Plasma Plant turns your old junk into electricity, which can then be used to create more junk
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted November 12th 2008 8:52PM
posted November 12th 2008 8:52PM
The transmutation of garbage into energy is a particularly modern form of alchemy. We've seen it done on a smaller scale in the past, but now a company called Geoplasma is assembling the country's first plasma refuse plant in St. Lucie County, Florida. Scheduled to go online by 2011, the plant will process 1,500 tons of garbage a day, adding 60 megawatts to the power grid -- enough energy to power 50,000 homes. The plant works by vaporizing refuse with a 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit stream of plasma. The organic components (food, fluids, paper) create a pressurized gas that is then used to turn a turbine, while any inorganic refuse (metals) that may be present condenses, later to be collected for industrial uses. But will it power a Flux Capacitor?
[Via Inhabitat]
[Via Inhabitat]
and I want them futuristic nikes...
http://gizmodo.com/5020072/nike-finally-releasing-back-to-the-future-part-ii-mcfly-sneakers-sort-of
I dont see how this is newsworthy...
we been burning our trash for years, just that this one burns it at a hotter temperature and hot enough to melt metals....
combustion and gasification are quite different. nothing is being burned in this process
This is bogus.
I find it hilarious that no matter how sophisticated the form of energy production, it always seems to boil down to producing a gas to turn a turbine.
Once they finally come up with a nuclear fusion reactor that actually works, it will produce steam to - guess what - turn a turbine. Anyway, whats wront with turbines?
Considering turbines are some of the most efficient options, it would be dumb to venture far. They get about 90% + efficiency which is pretty darn good.
I love the way that all this fancy technology talk-
plasma this, geothermal that, nuclear this, vaporise that...basically all boils down to steam turning a big metal windmill.
Pretty pathetic really. I don't care how they generate the blinking steam....it's still steam!
Now room temperature fusion, super-conducting metals and plastics harnessing the power of the 100 lightening strikes per second that strikeThe Earth every day, now that's interesting.
"Unfortunately you never know where or when a bolt of lightening is going to strike....." hold on a minute!
haha, BOILS DOWN TO? STEAM?
hilarious
I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE
Anybody know how this will affect the environment?
It should be a great benefit to the environment, because it will reduce our need for new raw material sources. Imagine your old PC getting gasifed by the plasma. The gases will turn a turbine to make electricity, and then the gases will be captured and resold as pure gases (O2, H2). The solids will also be collected, and they can be reprocessed into their raw forms as well. Aluminium, iron, lead... all the raw elemements can be collected, and put back into the manufacturing stream.
Personally, I'm surprised by the lack of knowledge in this thread as to what plasma gasification actually means. Everything is converted back into its molecular form, and can then be sorted and sold on to make new things out of. Less (theoretically no) physical waste sent to a landfill, and we get the bonus of the electrical production - enough to run the plasma gasifier, and a surplus to sell to the grid.
That's awesome.... I saw that 60 minutes video about the china landfills... its very sad. I think we should be investing tax payer dollars in new technologies such as this one instead of bailing out old Automotive companies who have failed.
Since when did computers contain organic parts?
@whataviper
After you study organic chemistry, you'll be able to answer your own question.
(hint: just about everything made from petrochemicals, ie plastics, are considered organic compounds)
If I could go back in time I would take back all those comments bashing everything non-iPhone....
NOT!!!
I would buy up all the 1st gen iPhones I could get! 4GB models... refurbs... anything i...
at this day and time we truly need this.
take a look at this 60 Minuts link, (from china to America and back to china)
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4586903n
Mr. Fusion used Fusion power to generate electricity.
This is using plasma to burn garbage to turn a steam turbine to generate electricity.
Much different.
Part I Jennifer > Part Two Jennifer
If Part I Jennifer is greater than Part Two Jennifer, doesn't that make her fatter than part 2 jennifer?
I read it as Part II can fit Part I inside her lady bits.
my questions :
what is the net gain in energy? Running a plasma flame, transportation of the garbage, etc. seems like a lot of energy spent on the process, do you get more energy out of it than you put in? And if so, how much?
And, finally is it worth the cost? Does it cost more in operating this plant to produce energy and dispose of refuse than it does by conventional means?
A few questions I had concerning the practicality of this technology.
"do you get more energy out of it than you put in? And if so, how much?"
I think somebody wasn't paying attention in his middle school science class. Probably busy playing with his iPhone.
In the US you have to take an AP Physics course to learn the rules of thermodynamics, middle school involves learning to read analog clocks. And Pizza.
my question wasn't worded correctly, take it easy. Take ethanol. It's a waste of energy because when you factor in the fuel used to produce the corn, transport it, make the ethanol, and finally transport the ethanol to the station for the consumer. That is a net loss in any gains that the ethanol can give you. Is this technology similar? Are you using more energy during the whole process to get your electricity than you would if you used nuclear or coal or natural gas? Middle school my ass you fucktard.
Very good point. However, what ends up happening is that, yes, it does take a certain start up energy to create the plasma initially, but it's like the activation energy in a chemical reaction. Once you continue to add garbage, the output of energy in the generator is greater than the cost of the plasma, and so it becomes a constant reaction.
It's actually quite ingenious.
Can it power enough GTX 280's to run crysis at 100fps?
no, but it can power up a computer so you can look up some new jokes.
This is just an arc reactor. You know, the thing that runs the ironman suit. Old actually, france has a few better ones. Expect more of these to pop up as states start mandating renewable resources (and what's more renewable than our garbage?)
But will it power a Flux Capacitor?
Of course not, for that you'd need a bolt of lightning, or 1.21 JIGGGGAWATS (GIGAWATS)
Was I the only one looking for some cool Engadget photoshop job in the picture? Frankly, I'm disappointed.
You sir are not alone.
trash problem solved?
we (Port Moody, BC, Canada) rejected such plant here (maybe just smaller). After researches have been done, people found that:
- they tried it already in Germany, and it didn't work
- in Toronto, Canada, they have one plant, that they can not still operate at 100% capacity - it always seems to run into problems. Last time it was shut down because of pollution (quite recently)
- pollution was a big concern, regardless what the company claims
- looks like a scam - they built a plant in Toronto, and apparently, now if the same company builds another plant in Canada, Toronto get cash back for promoting "solution"
- they can not accept all trash, so it has to be kinda sorted.
- looks like recycling is much better option (and I'm sticking to it,I do not even through organics, and use that for compost)
This is a step in the almost right direction - instead of using the plasma stream to drive a turbine - you can "pump" it through a tokamas system and directly generate electricity in the multiple Megawatt range - been in use in several parts of the world for a long time. Some were decommissioned and are now coming back on line.
Using MHD instead of a gas turbine is a far better way to use the plasma. Driving the turbine is a loss in the net energy available and an increase in expense - to build, operate and maintain.
And no smell, no pollution - only refuse is base elements that can be sold to industry. And you can also use coal, it doesn't combust - no hydrogen to from H2O to burst it into flames - no CO2 for the same reason. You can also use the slag from previous coal incineration for the plasma stream. (all you have left are 29 elements that can be used in industry) Hmmm.
Direct plasma conversion to electricity truly has some great possibilities.
(full disclosure - I am working with colleagues around the world to develop a "home" based unit and regionalised system that will use the coal residue for MHD systems. We are seeing remarkable results).
You would need a little over 200 of these to power a flux capacitor.
My calculations are based on the fact that your average flux capacitor requires ONE POINT TWENTY-ONE JIGGAWATTS!!!
Timely post! It's November 12th... the night of the "Enchantment Under the Sea Dance"!
It's also the night that - at precisely ten-o-four pm - lightning struck the Hill Valley clock tower 53 years ago.
And DT though HE was a loser...
Hahaha, you sir, have the best comment of them all. How could I have been so careless as to not notice that myself? Tom?
I've heard of a company that can do 3,000 Megawatts from 3000 tons of garbage. That's easily more than 1.2 Gigawatts enough power a flux capacitor...
This girl I'm smitten with told me about this secret parking lot that's filled with a bunch of Deloreans. I'll report back, Engadget, don't you worry.
http://www.popsci.com/node/10067
popular science reported on this in March of last year. I'm glad something useful has been made out of the technology.
is it just me or there someone else worried about where the fumes go after powering the turbine?
That isn't Elizabeth Shue in the picture..
Good thing too. I never understood what people saw in her; Lea Thompson forever.
Folks...this is just another way of saying burning garbage! Don't get fooled by the new name. It's not a new method to generate energy. It's one of the worst methods of "generating" energy.
It's not burning, its vaporizing. The pollutants are captured to be recycled.
I remember seeing a prototype version in Popular Science a little less than a year ago. Good to see that they are actually building large-scale versions.
And yes, Back to the Future does indeed kick ass.
They've either already built, or in the process of building, one of these up in Ottawa as well:
http://www.zerowasteottawa.com/en/