You must log in or # to comment.
Every damn power plant is a glorified steam engine
Readily available, low boiling point, non corrosive (relatively), and ecologically safe. What more do you want?
Also a ridiculously high heat capacity. It does make sense.
Molten salt. Lower pressure, higher efficiency, and I believe less reactive in the event of an uh-oh.
The molten salt is used as the first step. It then makes steam through a heat exchanger. Molten salt is safer next to the actual reactor because water is not a good coolant in case of emergency.
Oh, I was just joking around. What my water system is missing is molten salt.
Although for the sake of preposterousness, I’m going to suggest we use the molten salt to turn a giant water wheel.
Hydro isn’t. Nor is solar photo voltaic, wind, or tidal, but yeah, nearly everything else is. In a combined-cycle natural gas or diesel plant half of the power generated isn’t steam power, but the other half is.
Hydro is liquid steam
aah, but it didn’t say steam, it said boiling water.
smaller gas generators based on internal combustion engines don’t boil water though, right?
gas generators based on internal combustion
they heat air, afaik. hot gas expands -> mechanical movement moves magnets -> electromagnetism -> electric power.
Molten ice.
I watched a video a while ago about a new approach to fusion which uses induction iirc https://youtu.be/uRaQLZaaHWo
Why don’t we just pipe our water all the way out to the sun and pipe the steam back to earth.
Because it would cool down on the way back.
We just have to pipe it faster
Oh yeah! I did that for my house. We have free heat and power. It’s a bit of a pain in the ass to build the pipeline that far out and it took me many more hours than expected, but, the system toots along just fine.
building a pipe all the way to space would mean the pipe would have to sustain its own weight, which is the same problem as a space elevator. that doesn’t work either because there’s no material on earth strong enough to support its own weight over that distance.
I wonder if nuclear would get more traction If it was pitched as enhanced steam power instead
“It’s a blockchain of an highly enhanced hydrogen process. Thanks to its AI quantum mechanism it manages to increase the energy output by a ton through its cloud.”
Just tell that to investors and they’ll gobble it up. /s
I wonder how fast we could get a steam train to go if we stuck a suitably shaped non-critical amount of plutonium in the firebox.
As fast as it will roll down a hill. A non-critical mass of plutonium isn’t going to produce any significant heat for the boiler.
if we stuck a suitably shaped non-critical amount of plutonium in the firebox.
Non-critical? There isn’t much energy released from natural decay compared to criticality. We created things like this to power space probes like the Voyager I and II craft. 4.5kg of this Plutonium created about 2500w of thermal energy the the beginning of its life and the power declines from there.
So I need 80 tons of it in my firebox?
You can boost it by hollowing out the middle and filling it with tritium, but plutonium is dense, so 80 tons will probably fit in the firebox just fine.
but plutonium is dense, so 80 tons will probably fit in the firebox
I feel like there’s a thing that will happen when I put that much in such a comparatively small place.
It’ll heat up the firebox, which is exactly what the firebox wants to happen. It’s not like we’re using precisely-timed explosives to briefly make the mass much more than critical and counter its desire to blow itself apart for long enough that it blows other things apart, too.
Well, you’d then have another problem. Unlike coal/wood/oil fuel, you can’t turn off radioactive decay.
You’d have megawatts (gigawatts?) of thermal energy boiling off all your water pretty quickly, and likely eventually melting down your steam engine firebox, and it would be that hot for decades!
Nuclear Powered Steam Locomotives
Pros:
- Looks cool as hell.
- Only needs to be refuled every 25 years.
- It’s a steam locomotive.
- It’s a steam locomotive.
- Did I mention it’s a steam locomotive?
Cons:
- Have to replace the fireman with a nuclear engineer.
- Still have to stop to grease bearings and take on water periodically.
- Hazardous radioactive materials.
Pros clearly outweigh the cons. What are we waiting for?
Reading the comments, it would seem most everyone here thinks that the usefulness of the steam is done when it gets used to turn a turbine at high pressure.
The steam can be used for much more than once. In the 1800’s and early 1900s when steam ran trains and ships, they built double and triple expansion engines that took the energy of the steam two and three times before it was done. It doesn’t need to be one and done. And when the energy is done being harvested for power generation, it can used for other things. Engineers today aren’t dumber than the ones in the 1800s.
I can remember a small rural Minnesota town that had their own coal fired electric plant. (Built back before the REA was a thing). They took the left over steam from power generation and then piped it to around 200 homes in the town and heated them with the leftover steam. While a bit costly to install, it was dirt cheap to run. Those homes lost all that when the power plant was shut down and they had to switch to either natural gas, fuel oil, LP, or electricity.
So don’t get hung up on just the power generation. Think what could be beyond that point.
Municipal steam networks are still operating today.
For new infrastructure, Electricity is just so good-enough, that it is hard to justify building out partial alternatives like steam pipes. But where we already have them, they are still useful.
Also the water is just a medium for energy transfer; it can be reused & recycled in near perpetuity in a closed system.
We’re used to open systems with water in power stations, including cooling towers etc, because water is abundant on earth so it’s cheaper to just dump it back into the atmosphere; we probably take the whole thing for granted.
But it could be engineered to be a closed system a bit like a coolant in a refrigeration unit cycling back and forth. And it probably will need to be a closed system in the future in space where water will be incredibly precious.
Steam had several technical and power limitations. It was dropped very quickly when electrification was an option.
A good example of how you can do amazing things with steam is looking at the very last of the steam locomotives. Before they switched to diesel or electric, the steam locomotives were engineering masterpieces. Yes, you still got the classic steam locomotive puffs of steam coming out of the locomotive, but they only let the steam go once they had extracted the maximum possible energy from it.
Here’s a good video going over the whole design.
The same principal has been tried with crypto mining to reduce waste / cost.
Capture the heat and use it elsewhere like to heat the building.
Downside for heating buildings though is unless you’re doing it somewhere where it’s always cold, you eventually still end up with heat you can’t use, and at that scale, there’s better heating choices. I heard the city of vancouver was looking into heating a swimming pool with it, at least that would have a constant use.
Then you still end up with the issue of the mining cards only being good for 2-3 years before the tech improves and they aren’t mining efficiently anymore, which then just leads to more e-waste.
But imagine if the cards themselves had a really long useful life or were super cheap and easily recyclable, we could put miners in things like space / baseboard heaters which were already going to be doing resistive heating and then gain something from that instead of just heat.
Imagine doing something like having a GPU based baseboard heater that folds proteins whenever it’s on, where it doesn’t become completely obsolete in a couple years. If the chips were cheap enough it’d be way better than just doing heat.
Edit: Taking the idea further… imagine if governments mandated reuse of the heat generated by data centers instead of piping it outside? You want to build a data center here? Build a public pool and heat the building / water with your excess heat. Then that commercial zone also gets a fitness center for anyone nearby.
Low key this is a great way to convince people to switch away from fossil fuels.
Most people seemingly don’t know that coal/gas stations work by essentially boiling water. Most are horrified at how trashy and underdeveloped the concept is compared to high tech alternatives like solar, wind, or hydro.
You can transfer gas to electricity without boiling water. But it is much more efficient to combine it with boiling water
It’s always been about finding new ways to spin a turbine
There’s only 3 major ways to transform different forms of energy into electricity, which are:
- solar panels (light -> electricity)
- mechanical engines/generators (mechanical movement -> electricity)
- electrochemical battery (chemical dipole -> electricity)
there’s a whole lot more, such as thermoelectric generator and piezoelectricity but these are the three significant ones.
note that i distinguish these categories by their core essence, such as whether they’re using changes in magnetic flux (like a mechanical generator) or transferring 1 photon on each electron (like solar panels), instead of looking at what source type of energy they transform.
because there’s many ways to transform e.g. light energy into electricity. you could also heat water with the sunlight and then drive a steam engine with it. but that’s not what i care about. i care about the fundamental connection between different types of energy, and how they can be directly transformed to one another.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betavoltaic_device
We use steam because it is very efficient and lowest cost to maintain.
Living somewhere that makes 90+% of its electricity from hydro, I am slightly confused.
Most modern means of electricity production involve creating heat in some way, then using that heat to boil water, creating steam. That steam is then used to turn a turbine, which generates electricity.
There are actually versions of fusion reactors that use the magnetic fields generated by the plasma in order to make electricity directly.
use cherenkov radiation to power photovoltaic array.
Yeah but photovoltaic has a yield of less than 50% even for the best panels. Lots of waste there, compared to steam.
Why is that a problem, exactly?
It’s not really a problem, it’s just funny that so many forms of power generation we have are just boiling water to make steam that spins turbines.
It only feels odd because that is genuinely an incredibly effective means of generation, and we found it very early on because steam is so fundamental. Nothing wrong with sticking to the best method ever discovered.
and we found it very early on
just FYI, the electrochemical battery was invented in 1800, while electromechanical generator was invented in around 1866.
I blame the constant stream of bullshit, clickbait “science” headlines that media and internet has subjected an entire generation to, leading to the same effect as it’s had on politics, which is the average person tunes out completely and nobody knows what’s “standard” and normal anymore, and doesn’t really care either.
People with no actual experience in electrical generation on large scale.
With rising sea levels and general water shortages, why don’t we also use them as desalination plants?
Surely there has to be a way to deal with brine, it’s just salt and water after all?
Salt is absolutely terrible for any equipment involved in power generation. You’re better off with a power plant and a separate desalination plant than trying to use one for both
But you’re right, cheap energy will help immensely with this
Say that too molten salt reactors! /s
Haha true that, though if I’m not mistaken a large part of the engineering of molten salt reactors is dealing with the salt…man I want the cool tech to be rolled out
you have a better plan?
Yeah; somehow converting the plasma directly into electricity at a 1:1 ratio using… Uh… Dilithium or something.
I hate to break this to you, but chemically, dilithium is just a highly complex steam.
What if we add some nutrinos? And then reverse the polarity? And maybe some antimatter?
Wait, was dilithium just the media Star Trek used to go from reacting matter with antimatter, producing heat, causing the dilithium steam to expand, spinning a magnet inside a coil somewhere behind one of those access panels? Was antimatter just fancy futuristic coal powering the Enterprise’s steam engine!?
Edit: phew No, it’s not just a fancy space steam engine. It is pure fantasy; the dilithium crystal matix regulates antimatter (impossible for any matter to do so) and interacts with subspace (no evidence such a thing even exists), but it’s not spinning any magnets.
Not a better plan but just a curiosity as a physicist enthusiast.
Regarding nuclear fission and nuclear waste (and ignoring the big elephant in the room that are nuclear weapons)…
What are the technical difficulties to turn the radiation emitted by nuclear waste into electricity?
I mean, if the nuclear waste is still radiating, it has stored energy that is radiated as photons, right?
Then, we have the photo-electric effect which turns photons into moving electrons as long as the frequency surpasses a minimum threshold.
Given that the radiation of nuclear waste has frequency way higher than UV, why can’t it be used to feed a photoelectric generator?
Also, we have tons of nuclear waste, so the argument that a single rod doesn’t generate enough radiation seems kinda bogus since we could just store the nuclear waste into a safer recipient that turns the harmful rays directly into electricity and we have a shit-ton of them stored in thick lead or concrete barrels just so this radiation don’t harm the surroundings.
.
It is a genuine question that I had, but never had enough physics class to understand where this logic falls apart.
Because, if it were feasible and “cheap”, I bet that the US would already be doing it and having access to “free energy” (not really, but a long-standing generator that doubles as removing nuclear waste from the ambient).
Given that the radiation of nuclear waste has frequency way higher than UV, why can’t it be used to feed a photoelectric generator?
You’re probably using one of these right now (albeit indirectly)! They’re called Photovoltaic nuclear batteries and they’re critical to modern encryption. They ensure that encryption keys, which are stored in highly volatile memory (memory where if power is ever lost the contents are immediately erased), never lose power unless the memory modules are physically disconnected.
The reason they’re not used more extensively is that they just don’t produce very much power - the high-energy electromagnetic radiations are very difficult to harness constructively (things like gamma and X-rays) and as a result we have to do some weird physics stuff to convert them. PVN batteries convert particle radiation, beta radiation from tritium decay specifically, into usable photons via a thin coating of phosphorus on the glass, instead of them being captured directly.
(this is a wild oversimplification just to be clear)
These types of energy generating current from radioactive decay exist and are used to power spacecraft for years. Not very efficient and the cost/benefit ratio is really only justified on space exploration budgets.
Short answer to why aren’t we doing X is always, always, cost.
watched something on nuclear waste. produces some heat just sitting there. should be usable energy there. think it emits neutrons and electrons. ‘ionizing’ radiation. don’t know if there is a way to generate electricity directly but seems more energetic than just photons.
Just get Maxwell’s demon to separate the plasma into positive and negative charges, effectively creating a capacitor, then discharge it directly over some HVDC lines!
I would swear I saw Tom Scott interview one lab that was planning on building a fusion generator that worked like a diesel engine. Like, the fusion reaction drives a piston.
The pistons drive the fusion, or so they think… General Fusion.
I want it to work like a hit and miss engine. Big ol flywheel, the exhaust valve is held open until the RPM dips low enough then you get a power stroke, just a nice controlled fusion event that releases a whackton of energy, bring the RPM up a bit…
Like the TARDIS Time Rotor, just a pleasant up and down stroking motion as Billie Piper trips and falls onto you…
Could be supercritical CO2, actually
As if CO2 wasn’t bad enough already? Now I have to deal with it making snarky comments about what I wore to work today?
Better to be aware of it, unlike CO, which will permanently put you to sleep because of what you wore.
C02: “I guess I would wear that if I had that body style”.
