Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
man invents a way to turn plastic into oil.
#1
http://www.flixxy.com/convert-plastic-to-oil.htm

I wonder if it's effective at all?
Quote: “A society that puts equality… ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality or freedom…a society that puts freedom first will, as a happy by-product, end up with both greater freedom and greater equality.” --Milton Friedman
relax. it's only the internet!
Reply
#2
AM, why not? After all, plastics is a hydrocarbon, which is a byproduct of oil in the first place?

I'll watch the video, but up front, I don't see anything new here, if you know where plastics comes from. S2
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#3
This isn't anything new. I heard about this like a year ago, if not longer. It isn't a Japanese invention, as such. There is a plastic to oil converter being used in Maryland now.

Envion Converter station
Reply
#4
And too, the thing is that there will be more energy required to convert the plastic, in order to generate more fuel. The only thing that makes sense is to actually accumulate the waste, in one place, and use a single huge machine to convert the product.

But only one goal is feasible: getting rid of waste. Making fuel is secondary, and not efficient. Perhaps producing plastics, which are reusable would be better money/time spent?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#5
The benefit to this, that I can see, is that it recycles the plastic into something that is reusable in multiple ways (as opposed to turning it into more plastic alone), while producing much less toxic waste (and may use less power) than traditional recycling, which is hugely wasteful of water and power, and produces large amounts of toxic sludge. Those factors, alone, make it worth doing on a large scale. It's not that you save any real energy doing this, because you don't. It actually makes it worth separating out all that plastic that goes into landfills now.
Reply
#6
The fact that there is more energy used in reprocessing than energy gained, makes nuclear power even more attractive. Nuclear fission has an initial high cost, and once constructive, is far less expensive to conventional forms.

Also, creating hydrogen energy, for fuel cells, is energy inefficient unless nuclear power is used in the conversion. Only solar power, collected in space, and microwaved to earth, would be more efficient and cost effective. Fusion power? Who knows when, or if, it will be harnessed. If we wait on that, we may be waiting for G-d knows how long.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#7
I look at this in this way...

Under the normal, non-recycling method, you use resources (oil, chemicals, water and energy) to create plastic. You use that plastic once, then throw it away. It might be seen as pollution, except that it is fairly stable. It doesn't break down much, nor does it create much toxic by-products once in the landfill.

Under the traditional recycling scheme, you use the same materials to produce the plastic then, once used, you put it together with more water, chemicals and energy to create less plastic, and a lot of toxic waste. and not all plastic can be recycled in this way, so some of it goes right into the landfill.

Under the plastic to oil scheme, you use the same oil, chemicals, water and energy to create virgin plastic. Once used you add energy and maybe some chemicals (not sure on that one) to create a smaller amount of liquid which is akin to the oil you used originally, and a small amount of toxic by-products (much smaller than traditional recycling), plus carbon and water. That liquid can then be used in many of the same ways the oil was originally used, including fuel, smaller amounts of plastic, and chemical manufacture. And all types of plastic can be used which means, technically, no plastic in the landfill.

If you are looking for a net gain in energy, it ain't here. However the amount of energy used in the entire cycle is much smaller than in traditional recycling, and uses less space than just throwing the plastic in the landfill.
Reply
#8
Aurora Moon Wrote:http://www.flixxy.com/convert-plastic-to-oil.htm

I wonder if it's effective at all?

Wonder if he'll earn more money than what the man

who turned oil into plastic got?

:?
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!
Reply
#9
Huh...What? Wrote:It doesn't break down much, nor does it create much toxic by-products once in the landfill.
that's so not entirely accurate. plastics contain additives called 'phthalate', which makes them soft, and food and such can be wrapped in them. they also keep food fresh, another place were they are is the inner coating of tins. phthalate dont have chemical bonds with the materials, they are constantly released, into the food, and into the environment. they are also pseudo hormones which make females reach puberty earlier, and immobilize the sperms of men. studies showed that up to 50% of european men can't father children. the demographic change is actually a chemical castration. not a bad thing i think. :lol:
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#10
I would like more info on this.

Also, if it makes females reach puberty quicker, this means the chemical supposedly is a feminine one, and that sperm being infertile due to it means that its feminizing the men perhaps?

Explains why Europe is very weak when it comes to much of its menfolk and their society as a whole as a result.
Reply
#11
Pthalates are primarily used in PVC, not the majority of plastic, and are mostly being phased out. And it's still not much compared to the rest of what's in the landfill. Keep in mind that for at least the last 30 years new landfills (in the US, at least) have required liners to keep leechate out of the ground water and surrounding area.
Reply
#12
phased out in europe and america for a year or two, but no change for china etc. phased out are the most controversial ones only, it's a big group of chemicals though. it's funny, if you thought you buy healthy bio food in a sustainable bio shop free of pesticides etc, and your bio apples were wrapped in the usual transparent plastic, all you got were high prices. sex toys contain a lot of them, up to 60%. that inserts them right to the point of action. :lol:
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Germany invents 3rd gender. mv 4 1,235 08-24-2013, 10:24 PM
Last Post: JohnWho
  Astronaut invents coffee cup for a weightless cup o' joe Aurora Moon 1 593 03-13-2009, 05:29 PM
Last Post: John L
  Midway, home of plastic waste quadrat 5 879 04-05-2008, 12:36 AM
Last Post: quadrat
  Transparent Plastic Polymer is Strong as Steel John L 2 944 10-13-2007, 04:07 AM
Last Post: quadrat

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)