[boris]

With a sufficient energy input, any hydrocarbon can be converted into oil or gas. The fly in the ointment is that you might need more energy than can be recovered from the fuel you make. This is not necessarily a bad thing: synthesized gasoline made by energy from a nuclear plant is a wonderful way to store the energy since it is very dense and a liquid.

This has been known for at least a hundred years.

===========================

As I once described here, I was asked to evaluate a German patent which fed a wire of pure aluminum into a tank of water. A high voltage created a spark, which caused the reaction: 2Al +3H2O --> Al2O3 + 3H2. This reaction is an interesting 'redox' one, in which aluminum is oxidized and water is reduced (a neat trick). The resulting hydrogen was used in a modified car engine and burned with air.

No question it would work. BMW tested it.

The teensy little problem(s): All of the oxygen in the water was wasted; sequestered in the dense "ash" of Al2O3 (aluminum oxide) which had to be periodically removed in the form of sludge. Also, with pure aluminum at 70 cents per pound, gasoline would have to cost $12-$15 per gallon to make this scheme economically feasible.

In essence, it is a big storage battery which is charged up at the aluminum smelter by the huge amounts of energy needed to get the aluminum metal out of rock. Indeed, electrical prices and aluminum prices interact in a complex manner; each affecting the other. Some smelters have their own dedicated power plants.

--Boris

[honway]

We've done so much testing in Philadelphia, we already know the costs," he says. "This is our first-out plant, and we estimate we'll make oil at $15 a barrel

The fly in the ointment is that you might need more energy than can be recovered from the fuel you make.

It appears they have solved this problem by using the gas produced in the process to provide the energy requirements.

[honway]

Thermal depolymerization, Appel says, has proved to be 85 percent energy efficient for complex feedstocks, such as turkey offal: "That means for every 100 Btus in the feedstock, we use only 15 Btus to run the process." He contends the efficiency is even better for relatively dry raw materials, such as plastics.

[honway]

The fly in the ointment is that you might need more energy than can be recovered from the fuel you make.

With math like that I am not surprised this approach appeals to you

Let me be more clear, since you seem to be having trouble with the concept here.

Garbage which would otherwise end up in a landfill goes in one end. More energy is produced in a useable form (oil and gas) than is consumed in the process. That is a good thing.

Is that simple enough for you, or would you like more help?

[AmericanVictory]

Thanks for your analysis. But we would point out that more energy in than out did not stop the oil shale boondoggle and the ethanol boondoggle now proceeds apace with our government moving dangerously into the realm of Soviet science attempting to "prove" that it is a net plus and the Senate "leaders" from both parties calling to double our use of this boondoggle and thus assisting the other side in the war on terror, even as the President says to interviewers that he can almost feel ourselves growing our way out of our dependence on foreign oil. There is a certain love that our leaders have for expensive boondoggles as opposed to actual solutions.