Green Building Forum - kerosene from concentrated sunlight Mon, 25 May 2026 23:13:02 +0100 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3 kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207795#Comment_207795 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207795#Comment_207795 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:54:18 +0100 fostertom Posted By: Ed Daviespayback in 44 months over a 25 year lifeEd, I think you ought to rigorously add 'in Energy terms' in case people confuse what you're saying with the widespread concept of financial payback.

44 months payback seems pretty good in financial terms but is horribly low in EROEI terms - far far lower than the assumptions that Western society is built upon. The Romans, the Easter Islanders, and many more collapsing civilisations didn't see it coming either.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207796#Comment_207796 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207796#Comment_207796 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:11:59 +0100 Ed Davies
Would you like to explain why 44 (or 22) months payback is so terrible. Different and needing adjustment I can understand but civilization collapsing I don't see.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207797#Comment_207797 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207797#Comment_207797 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:12:59 +0100 SteamyTea Posted By: HalcyonRichardFooled me for a bit as well. It states power then liters/day. So I would think that 250 kW for a day for 600 litres of fuel. i.e. 250 x 24 kWh/ 600 litres This gives 10 kWh/litre.
Yes, that was the bit.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207798#Comment_207798 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207798#Comment_207798 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:13:37 +0100 Seret
We can produce data that takes account of absolutely everything, but only at the world scale, and that's of limited utility.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207799#Comment_207799 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207799#Comment_207799 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:15:40 +0100 SteamyTea kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207802#Comment_207802 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207802#Comment_207802 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:31:09 +0100 fostertom Posted By: SteamyTeaif you take into account the amount of energy and time (generally solar, thousands of years) to create a kg of coal or oil, how does that affect your figures?I'd add that to Wiki's words:
"The natural or original sources of energy are not usually included in the calculation of energy invested, only the human-applied sources"
and to my words:
"Like solar irradiation, we can take that as a 'common' or 'given'".]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207803#Comment_207803 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207803#Comment_207803 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:33:53 +0100 SteamyTea
So taking the PV example, if you make a solar farm that take say 5 MWh to manufacure, and delivers 1 MWh a year, then with that 1 MWh a year you start making more solar farms, how do you calculate that EROEI?]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207806#Comment_207806 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207806#Comment_207806 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:46:13 +0100 fostertom Posted By: SeretTom, the only practical way you can be sure to account for all inputs is to only ever use world aggregate dataYes, that's what it takes, if as I'm suggesting, EROEI/RORI is allowed its potential to really spotlight the hugest question of the Unsustainability (or Sustainability) of human civilisation on Earth. Of course it's impossible to do so, with present methods/data - or even ever. Therefore put in suitably large fudge factors. An IPHS (Intergovernmental Panel on Human Sustainability) should be able, over few decades, to get on top of that, to 95% certainty, if anyone was interested.
Posted By: SeretIt's not rational to include the energy cost of running the lights in a goldfish's bowl which is owned by someone who mined the copper in the motor used in the lift of a Bolivian bicycle repair man's wife's hairdresser in the estimation of a UK wind turbine.
It's the only rational basis, if you want the deepest truth.
Posted By: SeretAny time you slice things further than that you're going to have to impose bounds. The further down the chain you go the tighter your bounds have to become
Sure, but know it's just being done within the everyday practices of so-called Economics, which make the case for maximised monetary take accompanied by maximised rejection of costs onto 'the environment', even if truest fundamental Economics would abhor such partiality.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207807#Comment_207807 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207807#Comment_207807 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:51:35 +0100 fostertom Posted By: SteamyTeaSo taking the PV example, if you make a solar farm that take say 5 MWh to manufacure, and delivers 1 MWh a year, then with that 1 MWh a year you start making more solar farms, how do you calculate that EROEI?That's EROEI = 1. All of the output from the first solar farm is 100% consumed by the energy-production industry - there's none left over for useful use by anyone or anything out side of that industry. That is exactly what's happening at the point of collapse of a civilisation.

Please re-design the proposition!]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207808#Comment_207808 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207808#Comment_207808 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:53:27 +0100 fostertom Posted By: SteamyTeaSo you have put some bounds at the very start.OK, we can agree on that. I asked if that's what you meant by 'bounds'.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207810#Comment_207810 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207810#Comment_207810 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:57:14 +0100 Chris P Bacon kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207813#Comment_207813 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207813#Comment_207813 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:11:55 +0100 fostertom Posted By: Ed DaviesWould you like to explain why 44 (or 22) months payback is so terrible. Different and needing adjustment I can understand but civilization collapsing I don't see.In financial terms, if your MROMI (Money Return on Money Invested) reaches as high as 1.06 (6% return on investment), that's pretty good payback. But in terms of EROEI or RORI, it's the end-point of civilisation.

It's said (I think you said) that egalitarian hunter-gatherer society, when working nicely, achieved EROEI about 8. That AFAIK means that a hunter-gatherer would work for 1 day to gather wood fuel, hunt for food, and do all the other things necessary to sustain life - and then could relax or do cultural things for 7 days. Sounds pretty good, to a 21C urban dweller! Especially as hunter-gatherers to this day are also generally happier, fitter, healthier and wiser that 'civilised' folk.

Inefficient Feudal society achieved EROEI about 4 - and nearly all the free time was creamed off by the elites.

Present Western society is built on the 100yr assumption of EROEI in the hundreds, as experienced by those Westerners, though the 'cream' is ever more inequitably distributed, from continued large-scale slavery, up to the the few fattest cats. That EROEI is presently down in the 20s, globally, and in continued free-fall.

So a technology that delivers EROEI 6.8 is very much a driver of that free-fall, pulling global EROEI on down from the 20s, as it replaces an exhausted easy-oil well. Just because there's no alternative - it's the best we can do now - is exactly the problem.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207816#Comment_207816 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207816#Comment_207816 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:24:51 +0100 atomicbisf
And payback time seems pretty meaningless taken out of context. If I planted a crop and it took 44 months to grow and be harvested and it paid back only the energy I put in, that would be terrible. If I was building a hydro-electric dam I think I'd be pretty pleased if it only took 44 months to pay back the energy invested and then had another hundred or two hundred years of life in it.

Ed]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207817#Comment_207817 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207817#Comment_207817 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:30:26 +0100 Ed Davies
Not me that said that about hunter gathers but I have repeated the observation that baboons work about 15 hours a week, which comes to much the same sort of thing (and which sounds quite good to me). However, they do spend a lot of the rest of the time making each other feel miserable so not that much different from “advanced” society, really.

HalyconRichard's point is that the EROEI of PV is a lot better than 6.8.

But still the question, would an EROEI of 20 really be that dramatically different from 100?]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207819#Comment_207819 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207819#Comment_207819 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:41:58 +0100 HalcyonRichard I agree that we need the improvements. But they are happening as we speak. What target do we need to hit. Offshore Wind is currently better than 20 and onshore is even better. PV is improving all the time this article talks about EROEI of 15 to 60. That's a fantastic improvement on the 1970's. And the improvements are still happening. I think the low EROEI in past declines was probably a result of the decline rather than the cause. Every body apart from the few know coal tar sands are a bad deal. And what about Germany ? Thay are heading for 100% renewables. Will that mean that all their EROEI's will be infinite ?

"However, today’s PVs return far more energy than that embodied in the life cycle of
a solar system (see Figure 1).Their energy payback times (EPBT)—the time it takes to produce
all the energy used in their life cycles—currently are between six months to two years, depending on the location/solar irradiation and the technology. And with expected life times of 30 years, their
ERRs are in the range of 60:1 to 15:1, depending on the location and the technology, thus returning 15 to 60 times more energy than the energy they use."

If you look at the chart of EROEI then we have been moving to the left of the chart with lower EROEI. But recentley it's been going the other way with renewables. PV is increasing EROEI all the time. The cheap oil times are nearly over the cheap renewable times are just getting started.

Richard]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207821#Comment_207821 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207821#Comment_207821 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:48:02 +0100 fostertom Posted By: Ed DaviesBut still the question, would an EROEI of 20 really be that dramatically different from 100?Maybe not, in fact that would be an excellent figure, if egalitarianly distributed i.e. accompanied by far reaching societal change, something like transition Movement's ideas (and NB back at international Transition Training HQ, Totnes, great emphasis is given to new, practical approaches to governance, as alternative to western-style 'democracy').

The trouble is, no one has any plans for an orderly descent to a new 'equilibrium' at 20, nor any idea how to achieve that. All indications are that EROEI will plunge on down past that, until crisis forces the concept onto the agenda and into understanding.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207822#Comment_207822 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207822#Comment_207822 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:50:10 +0100 fostertom Posted By: HalcyonRichardwhat about Germany ? Thay are heading for 100% renewables. Will that mean that all their EROEI's will be infinite ?The point is, Renewables are very far from 'infinite' EROEI - that's a confusion.
Posted By: HalcyonRichardThe cheap oil times are nearly over the cheap renewable times are just getting started.
Let's hope. Of course you know it's nothing to do with 'cheap' i.e. in money terms. The lowest of EROEI processes can be superb financial investment - in fact that's what's driving hideous tar sands etc.

EROEI (and don't forget, more broadly, RORI) is Economics without mention of money - for the first time, absence of higher-EROEI alternatives breaks the usual theory of substitution of one monetarised commodity with another one.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207823#Comment_207823 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207823#Comment_207823 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:54:00 +0100 HalcyonRichard I do not understand. But that's how we worked it out. If the energy input for everthing comes from renewables. The the input energy by definition is zero. So anything divided by zero is infinite ? Or is there more to it ?

Richard]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207826#Comment_207826 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207826#Comment_207826 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:11:21 +0100 fostertom
A good place to start from - because it ain't like that, and the calculated EROEI figure is the measure of how far the Renewable source, in a full accounting of all its intersections with the world, declines from that ideal, in reality.

It turns out that the installation produces energy, but that a fair bit of it is consumed by the energy industry, not just in distributing the energy produced, but in maintaining and eventually modernising or replacing the installation, in building more installations, in ameliorating the installation's impact on the environment - and those are only skimming the surface of the installation's fullest-accounting cost to the planet and to society. If we don't account for all those - and same for every other 'thing' that humans do, then we're fooling ourselves. But the planet isn't fooled, and sooner or later faces us with reality.

One of the 'costs' that the Renewable installation has to carry its share of, is the growing Security measures that arise from the kind of society that the sum-total of human activity creates. As EROEI falls, and the surplus that's left for useful use by the rest of us contracts even faster, 'essentials' like Security, Military etc will take first priority, leaving even faster contraction of what's left for 'us'.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207835#Comment_207835 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207835#Comment_207835 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 21:31:27 +0100 Seret Posted By: fostertomIt's the only rational basis, if you want the deepest truth.

Data isn't about truth Tom. All data is incomplete. The question is whether it's accurate. An imperfect, incomplete model (as they all are) can still be accurate enough to be useful. If you want a model that completely, perfectly reflects reality then you'll probably need to construct a new universe. And find somewhere to put it.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207836#Comment_207836 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207836#Comment_207836 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 21:42:54 +0100 fostertom Posted By: fostertomTherefore put in suitably large fudge factors.to be absolutely sure there's no self-deception going on.
Posted By: fostertomAn IPHS (Intergovernmental Panel on Human Sustainability) should be able, over few decades, to get on top of that, to 95% certainty, if anyone was interested.
]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207837#Comment_207837 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207837#Comment_207837 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 22:03:48 +0100 SteamyTea Posted By: SeretAll data is incomplete. The question is whether it's accurateThe Laws of Thermodynamics seem pretty complete, accurate and precise.
I think some of the Quantum stuff is pretty spot on too, but I don't understand all that spooky action at a distance stuff, nor do I want to.

But Tom raises an interesting point, one that has been touched on by MacKay, If we run short of energy, and the military starts taking a larger slice for security reasons, then very quickly we will increase the supply.
Back in the oil crisis of 1973, Japan had less than 3 days left of reserves, they broke the international embargo to get more. Did not do them any harm.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207839#Comment_207839 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207839#Comment_207839 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 22:08:29 +0100 bxman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TX82PRxHvI]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207850#Comment_207850 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207850#Comment_207850 Wed, 27 Aug 2014 07:39:16 +0100 bxman
There are several Bio-Gas plants in the UK but not that much Gas Storage at the moment but that could provided I am sure probably cheaper than pump storage for which there are very limited physical sites available most having been already used.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207851#Comment_207851 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207851#Comment_207851 Wed, 27 Aug 2014 07:44:14 +0100 Triassic Posted By: bxmanbut not that much Gas Storage at the moment The NIMBYs put paid to that years ago.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207852#Comment_207852 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207852#Comment_207852 Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:06:17 +0100 HalcyonRichard Good post about Audi. See wiki for some information :-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_to_gas
Systems are running that use excess generation and inject gas into the gas system. In Germany as usual.

But people such as sunfire have commercial trials and systems. They also have power to liquid - which is good for long term storage/transport/aviation. Cost per kWh for energy to gas 0.11 Euro. And energy to liquid is 1.00 Euro/litre (approx 10 kWh)

http://www.sunfire.de/en/produkte/fuel/power-to-liquids

The factsheet on that page is very interesting.

http://www.h2fc-fair.com/hm12/images/exhibitors/sunfire-tech-forum.pdf

Richard]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207855#Comment_207855 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207855#Comment_207855 Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:43:57 +0100 bxman As far as I can see Sunfire are not associated with the Audi project .

However what we need is a catalyst that will produce Propane rather than Methane.

LPG is an excellent road fuel.
I can recommend it to anyone having used it for 8 or so years.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207866#Comment_207866 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207866#Comment_207866 Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:24:18 +0100 SteamyTea They have a 6 MW electrical input, that will be 52,560 MWh (53 GWh) a year, assuming it runs 24/7 [2].
They produce 1,000 tonnes (1 million kg) of e-gas with an energy content of 13.85 kWh/kg, or about 13,850 MWh (14 GWh) a year, so it takes 3.8 times as much energy to make as it gives back [3].
They also claim that once burned in a car it only emits what was bound up in the process, but this is only true if if capture all the CO2 from the initial energy source [2]. This is OK if it is renewables or nuclear, not so good if it is coal or gas.

I hope I have misunderstood what they are saying.

Refs
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_to_gas
[2] http://www.audi.com/content/com/brand/en/vorsprung_durch_technik/content/2013/10/energy-turnaround-in-the-tank.html
[3] http://www.cedec.com/files/default/8-2014-05-27-cedec-gas-day-reinhard-otten-audi-ag.pdf]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207871#Comment_207871 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207871#Comment_207871 Wed, 27 Aug 2014 12:01:04 +0100 Seret Posted By: SteamyTea
Posted By: SeretAll data is incomplete. The question is whether it's accurate
The Laws of Thermodynamics seem pretty complete, accurate and precise.

I meant actual data. By definition data points only approximate reality, as they're a discrete approximation of a continuous phenomenon. This is what the Butterfly Effect is about, since a model can't simulate reality with full accuracy it'll eventually diverge.]]> kerosene from concentrated sunlight https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207873#Comment_207873 https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=12478&Focus=207873#Comment_207873 Wed, 27 Aug 2014 12:17:46 +0100 SteamyTea
I though the 'Butterfly Affect' was about patterns in chaotic systems. More about initial conditions than the affects. I often use a non linear multiplier when checking data. Oddly enough, adding a bit of 'noise' can improve accuracy.
There are some things that do not have a true mathematical solution though, spotting these ones is a bit harder. Why weather forecasting has moved over to Baysian statistics as it allows the rubbish results to be discarded early on.]]>