View Feed
group-icon
Coffee Room
Discuss anything here - everything that you wish to discuss with fellow engineers.
12915 Members
Join this group to post and comment.
einstein89
einstein89 • Sep 29, 2007

Zero Pollution !

Whts going on im tired of this fuel prices , this pollution ,
and non working solar energy!
Ya there r air compressed engines , which use compressed air at 4,315 PSI and a air injector injects it in cylinder which pushes piston , but again , to compress air till tht extent , huge compressor is required and for tht electricity , again pollution during creating electricity , i mean during generation of electricity! So leave Air compressed Engines!
Stirling Not yet so efficient or productive tht they will use solar energy and drive my car!
Fuel Cell , same concept , tht they will again create pollution some where else! ,
Nitrogen is similar to air compressed engines! it too compresses nitrogen and liquid nitrogen when gets into gas , it expands 700 times! again pushing piston and tht saga continues!
but compressing nitrogen , takes electricity ! again same saga pollution!
SO ANY ONE CALLING HIMSELF/HERSELF ENGINEER can we unitedly make something which is pollutionless , ya , electricityless!
can anyone here help each other!
atleast imagination and making some concepts! so tht we will have peace in this world , ya pollution free one!
So guys concentrate here pls!
einstein89
einstein89 • Oct 1, 2007
Is there any one who will reply ? (Willingly)
Kaustubh Katdare
Kaustubh Katdare • Oct 2, 2007
Of course, pollution is a big problem. We do need a solution for this problem. In my opinion, we should make optimum use of the Solar Energy. It would be nice if CEans can come up with ideas about utilizing the solar energy in a better way.

I'd love to see solar powered CAR, Aeroplane, Trains etc. But, how do we make it possible?

-The Big K-
Newmanite
Newmanite • Oct 2, 2007
Ride a push bike absolutely zero pollution
Ashraf HZ
Ashraf HZ • Oct 2, 2007
We are pretty much restricted to the conversion efficiencies of current solar panels (I think 20-something %). However, we can still improvise with this limitation by engineering devices which consume less energy so it can actually fully run under solar energy, like Big K said.

Check out this article at tomshardware. They have a project on running a computer 100% by solar power.

https://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_solar_powered_pc/index.html

By the way einstein, is "electricity" really pollution? πŸ˜›
furkan_ims
furkan_ims • Oct 4, 2007
Hi Friend
I Think Except Soler Energy,if V Use Magnetic Energy To Run Compressor
I Dont Know How But If Any Knows Please Help
einstein89
einstein89 • Oct 4, 2007
ash
We are pretty much restricted to the conversion efficiencies of current solar panels (I think 20-something %). However, we can still improvise with this limitation by engineering devices which consume less energy so it can actually fully run under solar energy, like Big K said.

Check out this article at tomshardware. They have a project on running a computer 100% by solar power.

https://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/06/technical_foundations_diy_solar_powered_pc/index.html

By the way einstein, is "electricity" really pollution? πŸ˜›
hello mr x
so mr tell me how electricity is produced
i can suggest various ways ,
thermal power plant using coal
nuclear power plant using nuc fuel (huge pollution 100000 tonne nuc waste)
generator using petrol , diesel ,
burning waste
ya
hydro electric dont create pollution , also tidal , geo thermal , wind etc
but we dont use tidal , geo thermal and forget wind in cities

now tell me we mostly use the above plants
which create huge pollution!
tell me how will u run a compressor which is for public use ,
which will run 24 hr and consume power equivalent to 10 huge cities
for air compressed , for nitrogen comp
u need air at 4315 Kpa/m(square)
huge pressure
now tell me ur hydro electric single or say u build 10 dams ,(hope water scarcity doesnt exists)
can u run as many pumps (pumps for comp air vehicles) on hydroelectricity!
so think practically and then criticise!
einstein89
einstein89 • Oct 13, 2007
people r interested in making pollution it seems
xheavenlyx
xheavenlyx • Oct 13, 2007
Keep whining and the world will crumble in front of your eyes, (that too in your perception).

If you want to change something, thats through a solution. Now it seems you are so depressed that even cave man burning fire was pollution for you. Stop whining!!!!

Yes gov are very shitty in handling these things, yes, we are polluting more and more every year, yes, all this is true, but then whats the alternative when you have flushed everything down the toilet?

Now, a few weeks ago I was going to reply, I think I had, but didnt go. I was saying I too have thought of the same thing πŸ˜€ Exactly the same thing, but then I thought, whats the most efficient and the least polluting? compromises always have to be made! Thats how engineering works? You have to pull down a property to raise something else, efficiency at cost of pollution, and vice versa.

So, the best thing to do is find a solution, I understand how you feel.
Shaunzer
Shaunzer • Dec 23, 2007
toshiba micro nuclear plant

Maybe we can have more "mr fusion" in our cars for now, toshiba jus tmight have the answer with their consumer micro nuclear plant
einstein89
einstein89 • Jan 2, 2008
Re: toshiba micro nuclear plant

Shaunzer
Maybe we can have more "mr fusion" in our cars for now, toshiba jus tmight have the answer with their consumer micro nuclear plant
thts the way it is done 😁

still further solutions are welcomed!
Er.AtulSingh
Er.AtulSingh • Jan 3, 2008
Hi,
dats a fantastic thot,
I m with u E89,
The thing is ,V r restricted in imagining, V think on wat is already created ,Say the "Engine",
Cant v think of some weared way for transport. which doesnot require Eltrcty.
I strongly believe , we may find some organic design approaches to it.
SO Try to Think out of BOx.
Think of something Crazy.

Hey wish u all a very Happy New Year.
priya mandole
priya mandole • Jan 14, 2008
sir ,im right now working on a project which would help in a zero pollutoin,
but using wind energy.if u could help me in that.............
Er.AtulSingh
Er.AtulSingh • Jan 17, 2008
Hi,
I may not b the right person to give u some information, as i hav jus compltd my BE dis year
Ya but we can Share ideas , and through Brainstorming sessions , wwe cud come out wid a Feasible Solution
So lets start
wat xactly ru thinking?
videotuning
videotuning • Jan 17, 2008
0 pollution means that we go to work with the bycicle
arunbs
arunbs • Jan 20, 2008
hu pollution is a real problem no doubt in it. but the guy who is freaking out. how many trees have u planted in your locality. why u want to travel in ur super bike or car y not a public transport... ya prevention is better than cure but can we prevent pollution .. a big NO. but we have many ways to cure. y dont we think to develop a efficient method for that.ya the question is also about global warming too but we cant hold our breath for that.& abt production of electricity.. burning fossil fuel at thermal plant is different from internal combustion engine in vehicles...it produces oxides of nitrogen & sulfur. but a coal powered thermal plant wont only co2 & co.
nw compare the pollution created by 10 bikes & a bus with 10 guys. bus will produce less pollution. nw wat abt a huge thermal plant. i agree abt the energy loss/efficiency coz of converting frm one from to another but still.
having a optimum level of greenhouse gases & other stuffs wont harm our ecosystem that bad.

cigarette smoking is injuries to environment !!
einstein89
einstein89 • Mar 1, 2008
Er.AtulSingh
good tht u r thinking logically
really good thought , is engine always necessary
cant we move out of it???????????????????
we call ourselves crazy , we need to develop something crazy
transportation we aim
@!$#@$ the engine, we need something else
lets discuss tht
certainly combustion goes to hell
we must use something tht uses
magnets
gravity
some chemicals which r not hazardous
only one thing we keep in mind , zero 😁 pollution
thts crazy , thts why we r here.
i hope we think abt this
vimalcasio
vimalcasio • Mar 2, 2008
einstein89
Whts going on im tired of this fuel prices , this pollution ,
and non working solar energy!
Ya there r air compressed engines , which use compressed air at 4,315 PSI and a air injector injects it in cylinder which pushes piston , but again , to compress air till tht extent , huge compressor is required and for tht electricity , again pollution during creating electricity , i mean during generation of electricity! So leave Air compressed Engines!
Stirling Not yet so efficient or productive tht they will use solar energy and drive my car!
Fuel Cell , same concept , tht they will again create pollution some where else! ,
Nitrogen is similar to air compressed engines! it too compresses nitrogen and liquid nitrogen when gets into gas , it expands 700 times! again pushing piston and tht saga continues!
but compressing nitrogen , takes electricity ! again same saga pollution!
SO ANY ONE CALLING HIMSELF/HERSELF ENGINEER can we unitedly make something which is pollutionless , ya , electricityless!
can anyone here help each other!
atleast imagination and making some concepts! so tht we will have peace in this world , ya pollution free one!
So guys concentrate here pls!
hi guys,
i have heard some where about using hydrogen, i.e hydrogen powered cars
gohm
gohm • Mar 7, 2008
Good topic!

First I think one must define pollution. Is pollution just unwanted byproducts from a process, or is it much broader and include any negative side effect from a process? I would say the broader definition as if a process uses up a resource but does not emit polutant byproducts, isn't that just as harmful? In that case, I do not think 0% pollution is possible within the chain from aquiring raw materials/resources all the way to the end usage of the product. Everything has its trade off. for example, get rid of mechanized transport and you will reduce co2 emissions. Flora damage from walking causes some plant species to become extinct. Ok, so maybe not the greatest example however you get the idea. The key to me is to limit the footprint or impact of the process to as small as possible while keeping the economic viability of the process/product high so to have a large global impact. The most amazing low pollution device is pointless if nobody uses it. my 2 cents!
Ashraf HZ
Ashraf HZ • Mar 7, 2008
Crap, gohm.. I typed up a long ass post offline a few days ago, and you basically summarized it πŸ˜›

Anyway, the key is finding an efficient way to generate electricity. Thats it. Electricity itself is not a problem.
gohm
gohm • Mar 8, 2008
Ha! ha! laugh

Yep, I got lightning fingers... except during certain bar chord changes!

ash
Crap, gohm.. I typed up a long ass post offline a few days ago, and you basically summarized it πŸ˜›

Anyway, the key is finding an efficient way to generate electricity. Thats it. Electricity itself is not a problem.
psbabu
psbabu • Mar 11, 2008
hi friends.....i m new to this forum.....a brilliant (rather crazy) topic put forward by Mr.Einstien. As its sadi tht its a brain storming session, i have a crazy idea in my mind.
v have to study many things from nature . nature has answers 4 every questions.
here our problem is pollution and electricity or power is the cause for this. Y cant v think about animals. where r they gettin these power? power to run,power to hunt etc etc....if v r able to adopt there technology in power prodution,then our problem can b minimized ...(and only minimised...v cant reach a 0% pollution)
psbabu
hi friends.....i m new to this forum.....a brilliant (rather crazy) topic put forward by Mr.Einstien. As its sadi tht its a brain storming session, i have a crazy idea in my mind.
v have to study many things from nature . nature has answers 4 every questions.
here our problem is pollution and electricity or power is the cause for this. Y cant v think about animals. where r they gettin these power? power to run,power to hunt etc etc....if v r able to adopt there technology in power prodution,then our problem can b minimized ...(and only minimised...v cant reach a 0% pollution)
Bio-power? Hmm.. *rubs chin* We have a thread discussing about biofuels here.

Unless you are referring to using the animals themselves to do work πŸ˜›
just2rock
just2rock • Mar 12, 2008
No Human ..no pollution😁
An update on Solar cells: https://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/03/solaria-cheaper-solar-panels-pv-silicon.php

Looks like we can look toward mass producing these stuff. Tis an ongoing quest to zero pollution πŸ˜‰
M RISHABH JAIN
M RISHABH JAIN • Mar 28, 2008
YA HERE I M ............
I also want to know the answer of ur ques.
But i can tell u 1 thing i.e. here v never be make a environment having 0 pollution.......
gnomic
gnomic • Mar 30, 2008
Where to begin?

Bikes are not 100 polution free - think cradle to cradle - you still have to smelt the ore unless you are buiding a bamboo bike (yes, some guy is doing it! Google it)

We don't need to "generate" electricity. We need to efficiently capture the energy that it out there - solar is one option. How about capturing other particles like neutrinos? Or finding a new way to power things that doesn't use electrons? (Not a free energy freak, just want yo to think out side the box).

What we really have is a problem storing and delivering energy. Oil and gas are nothing more than a high density chemical battery, and very inefficient when you consider what it takes to get it from the ground to your engine - and then we throw away most of it as pollution.

There is no reason we can't get solar up to ~50pct (that whole day/night thing makes it harder to do more unless we move the panels to orbit, and then you have to beam the power down, etc.). The problem is storing that energy in a lightweight concentrated form that you can use for cars.

And if you bug is pollution - why not figure out how to capture it and convert it to something more useful? It still has lots of energy left...
raj87verma88
raj87verma88 • Apr 12, 2008
einstein89
hello mr x
so mr tell me how electricity is produced
i can suggest various ways ,
thermal power plant using coal
nuclear power plant using nuc fuel (huge pollution 100000 tonne nuc waste)
generator using petrol , diesel ,
burning waste
ya
hydro electric dont create pollution , also tidal , geo thermal , wind etc
but we dont use tidal , geo thermal and forget wind in cities

now tell me we mostly use the above plants
which create huge pollution!
tell me how will u run a compressor which is for public use ,
which will run 24 hr and consume power equivalent to 10 huge cities
for air compressed , for nitrogen comp
u need air at 4315 Kpa/m(square)
huge pressure
now tell me ur hydro electric single or say u build 10 dams ,(hope water scarcity doesnt exists)
can u run as many pumps (pumps for comp air vehicles) on hydroelectricity!
so think practically and then criticise!
so you think that by producing electricity pollution is caused. True, to some extent. Thermal power plants do cause pollution, but can you say that for the other power plants. And now tell me, without electricity the machines today will be running on steam engines or IC engines and that would have been 100 times more pollution than now. The Nuclear power plant is a very clean source of electricity and there are many ways to dump the waste effectively. The windmills, geothermal power plants, solar power plants etc why do you forget them. Various other improvements and research is being made to develop clean machines and increase the efficiency of the rest. You talk as if you are the only one who is thinking about this problem of pollution. You are telling others to think practically but are you? What have you done to reduce the pollution? Have you installed solar panels in you home to reduce the burden on the electricity provided by state? Are you doing water harvesting? Have you made your house eco friendly? Do you drive an electric vehicle or use public transport? And my last question to you HOW IS FUEL CELL GOING TO CAUSE POLLUTION?????
desijays
desijays • Apr 22, 2008
Okay. I have an awesome insight. Its too good, I feel like I have been enlightened......I was kidding abt the enlightment part. Maybe the awesome part too.

Think about the entire ordeal of producing electricity logically.

1)We need electricity so we use 'stuff' to make it.
2)Unfortunately the 'stuff' we use, creates pollution
3)If we had some means to feed that pollution back into that 'stuff', we are accomplishing 2 things. Electricity to use and less pollution to worry about.

Now real world scenario........

1)We need electricity, so we burn coal, diesel, gas to get that electricity.
2)Unfortunately, they produce pollution in the form of green house gases like CO2, water vapour......... etc.
3)If we can use CO2 or water vapour to produce that electricity then we get the electricity that we want and we can worry about a lot less pollution.

So the solution is to make electricity using the very pollution that is created in its production

Law states "Energy can neither be created or destroyed. Only transformed from one form to another" ->eqn 1

From eqn 1, if pollution is produced while creating electricity, then pollution is in itself is a form of energy. ->eqn 2

From eqn 2 and eqn 1, if pollution is itself a form of energy, then it can be converted to a form that we can use.

So, that I believe is the solution ... err....proof, or whatever.

So the bottom line is, if you can figure out a way to create electricity from green house gases and if that 'way' is economically feasible then you have solved one of the world's greatest problems of this century.

Amen!
gohm
gohm • Apr 22, 2008
very true and that is the tricky part! encouraging forms of energy creation that has a small negative environmental impact is key until then. solar, wind and hydro. Combustion process will be a distance "second place" unless a circluar connecting link can be found as you mention.
gnomic
gnomic • Jun 4, 2008
Jeez, for a bunch of smart guys, you disappoint me.

We do not need to generate any electricity. He have the biggest generator in the solar system sending us energy. We need to convert it at higher efficiencies. Right now the average is about 20% and relies on a lot of expensive materials and difficult fabrication that only works when the sun is at a 90 degree angle plus or minus a few degrees, making the system complex and prone to failure.

About 40 sq km at 80% solar conversion efficiency and you can power the entire US.

The next problem we have is storage. Energy storage is horrible. Its inefficient, most non-renewable, material and fabrication intensive, often toxic.

Finally, we have the problem of transmission. Centralized power generation results in more than half the power lost during transmission. Distributed co generation is resource intensive to the point of impracticality.

Alternatively, you can use secondary solar such as wind and tide, or tertiary solar, most notably biofuels. Or, better yet, find a more efficient method of thermal conversion that works at lower temperatures. The Rankine cycle isn't practical unless you have temps of around 1K F.

me? Not an engineer, just a hobbiest inventor.
gnomic
gnomic • Jun 4, 2008
Oh, and bicycles aren't pollution free, they just result in lower amounts of direct pollution in relative terms. But the transportation results are not scalable. Everyone shipping everything via bike would result in a lot of pollution and be very inefficient.

Solar generates a lot of pollution in manufacturing, but none during the use phase of its lifecycle. And the storage densities aren't there and the ones that work well aren't very light or don't have proven long term lifecycles. New technologies like LionFE batteries and ultracapcitors are improving storage, but there is lots of room for improvement.

Hydrogen may look good, but the energy density isn't there (unless you got controlled fusion). And you still need to make H2 which requires a lot of energy and is typically made from stripping natural gas, a process that results in a lot of C02 and other pollutants.

Nuclear? Lots of waste problems, huge capital investment, and if you brought 1 plant a day up for the next 20 years, it still wouldn't demand. And then there is that whole terrorism problem. Still, if anyone can create a nuclear battery that uses trace radioactives and has high conversion efficiencies, you could likely make a lot of money.

MIT has a lot of good knowledge leadership in their lecture series and online classrooms that is worth studying.
Ashraf HZ
Ashraf HZ • Jun 4, 2008
I believe "generating electricity" is a concept of converting any form of energy into electricity anyway, right? πŸ˜›

P.V efficiencies are reaching 40% +.. Good heliostat designs can reflect of solar heat towards thermal recievers. With Fresnel lens, Sun tracking, etc, solar power is indeed the way to go. If you dont like solar farms, perhaps its better to use off-grid solar solutions. You need not to worry about transmission problems. Every home and business should invest in them πŸ˜€

Yes, manufacturing P.V cells and the like may cause pollution initially, but as you said, the positive externality towards the environment as well as humans makes it worth it.

He's something about microwave light bulbs:
https://www.eetimes.eu/201200407

And taking about nuclear batteries?
IEEE Spectrum: The Daintiest Dynamos

Innovations like these will eventually dampen the World's demand for electricity and allow renewable energy to catch up. Things like MEMS and nanotechnology isnt a science fantasy, its a reality for us.

For a discussion of biofuels, please check this out:
https://www.crazyengineers.com/forum...o-you-think-bio-diesel-would-fuel-future.html

Remember, we cannot reduce pollution overnight. Takes global policies, investment, a change in mentality, trust and commitment. One step at a time. And if that means going to the nearby shop with a bike rather than your SUV, than that makes a difference.
suyash
suyash • Jun 5, 2008
Off topic (or is it?)

Has anyone seen the movie, which is in fact an Oscar winning documentary --> "An Inconvinient Truth" ... made by Mr. Al Gore .

One gets tremendous motivation to really think about planet earth, and for the fact that what we take for granted today, might cease to exist way before its time is up...

In fact, I am also looking forward to energy efficient solutions like hybrid cars, green appliances which effectively aim to reduce the carbon percentage to zero.
Rckid
Rckid • Jul 13, 2008
perhaps a mechanical plant, a mechine using solar energy to change carbon dioxide into oxygen or some other unwanted gas into oxygen surly its posible

just an idea
That would be pretty ideal, haha. I think it'll require a hell lot of energy to break the carbon-oxygen bonds and keep them apart.

I hate chemistry πŸ˜›

Plants are doing a better job than us in that regard. Its better we try to curb illegal logging and things like that.

@suyash
I've yet to see it! Might learn a thing or two from watching it.
geococeo
geococeo • Aug 4, 2008
hey everyone i love you all! you are all geniuses! no joke.
here is how i reduce pollution:
i have a very large garden and for at least 4 months out of the year i grow my own food. here in america nearly everything is shipped by diesel truck, my garden probly reduces fuel consumption by five or six gallons per year, imagine everyone who has an ugly green lawn which they dowse in chemical fertilizers and pesticides and mow with an inefficient gasoline tractor, having instead a lush garden where they were able to eat free organic produce for at least the summer months with minimal effort(the city i know is a different story).
point: move food production to the local economy!
also i eat food that supermarkets throw in the garbage the rest of the year, i realize this is not a solution for everyone but it is what i am doing to minimize wasted energy. plus i run a car on waste vegetable oil, walk or bike if possible, participate in public transportation, stopped watching so much tv and try to generally lower my demand for power rather than figure out how to "clean up" esxisting demand!
use less
humans survived for uncountable years without electricity, so lets learn a few of our ancestors tricks and combine them with our contemporary supply of pure genius and bam! pollution will be minimized
ps: al gore lives in the most power consuming household in the state of tennessee(he is full of *#%!)
gohm
gohm • Aug 4, 2008
Geo-

I applaud you, you rock! 😁😁😁
We need more people on this orb like you! thank you!
Ashraf HZ
Ashraf HZ • Aug 5, 2008
Nice one, Geo!

I need to find a way to use the cooking oil in my house. Might persuade my mom to store the used oil (after being reused again) while I research on it πŸ˜›

Have you thought about installing solar panels on your roof too?
be_apurva
be_apurva • Aug 5, 2008
i think using nuclear energy will be helpful in reducing air pollution...but it has its own side effects if nuclear plant malfunctions...it can lead to emission of dangerous radiations...
geococeo
geococeo • Aug 10, 2008
yes i would love to have solar panels for the generation of energy this is a very clean source in the long run, unfortunately the price is too high for my means, i would however like to in the near future harness solar energy in order to heat water for baths and dishes etc. a solar water heater is much less expensive than silicon panels and any one can build one with minimal knowledge. geothermal is also a great source of efficient free clean home heating and cooling.
this is a great and passionate topic!!!
student susi
student susi • Sep 26, 2008
hi this is Susi new to CE
coming to the matter........reducing pollution
😎
  • why don't we use a cycle while going to small distances?It is lot of fun & saves loads of fuel.
  • why don't we use the public modes of transport often instead of riding a vehicle for just 1 or 2 persons.We must SHARE OUR DRIVE
driimzz
driimzz • Dec 1, 2008
It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it.
just2rock
just2rock • Dec 2, 2008
driimzz
It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it.
Look the thing to put in right perspective is that these impurities are maximal generated by pollutions.Global enviormental scenario is changing day by day of the same very reason.
Besides this corporate bodies should come forward to support Enviormental clean process,because the maximum of misuse of electricity or better called "Carbon Footprints" are been locable their only,as told by Researchers also.I have small chat few days back with "GreenPeace".They were discussing the same with me and will be soon converting those suggestions into actions.
syedaafaq
syedaafaq • Dec 4, 2008
i will accept all the comments given by everyone here......... but i would like to tell that we are now in 21st century, everyone needs to grow, build strong in their own economic aspects... no one thinks about the future generations...... even i too.... think a while.. even the members of global pollution measures who organizes camps, meetings to reduce pollution .....never implement it in their own lifestyles.. they come to the meetings in a branded air conditioned bmw or mercedes etc....... sit in an air conditioned hall and discuss the steps for reducing pollution...... huh..... very pathetic situation for our mother nature......... its not a organizations' work to do something for reducing the pollution its duty and responsibility of each and every person in this earth to avoid polluting as much as he can............
a small fact: the cigratte smoking not only spoils our health but also pollutes the environment......for all the chain smokers there, i would say if u cant do anything in order to reduce pollution atleast reduce the number of cigrattes you smoke everyday..... it would be a small contribution on your part to the mother nature for keeping it free from pollution......
Good point, syedaafaq. Its kind of hypocritical to preach about the protection of the environment while not implementing it in their own lives first.

Share this content on your social channels -