Flammability of a water + oil mixture

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
orbs
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 156
Registration: 15/09/05, 20:21




by orbs » 11/09/10, 07:29

Hello
indeed I lacked rigor: 1 ml = 1cc


the oil used is common heating oil


concerning the results we can assume:
the combustion of petroleum alone and the vapor created by part of the energy released, improves combustion resulting in a less fragrant flame and no apparent smoke.
this optimizes the combustion of oil.


this manipulation has no demonstrative claim.


the question:
Is the volume of gas produced by the combustion of the emulsion less, equal, or greater than the volume of gas produced by the combustion of pure petroleum?

a @ +
orbs
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 11/09/10, 10:20

depending on what temperature you measure the gas produced

hot there is a large volume of steam in addition

after condensing: same volume as petroleum alone

we know ways to make pure oil burners that work well

mix water and detergent and therefore a way to make a flame that does not smoke without a complicated burner: but then condensation is essential so as not to lose the heat of the steam

what is the point ?

can be burn waste, solvent and dirty oil, occasionally and without special burner

there was also a company that touted the advantage of diesel fuel with a little water and a miracle additive to reduce pollution: the additive was therefore simply dishwashing liquid!
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 11/09/10, 12:29

Disagree with you to wet wood! I have long wood heated with a wood stove and I can assure you that if the stove is able to reach a high temperature smoldering, semi moist wood gives better energy yields a very dry wood .

Very, very surprising for me too !!

What is this stove, is there on the internet any information on this kind of Canadian stove, with the plans ??

You have to understand why, check and measure with precision !!
The heat taken to heat the water vapor is important (from 10 ° C to 400 ° C) and greatly reduces the calorific value of the wood !!
A stove with a wood pre-drying chamber and recondensation of evaporated water vapors, with a thermal balance close to zero, before combustion, can have a very good performance, but the water vapors are never heated to 400 ° C in the flames, but recondensed in liquid to flow !!!

Otherwise I do not understand the physics of this Canadian finding !!
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 11/09/10, 12:31

deledeco said:

a calorimeter is not at all a pan on the flame !!


and I am well aware of it, but I am currently talking about "background experiments"
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 11/09/10, 12:56

dedeleco wrote:
Disagree with you to wet wood! I have long wood heated with a wood stove and I can assure you that if the stove is able to reach a high temperature smoldering, semi moist wood gives better energy yields a very dry wood .

Very, very surprising for me too !!

What is this stove, is there on the internet any information on this kind of Canadian stove, with the plans ??

You have to understand why, check and measure with precision !!
The heat taken to heat the water vapor is important (from 10 ° C to 400 ° C) and greatly reduces the calorific value of the wood !!
A stove with a wood pre-drying chamber and recondensation of evaporated water vapors, with a thermal balance close to zero, before combustion, can have a very good performance, but the water vapors are never heated to 400 ° C in the flames, but recondensed in liquid to flow !!!

Otherwise I do not understand the physics of this Canadian finding !!


the heat of vaporization of the water is not the problem ... the proof the oil water mixture burned well

dry dry wood because it has been wet burns much better than so-called wet wood because it is still green: I am talking about a simple normal hearth where the green wood gives off smoke and tar which leaves the hearth without having burned

of course there are improved fireplaces ... like gasifier ...
0 x
Alain G
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3044
Registration: 03/10/08, 04:24
x 3




by Alain G » 11/09/10, 15:05

dedeleco wrote:
Disagree with you to wet wood! I have long wood heated with a wood stove and I can assure you that if the stove is able to reach a high temperature smoldering, semi moist wood gives better energy yields a very dry wood .

Very, very surprising for me too !!

What is this stove, is there on the internet any information on this kind of Canadian stove, with the plans ??

You have to understand why, check and measure with precision !!
The heat taken to heat the water vapor is important (from 10 ° C to 400 ° C) and greatly reduces the calorific value of the wood !!
A stove with a wood pre-drying chamber and recondensation of evaporated water vapors, with a thermal balance close to zero, before combustion, can have a very good performance, but the water vapors are never heated to 400 ° C in the flames, but recondensed in liquid to flow !!!

Otherwise I do not understand the physics of this Canadian finding !!


I'm talking about it here:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post177014.html#177014
0 x
Stepping behind sometimes can strengthen friendship.
Criticism is good if added to some compliments.
Alain
User avatar
coucou789456
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1019
Registration: 22/08/08, 05:15
Location: Narbonne




by coucou789456 » 12/09/10, 09:16

Hello

Otherwise I do not understand the physics of this Canadian finding !!
curious remark which advances the debate well ...

would our Canadian friends consider this remark as uneducated, ignorant or what do I know.

I think that the word "Canadian" in sentence was not justified, especially since the subject relates only to experiments of bottom of garage!

jeff
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 12/09/10, 15:30

I apologize, because I did not write this sentence with these derogatory innuendos, but simply, that this remarkable stove was sold only in Canada and that the climate of Canada is very different with colds that we n 've never in France !! And therefore its operating conditions are different.
A stove with a good performance with wet wood is more than remarkable !!
Its door that does not smoke when opened is also remarkable.
Also admiring, I am trying to understand how to improve my efficient stove.

Finally I admire the Canadians for their realization of Drake landing:
http://www.dlsc.ca/borehole.htm
which heats the winter with the heat of the summer !!
at 1000m altitude, further north than us, much colder in winter than us !!
Admiring, we should copy, especially in Narbonne, much warmer !!.
0 x
Alain G
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3044
Registration: 03/10/08, 04:24
x 3




by Alain G » 12/09/10, 15:54

Bah!


Don't worry, I'm not upset because I understood the meaning of the sentence!

To return to our sheep, the stove in question is still quite simple in principle which takes very cold air outside to increase its volume and create an efficient blower in front of the glass, the other advantage is found Today on many stoves, it is the gas deflection plate below the interior chimney outlet which prevents the fumes from leaving without passing through the flame for a cleaner final combustion.
The fact that the logs are positioned in the width direction prevents the end of the smoking logs from evacuating its vapor towards the door but rather on the sides and to join the flame.

I think this stove has only been available for 2 years and by digging a bit I realize that the stoves have really not changed much and that I should have kept it because it was a little wonder!
: Cry:

It had a small defect anyway because we had taken care to weld the deflection plate on both sides of the stove and it was deformed by heat, this little blunder would have been easily corrected by welding only one side to let the expansion make its artwork!
0 x
Stepping behind sometimes can strengthen friendship.

Criticism is good if added to some compliments.

Alain
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 42




by Capt_Maloche » 12/09/10, 23:50

dedeleco wrote:...
Finally I admire the Canadians for their realization of Drake landing:
http://www.dlsc.ca/borehole.htm
which heats the winter with the heat of the summer !!
...


Very interesting, I just watched the video presentation of the project

144 boreholes of 37m for 52 pavilons "BBC" type equipped with solar panels, 2 panels for DHW 4m², and around 30m² for heating (800 solar panels indicated 2.45 x 1.18m + antifreeze)

A building (community Energy Center) centralizes solar production first in water tanks apparently 240m3) then in the ground using drilling (geothermal probes in fact)

at € 60 per meter it's 144x35x60 = € 300 of drilling
Add earthworks, piping = € 100
The storage building around 300 €
Underground distribution for 52 pavilions € 500
800 solar panels of 2.80m² = 2240m² or approx. € 900

A cost of around 2 € for 100 pavilions
it is a very approximate value
that's around € 40 per pavilion just for heating production
(10 times the price of a gas boiler)

A BBC type building needs about 5KW of heating power in the middle of winter, let's take the case of a French winter in the Paris region with -7 ° C outside and 20 ° C inside, i.e. around 5000W / 27 ° C = 185W / ° C
Annual consumption = (24 x 185 x 2500DJU) / 1000 = 11 100 Kw.h per year

Cost of kw.h gas with subscription: approx. 0.085 ct € / Kw.h
i.e. 11 100x0.085 = around 1000 € of gas per year
We must add to this a large consumption of "Auxiliaries", all the circulation pumps, regulations and exchangers, network losses which must weigh in the energy balance, it is not for nothing that we abandon collective networks

Installation costs € 36 more per house than a simple boiler
or a return on investment of 36000 / 1000 = 36 years
:D


Energy is not yet expensive enough for this system


We welcome the solution which has the merit of operating in semi-autonomy.
Last edited by Capt_Maloche the 13 / 09 / 10, 00: 03, 2 edited once.
0 x
"Consumption is similar to a search consolation, a way to fill a growing existential void. With, the key, a lot of frustration and a little guilt, increasing the environmental awareness." (Gérard Mermet)
OUCH, OUILLE, OUCH, AAHH! ^ _ ^

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 253 guests