuck into a landfill for the next 100 years? It's also interesting to know that the top 16 shipping vessels create more pollution than all the worlds cars combined... I'm not really sure who to believe any more...I do think we are damaging the earth, but I'm not so sure that fossil fuels are the demon we are being sold.

Here is a similar video of another approach.....although I'm told by a friend studying chemistry that its probably a lost cause due to the amount of energy needed for the reaction..

Sorry but that so called fact about ships really winds me up!
Talk about massaging statistics.
They look at only 1 criteria when they state that. Sulphur dioxide emissions.
Cars use low sulphur or zero sulphur fuel. Sulphur dioxide produces acid rain. Not such a problem in the middle of the Atlantic.
Container ships are one of the most efficient forms of transport ever invented.
One container ship replaces 8000 lorries!

 

[Pigeon_Droppings2]

I take a long term view....a very long term view indeed.

In 3Bn (ish) years the sun will basically exhaust it's hydrogen fuel and destroy the solar system in the process.....at that point all the fosil fuels on earth will be burned in one go!

So basically we have 3Bn years to develop sufficient technology to either prevent that from happening....or to leave before it happens.

 

[slim_boy_fat]

In 3Bn (ish) years the sun will basically exhaust it's hydrogen fuel and destroy the solar system in the process.....at that point all the fosil fuels on earth will be burned in one go!

Sorry, I can't wait for the Sun to go supernova - I'll be off in a nano-second less than it takes to say it [in relative terms]

 

[rtbcomp]

I bet they do. You used to be able to buy gas boilers with Stirling engines and they are used in some nuclear subs.

https://www.renewableenergyhub.co.u...ormation/the-baxi-ecogen-microchp-boiler.html

That is interesting. I've long held the view that a domestic gas CHP unit, perhaps coupled to a heat pump, would go a long way to cut domestic emissions.

There's a Victorian pot-belly stove with a built-in Stirling engine at Blists Hill museum.

 

[fizzy]

That is interesting. I've long held the view that a domestic gas CHP unit, perhaps coupled to a heat pump, would go a long way to cut domestic emissions.

There's a Victorian pot-belly stove with a built-in Stirling engine at Blists Hill museum.

There really is very little that is really new out there.
Most things have been tried before in some form or another.

 

[Pigeon_Droppings2]

Sorry, I can't wait for the Sun to go supernova - I'll be off in a nano-second less than it takes to say it [in relative terms]

Hopefully future generations will be watching from a safe distance.....ironically at the point the sun goes supernova the only thing that can save and preserve the environment is technology!

Our time horizon is so short in astronomical terms we don't even know whether the output of our closest star is even constant (or reasonably constant)....fluctuations in output could easily impact on our planets environment!

 

[Shox Dr]

There really is very little that is really new out there.
Most things have been tried before in some form or another.

Very true. IBM in the 90s were searching patents all the way back to Victorian times, they were reapplying so many they digitised the lot. At one time you could search for free.

 

[fizzy]

Very true. IBM in the 90s were searching patents all the way back to Victorian times, they were reapplying so many they digitised the lot. At one time you could search for free.

When I was a teenager I designed and manufactured a computer joystick. It had an unbreakable mechanism. I patented it as I was young and naeive. During my research I found something very similar had been patented in 1905 for use on Glasgow trams!