Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

Void · 2025-08-19 09:45:09

There has been some chatter about lack of copper/conductor materials due to greater electrification of societies.

I think that to some extent this is already contemplated. For instance, Electric Cars might be used to store energy when plugged in. So, not only would a electric car extract energy from the grid, but at times it might distribute it back to the grid.

Homes and other buildings do not draw constant power though their concoctions to the grids. With increased distributed solar, this is going to become even more true.

So, could a utility put batteries at private locations, to utilize the excess capacity of the power lines? Sodium and Aluminum Batteries may work well for this, and would represent a reduced fire risk.

If the utility had data control of these devices, they could control if the batteries were charging or discharging into the main grid. So, to the limits of safety, the power lines could be kept working at near the capacity limits where possible.

Individual buildings would have their own solar systems or not, their own battery systems or not.

When some type of storm or other such disruption would happen, then individual homes might have a period of time when they could draw off of the utility's battery, even if it had been disconnected by problems with the grid.

I do understand that the downside of this would be line losses from sending electricity to a building and then back out of it. But if copper is to be so much in shortage, then this might reduce the amount of additional copper that would be needed in the future.

Most homes may or may not have roof-top solar installations, but in the future, we are hearing about notions of windows that are solar panels, or even paint that could be solar panels. So, continuous or normal draws though the power lines for these homes or buildings will not be as they are now, and an excess capacity to move electric power to storage though existing grid lines, may open up, to move that power to and from batteries that may be on private property but belong to a utility.

And as it is now, especially with solar the largest draw to a home would be in the early evening, and perhaps not so much otherwise.

Something to think about.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-08-19 11:25:14)

Void · 2025-08-19 10:11:42

Thinking about post #1 a bit more, perhaps some homes might get a better rate if they could convert over to DC power for internal use in the house. If a Utility had a battery near or at their house, then it could regulate how power from that battery might enter the AC lines. A homeowner could mostly use DC inside their home perhaps. And DC from solar power installations could be sold back to the Utility as DC power.

I am hearing that some appliances such as refrigerators may become battery powered in the future, so perhaps this direction can be considered.

Ending Pending

Void · 2025-08-19 10:14:24

An EV owner might also get financial incentive to slave the battery pack in their car to allow it use in stabilizing the grid.

Ending Pending

Void · 2025-08-19 11:26:28

I have added "Aspin Farms" to the title, as I anticipate that it could be an example of what to do with marginal farmland that Tony Seba says is likely to come into disuse. Tony Seba is associated with RethinkX.

RethinkX: https://www.bing.com/search?q=RethinkX& … pc=EDGEXST

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspen_parkland
Image Quote:
Image Quote: There is a tiny amount of it in N.W. Minnesota, I believe.

Where do Aspin grow in N. America? https://www.fs.usda.gov/wildflowers/bea … grow.shtml
Image Quote:

I am sure that there are more southern deciduous trees that could be grown further south. But I am thinking about converting farmland that may be abandoned to become feral, to be groomed instead to resemble Aspin Parklands.

Part of my logic is that you would have robotic groomers. Probably electrically powered, and you would grow Aspens and weed Medows, or if you like artificial prairie.

These lands are likely to have snow on the ground in part of winters, at least.

This could accommodate solar power, much of it being bifacial solar panels. In the summer the Aspens may shade solar to some extent. In the winter they will shade solar to a lesser extent. The snow on the ground will also reflect more sunlight onto the solar in the winter as well.

So, for solar in these higher latitudes this might make a bit of sense.

Mostly the land would not be ploughed, planted or have chemicals dumped onto it.

But some wood, and some organic matter, leaves, and weeds, could be harvested to conduct enclosed pyrolysis on to produce hydrocarbons and also Biochar from pyrolysis.

The Biochar could be incorporated into the soils with firebreaks so that if a patch burned, it could be controlled. I am actually wondering about deep injection of a biochar slurry where sandy or clay soils were available.

Should it be desired, using Aspin Parkland to try to cool off the Earth might be helpful both for Carbon removal from the atmosphere, and for changing the albedo, particularly in wintertime to reflect more sunlight into space, to some degree regulating albedo.

I also see this "Aspin Parkland" as being suitable for habitation in some places, due to Starlink and the existence of solar energy.

This to combat the urban monoculture which is said to be anti-human and to lead to population collapses.
An opinion: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE

I say that these tools may exist, to try to use, if it turns out that RethinkX is correct and also that the Greenhouse effect is a serious issue going forward in time.

Ending Pending

Bifacial Vertical Solar Panels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifacial_solar_cells
Image Quote:

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-08-19 15:28:46)

Void · 2025-08-19 14:57:44

At the gym, another piece of this occurred to me.

If you understand what "Superpower" is per RethinkX and Tony Seba: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … ORM=VAMGZC

It should be possible to heat bricks very hot with Superpower and to use that brick oven to conduct pyrolysis.
In the winter, you would have much less "Superpower", you would perhaps do more pyrolysis in the spring/summer/fall than winter.

It might however be possible to use the same oven as a storage of heat for houses when heat is needed more in the winter.

Some simple non-electric examples:
https://biochar-international.org/about … hnologies/
Image Quote: hearth-kilns.png?resize=387%2C255&ssl=1

Image Quote: trad-kilns-pitmound.png?w=337&ssl=1

Image Quote: trad-kilns-brickmetal.png?w=337&ssl=1

http://www.eagri.org/eagri50/AENG352/lec10.pdf
Quote:

Lecture- 10
Principles of Pyrolysis

https://kindle-tech.com/faqs/what-is-th … is-heating
Quote:

Author avatar
Tech Team · Kintek Solution
Updated 6 months ago
What is the temperature range for pyrolysis heating? Optimize Your Process for Maximum Efficiency
The temperature of pyrolysis heating varies significantly depending on the type of pyrolysis process, the materials being pyrolyzed, and the desired end products. Generally, pyrolysis temperatures range from 200°C to 1200°C. For example, slow pyrolysis of biomass typically occurs at lower temperatures (200–300°C), while high-temperature pyrolysis for producing pyrocarbon or syn-gas can reach 800–1200°C. Medium-temperature pyrolysis, often used for waste materials, operates between 600–700°C. The specific temperature range is determined by the feedstock, reactor design, and the intended outputs, such as pyrolysis oil, carbon black, or gaseous products.

So, some of this is probably in reach.

It might be possible to run an internal combustion engine off of the produced gasses in some cases to run an electric generator, but pollution is a potential but not huge problem.

As for the Biochar produced, it could be spread into soil as like they apparently did in the Amazon, or I think, hydraulically injected as a slurry deep into soil. Or you could use existing bogs, or even create bogs to store the materials, so long as you have a trusted source of water to keep that bob wet.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-08-19 15:25:37)

Void · 2025-08-21 20:13:38

Where I have spoken of Aspin Trees previously of course other trees such as apple, and other could be included.

Ending Pending

Void · 2025-08-22 07:32:06

I intend to work with this very soon: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … f1341c34fa Quote:

“New Evidence” That CO2 Doesn’t Cause Global Warming? I Don’t Think So.
YouTube
Sabine Hossenfelder
302K views

I value the presenters offer to explain. It is a modification of the more simple common notion of the CO2 greenhouse effect. But blocked is blocked If all the light of a certain wavelength is blocked by CO2 in the atmosphere, then it does not matter, (Too much), at which altitude the last bit of it is blocked. However, I will give consideration to a companion effect which would be the altitude of condensation of water vapor. It seems logical that if CO2 retains more heat at a higher altitude, then it should raise the altitude at which rain and snow and Hail, will form.

This would then allow more water clouds to pass over mountains to the interior of continents.

But I have another set of interests to look into now and will pause this post for a time....................

In diagnosing competitor or Elite thinking, a problem could exist where climate change politics could be used as a tool in international competition, the horizontal, and Elite competition, the vertical.

For instance, I assume that many of the Elites feel that those who are below them are "Useless Eaters". And envy of those portions of the "West" that prosper, could encourage those who do not so much prosper to use environmentalism as a weapon.

So, those are potential circumstances of possible intentions of some of the people and organizations on this planet.

Then we have the accelerationists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism

The attempt to wean the world from fossil fuels, could be a accelerationist scheme. And it would not be entirely immoral. If in fact we found out that the greenhouse effect is not that big a danger, new forms of power have emerged in part from that push and from the passage of time.

Among the power sources we are acquiring or about to acquire are solar, wind, geothermal (deep), and Natural Hydrogen.

It is obvious to me why the Communists and other horizontal competitors would like to deindustrialize America and other industrial nations.

The Western Europeans are a somewhat different case. I think that vertical control comes into play with them.

The line of cities, New York???<Dublin<London<Paris<Rome<Athens<others, is to some extent not really comfortable with a non-colonized USA. We have seen their contempt over the many years towards us. But rather than being clever, I think they sure know how to screw themselves up. But are they trying to get back to the Middle Ages, where the elite rule over a rabble? Is the USA in the way?

We must case a paranoid eye onto the British Elites. I have been told that Hittler, wanted to conquer Central Asia as it could supply him with an unlimited supply of soldiers. Are the western Elites inviting the illegal migrants in for this purpose?

Records say that the British put the Afrikaners into Concentration camps: https://www.up.ac.za/research-matters/n … real-facts

Now then are the Dutch and Scandanavian Royalty in conspiracy with the Elites of Britan?

Some evidence of sympathy of the NAZI in the Elites of the UK in and preceding WWII. (And in the USA also).

Yes, these are dark accusations, but now that I have done it, we can watch to see if further evidence will emerge.

I am not in the mood to have religious zealots be used by west Europeans to destroy the people who want representative governments. I am not in the mood to be subjected to such a genocide.

Anyway, that is the extreme possibility of Climate Politics.

Back then to Climate Science if possible.

Climate Science is measurements and theories, I suspect.

It should be useful, but I do not think that it justifies a static reality.

For instance, the Sahara has apparently repeatedly, naturally drifted from arid to green and back again. Well, that is climate change, and I expect that extinctions have occurred because of it. Also new creatures may have emerged from the stimulation that shifting has done.

So, an environmentalism that desires that we subordinate human emergence to a desire for a static climate, does not get support from me.

I support the improvement of the human race though technological advancement. But we want that to not be such an excessive burden on the world that a collapse of the world will result. The main reason we should not want that is that it might lead to the fall of humans.

The world can live on without us most likely, this is our window in time though. But with an estimate 1/2 billion years of life in the planet it could evolve new plants and animals when the world is done with us or when we are done with the world.

That is not to say that I favor extinctions.

It is very difficult to untangle actual Climate Science from Climate Politics.

So, I have suggested that if the predictions of RethinkX come true, then we can sequester Biochar, and allow the continued use of Coal to make solar panels. I think my plan is rather good. However (th) has given some evidence that high quality solar panels might be made without Coal. I will fetch that reference.

This: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 15#p233715

And this: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 20#p233720

Thankyou for that (th), we will probably want it for making panels on other worlds, if possible, and maybe on this world.

I will continue this post later..................Pause.................

Continued in next post....

Last edited by Void (2025-08-22 18:02:04)

Void · 2025-08-22 18:05:22

From the previous post, in the video at the start of the post, Sabine Hossenfelder indicates that the more CO2 in the atmosphere, the higher in the atmosphere is the material from which certain frequencies of Infared are emitted into space. I don't really know if I can have what I need to combat that claim. So, she claims part of the vertical, but I will work with the Horizontal+Vertical.

Average of the Continental Height?
https://quizlet.com/153483486/oceanogra … ash-cards/
Quote:

approximately 840 meters (2,756 feet)
The average height of the continents above sea level is approximately 840 meters (2,756 feet). This average takes into account the highest mountains and deepest valleys across all landmasses on Earth.
Quizlet
+1

How low was the Sea Level during the last Ice Age?
https://vividmaps.com/coastlines-of-ice-age/
Quote:

About 125 meters
During the last ice age, which occurred about 21 thousand years ago, sea levels were about 125 meters (410 feet) below the present. At the peak of the last ice age, which occurred about 40,000 years ago, sea level was at least 100 meters below where it is today. With so much of the planet's water tied up in ice, global sea level was more than 400 feet lower than it is today.
Vivid Maps
+2

How much extra land area existed during the last ice age?

https://brilliantmaps.com/ice-age-map/
Quote:

25%
During the Last Glacial Maximum, approximately 26,000 to 19,000 years ago, glaciers covered about 8% of Earth's surface, which is equivalent to 25% of the total land area. This period saw significant portions of the Earth's surface exposed due to lower sea levels, with glaciers extending across continents like Canada, Scandinavia, and parts of Asia.
Brilliant Maps
+2

Image Quote:

I will to some extent be considering "Atmospheric Displacement".

How high is the troposphere, where most weather occurs?
How much mass of atmosphere is over oceans vs. land?
How fluffy is the atmosphere? More heat or altitude causes more porosity.

Pause............

In times of greater differential of elevation, between land and sea, more of the existing CO2 in the atmosphere will exist over the seas than it would if the difference was less.

But during an ice age it is likely that total CO2 amount will be less. Rivers that run under ice sheets and the glaciers themselves can fertilize the ocean which might cause plankton to absorb more of the CO2.

If we come to the last 200 years, the land to sea elevation difference is less than in an ice age. If the atmosphere heats up by any means, then a greater mass of atmosphere will be displaced to be over land than was the case during the ice age. So, the air above the seas will be fluffier, that is because of greater molecular vibrations. This will also cause CO2 in the atmosphere to be displace from above the sea to above land.

While tropical seas can cool themselves off by fluid circulation in the air and water, also then can seek the cold of the sky by vertical convection and also evaporative cooling with a point towards the upper limits of the troposphere were, water vapor will condense into rain, snow, or hail.

If you elevate the condensation level, then less atmosphere and CO2 are above it.

Pause.....

I cannot know if a fluffier atmosphere layer will allow more photons though it or block them. But if the seas heat up they can make the atmosphere above them fluffier, and displace atmosphere and CO2 from above the seas and to be over the land masses.

Does the energy of a photon pass between molecules or be passed from molecule to molecule. Some of each, I think.

I think I want to sleep on this before continuing.....Next Post perhaps.......

Last edited by Void (2025-08-22 18:41:45)

Void · 2025-08-23 04:26:52

OK, in my efforts to humiliate myself I will continue. You have to continue or you don't solve.

The critical word is "Tropopause". This is the layer where greenhouse gasses convert vibration to emissions of photons that can pass into space.

The greater gasses are Water Vapor, CO2, and Methane, and some others.

Of these Water Vapor is the only one that appears to be able to condense. It is also the one that can float upward in other gasses if it has sufficient concentration and does not condense. So, it moves heat up and cold down though the vertical travel, as well as to emit photons, particularly when it condenses.

So, I guess Sabine Hossenfelder could be largely correct to say that adding CO2 to the atmosphere raises the altitude at which photons are emitted to space from the troposphere.

The notion that I also held that CO2 could saturate, is not as easy to defend. The Masking Tape idea where light dims for each additional layer of masking tape might fall apart as it is only the top layer of masking tape that can emit photons into space, according to the Tropopause notion. Below the tropopause the greenhouse molecules are pitching photons like balls and there are enough other greenhouse molecules to catch those molecules before they are emitted into space.

However, as I have mentioned I think water vapor plays the game a bit differently as it can condense and fall. So I can do a partial buy-in on the Tropopause model for CO2. And of course, vapors condensing makes clouds which have variable effects per heat rejection or retention.

But the Tropopause is variable, being higher at the equator and lower at the poles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropopause
Image Quote:
Quote:

The tropopause is the atmospheric boundary that demarcates the lowest two layers of the atmosphere of Earth – the troposphere and stratosphere – which occurs approximately 17 kilometres (11 mi) above the equatorial regions, and approximately 9 kilometres (5.6 mi) above the polar regions.[1]

So, the thermal limiting factor is the relative abundance of greenhouse molecules pitching photons upward from below, to the relative lack of greenhouse molecules above the troposphere which could catch them and pitch them back down.
(Sort of).

But the altitude of the troposphere, determines the density of the atmosphere where the troposphere is, and if a greenhouse gas is uniformly mixed by wind stirring, then the troposphere at the equator is thinner than at the poles and the amount of CO2 above the troposphere will be less at the equator than the poles.

But for a greenhouse gas that can condensed, to a liquid or solid that may fall, the amount of water vapor should reduce with cold.

So, I would argue that the amount of heating from an additional unit of CO2, will be less and less for each unit, as the troposphere will rise up to thinner and thinner layers of atmosphere where if CO2 is a constant portion of the mixture of atmosphere, it must be less in number of molecules above the troposphere.

So, I still argue that the temperature rise will not be linear and will be increasingly limited on a per unit of CO2 as the total number of molecules above the troposphere reduces with altitude.

But for water the story is not the same. The hotter the ocean the more evaporation. Then the formation of clouds changes things a lot both to cool and to warm in various cases. But the concentration is not uniform in the atmosphere, so then greater amounts of water vapor in a patch of air, displaces other molecules that are heavier, so then that patch of humidified air may rise, and it it gets to an open enough sky it will condense and tend to fall back down to the ocean.

So, the hotter the ocean the more evaporative cooling it will get because the sky is always up there somewhere to dry the air out by condensing the water vapor to liquids and solids.

So, again the attempt to heat will not lead to a linear rise in temperatures. The more heat in the oceans the higher the rate of heat loss.

I feel that I have a better understanding. But still, protecting a worthwhile path for the human race forward is more important than dealing with a more tropical Earth.

And I think I have come up with a practical way to sequester Carbon if that becomes necessary and if the predictions of RethinkX and Tony Seba are correct.

Ending Pending

But of course surface temperatures can rise. I accept that.

Last edited by Void (2025-08-23 05:09:45)

Void · 2025-08-23 11:41:17

So, now I am satisfied that the Earth does not have infinite resilience as per additional contribution of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere, but it has an increasing amount of heat rejection for each additional increment increase of CO2 or perhaps other greenhouse gasses.

But I have been working on sequestering Carbon in conjunction with solar power installations.
I do not speak Spanish, but I like the illustration: https://solarplacas.es/bifacial-vertical-solar-panels/
Image Quote: what-is-the-best-orientation-for-a-bifacial-solar-panel-1.webp

I would mount them on vertical wooden posts instead. kdb512 has pointed out that it is not just solar panels that consume energy to produce, you also have to produce the methods to mount the panels.

For the moment I am entertaining Aspin Trees. Tony Seba has said that solar panels are getting so cost effective that making fences from them can be economic. Vertical may reduce trouble with snow accumulations. While vertical bifacial (East<>West facing), may not capture as much energy during the day, it captures it more evenly with morning and afternoon peak energy, not so much at noon. This then reduces battery storage needs.

Aspin Tree wood to mount the panels on: https://fity.club/lists/q/quaking-aspen-tree/
Quote:

A little bit about Aspin wood: https://www.woodmagazine.com/materials- … es-1/aspen
Quote:

Aspen, due to sheer quantity alone, supports much of the logging industry across the Great Lakes states and Canada. Abundant because it propagates and grows rapidly in areas cleared by fire or harvest, aspen has many commercial uses. You'll find it in furniture, toothpicks, matchsticks, boxes and crates, paneling, and chipboard. And, this plentiful tree has been a popular source for paper pulp since the late 1940s.

I am not a carpenter or a farmer, so I do not know all the tricks for fence posts to be made from Aspin, but I think it might work. Methods to retard decay would likely be wanted, but with lots of trees robots could probably move the panels to new sets of posts over the lifetime of the solar panels if needed.

If trends continue, then solar panels at 37% efficiency and a reasonable cost may exist in perhaps 10 years. So, if solar panels with optimal south facing installations with panels 20% to 25% efficiency, make sense now, in 10 year the ones with 37% should do very nicely if mounted vertical east to west bifacial.

If you look up "Superpower" and Tony Seba: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE

So, one of the things you could do with "Superpower", is to heat up a brick oven of large size, and to use the heat of that oven to create Biochar, to spread onto land or inject into soil or put into bogs. The gasses emitted could be used to run an internal combustion engine perhaps with a generator.

So, if you cut down Aspens, you could make fence posts for solar and also make Biochar out of the scrap branches and wood.

In places like the "Rust Belt", Canada, and Alaska this may work. In the "Rust Belt" around the Great Lakes, perhaps 6 months have very good solar and the 6 not as good.

In this reference monthly solar energy are shown: https://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar-resource-maps
April though September look rather good. So, in those months construction and the creation of Biochar might make sense. In the other months the heat stored in the brick oven could be used to heat dwellings, perhaps.

Not only would scrap could be made into biochar, but also various weed plants that robots could harvest.

I am thinking that it might make sense to move populations North<>South to follow the energy production.
When the population bulged in the warm season in the North then water resources could be used, then when the propulsion moved South those water resources could be used. Robots and Electric cars could follow the power surge and its dwindling North<>South, to make most efficient use of resources.

Some people would stay in the North however, but because other people went South, they would have more space to themselves when many may not want to go outdoors as much.

Perhaps a more formalize method of Snow birding.

But the method would better utilize solar resources and spread resource burden on things like water.

This might make more sense than moving electricity north from the south or water south from the north (Which the north would not permit anyway).

With many humans gone north for the warm season then water resources in the Southwest for instance might be devoted to agriculture, and Southwest superpower would be used to extract water from the sea perhaps.

You have to keep in mind that nearly all work will be done by robots in the future, it seems, so people will not be as rooted to a certain location in the country. Canada would probably do well to make such an arrangement somehow.

A possible thing to do would be to establish financial incentives for people who will be willing to participate in snow birding, as such snow birding might be economically beneficial to our country.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-08-23 12:45:16)

Void · 2025-08-24 09:18:08

OK, supposing we discover that indeed we need to extract large amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. First of all it is not likely that most countries will do this unless bad consequences are evident of a sufficient magnitude to prompt it to be done.

I have suggested that some soils could be upgraded by including biochar into them.

But for a massive storage scheme, adding biochar to existing bogs, or even creating new bogs might be a path forward.

This would leave the Carbon available in case the situation changed, such as an Ice Age or some type of technological change.

Bogs can catch on fire if they dry out so you would want to make sure that sufficient water would exist to prevent that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bog

So, a bog keeps most Oxygen away from organic materials, and I think that biochar could be stored in them. This would still allow biological activity on top of the bog.

So, if you had dairy land that had gone feral, you could create biochar, and stuff it into existing bogs or created ones. But as I said you have to have a good water supply to make sure it stays wet.

Should you make Biochar by heating it in a electric brick oven as I have suggested the process would shed lighter Hydrocarbons, which might be burned in an Ice engine. But I won't like there is a possibility of air pollution if it is not done correctly. Things like Tar might be created as well.

I suppose that saltwater bogs could be created if you were near a body of salt water.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-08-24 09:35:32)

Void · 2025-08-24 10:46:00

So, this is something like what I am thinking:

I am showing log sections being pushed into a solar heated brick oven. This then to generate Biochar, and combustible gasses.

Of course chipped scrap wood or bundled weeds might be a different shaped chamber.

Where usually you want dry lumber, in this case wet will be just fine and with the bark on.

The brick oven being originally heated with solar power, will not directly combust wood, but will produce biochar and combustible gasses.

The Oven should be able to be heated with Superpower whenever convenient. But it is hoped that when a lack of solar energy exists, and otherwise, the repeated injection of Aspin wood and weeds, could generate enough extra exhaust gasses to run an internal combustion engine, it may be possible to keep the oven warm with the electricity generated.

At times heat from the oven might be used also to heat other things such as habitat or hot water.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-08-24 10:51:37)

Void · Yesterday 08:00:34

It has emerged slowly in my mind that indeed Charcoal production could substitute for the Coal needed to make solar panels.
https://www.missionnewenergy.com/solar- … hout-coal/
Quote:

Can You Make Solar Panels Without Coal?

Quote:

Torrefaction
Wood Chips can be used to make solar panels instead of coal?
Wood chips, when converted through a process called torrefaction, can be used as a viable alternative to coal in solar panel production. This process involves heating wood chips in an oxygen-free environment to temperatures between 250 and 350 degrees Celsius for up to 40 minutes at a time. The torrefaction process reduces the biomass of the wood by around 25%, turns it into a charcoal-like substance, and gives it a similar energy density to coal. This makes it a great alternative to coal, especially in forest-rich southern states.
Mission New Energy
+1
Mission New Energy
Can You Make Solar Panels Without Coal? 2025 Research
Hidden History Center
Why do we burn coal and trees to make solar panels?

View all
Mission New Energy
Can You Make Solar Panels Without Coal? 2025 Research
So can you make solar panels without coal? The answer is yes, but it will take some work. Can Solar Panels Be Made Without Coal? Can we make solar panels without coal? The main ing…
https://www.missionnewenergy.co

A new term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrefaction
Quote:

Torrefaction of biomass, e.g., wood or grain, is a mild form of pyrolysis at temperatures typically between 200 and 320 °C. Torrefaction changes biomass properties to provide a better fuel quality for combustion and gasification applications. Torrefaction produces a relatively dry product, which reduces or eliminates its potential for organic decomposition. Torrefaction combined with densification creates an energy-dense fuel carrier of 20 to 21 GJ/ton lower heating value (LHV).[1] Torrefaction causes the material to undergo Maillard reactions. Torrefied biomass can be used as an energy carrier or as a feedstock used in the production of bio-based fuels and chemicals.[2]
Biomass can be an important energy source.[3] However, there exists a large diversity of potential biomass sources, each with its own unique characteristics. To create efficient biomass-to-energy chains, torrefaction of biomass, combined with densification (pelletisation or briquetting), is a promising step towards overcoming the logistical challenges in developing large-scale sustainable energy solutions, by making it easier to transport and store. Pellets or briquettes have higher density, contain less moisture, and are more stable in storage than the biomass they are derived from.

Image Quote: Quote:

Torrefaction removes moisture and volatiles from biomass, leaving bio-coal.

So, in using "Superpower" for Torrefaction, in a brick oven, wood chips and perhaps logs, and weeds can be converted to various products. Obviously it is not desired to create Methane in the atmosphere or particulate pollution.

Combustible gasses could be immediately burned, perhaps in an Ice Engine. And pollution control would be very desired.

Although not generally considered an excellent way to store solar energy, then charcoal is also a possible way to have energy from solar sources when direct sunlight and electric storage are not enough.

The Brick ovens may be used to heat buildings in the winter and also hot water around the year, I presume.

But otherwise it could be used to make solar panels, or it could be added to soils, or injected deeper in deep soils, or added to bogs.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Yesterday 08:18:54)

Void · Yesterday 10:11:16

Now, it becomes obvious that if you fall short of solar energy in a winter at high latitudes you could both burn charcoal in the brick oven and conduct "Torrefaction" (See previous post).

The gasses produced, Hydrogen and Methane could in another version support Precision Fermentation.

If you sequester 1/2 of the charcoal you create and burn 1/2 in the winter season, you have reduced the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and yet have a burnable energy source for when necessary.

I suppose one could hope for some sort of fuel cell that could process Charcoal efficiently.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Yesterday 10:14:40)

Void · Yesterday 17:47:48

This is a long video and you may have seen it before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHdUMDV … ithHerbert
Quote:

EXCLUSIVE: Tony Seba "AI Robots Will Change Our WORLD"
Brighter with Herbert
138K subscribers

In previous posts here, I have begun to involve "Torrefaction" with electric sources of energy to convert organic materials to Biochar and also Hydrogen, Methane, and Tar.

I would like to appeal to what I consider rational thinking. At least from my point of view.

Now is it silly to let Northern Forests burn down because they were not managed or not? I pollute air above the North American Continent.

Many of these are Canadian, and much of land that may go feral if Tony Seba is correct. So, eventually we in America will have problems with forest fires where farm land used to be. Unless the land is groomed.

Take a look at it do you want forests to burn down putting particle pollution into the air and also putting CO2 into the Air? Does that make sense? Canada says it wants to go green, but they let their forests burn, and put lots of CO2 into the Atmosphere. And the USA will be in a similar situation if indeed, we allow a lot of farmlands to go feral.

The products of "Torrefaction" will yield Hydrogen and Methane which can be used in Precision Fermentation and also likely in Cellular Farming. So, this will be a form of farming that will not so much depend on growing seasons.

The concept of Pleistocene Park hope to hold back the excessive thawing of permafrost in the north. This may apply to our state of Alaska also. https://pleistocenepark.ru/

The use of some animals and robots may allow a certain percentage of the Taiga: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiga
Could be converted back to Mammoth Steppe, to provide fire brakes and to reduce the thawing of permafrost. The weeds and brush could be processed by Torrefaction to produce wealth and to reduce the release of CO2 into the atmosphere. This would also be firebrakes.

America could have migrating robots to do this, possibly Canada would do it as well.

While Bison may be destructive to Solar Panels, and equipment I am tempted to consider processing Buffalo Chips. Possibly a risk of stinky, but with good technology that perhaps could be avoided.

Lets say people in the North might burn 1/2 of the Charcoal produced in the less sunny months and put the other 1/2 into bogs and in the soils.

Robots would migrate north and south following the seasons.

The problem between the USA and Canada just now is from my point of view, a north culture that does not respect the individual. Also, the USA culture has been "Sinning" against the American spirit for some time, but I think we are in reform under the "Orange Man".

So the compatibility of Canada and the USA is in question as I do not trust the efforts by global elites to replace Americans and to try to make us into surfs. I think Canada is held more strongly in bondage by them than the USA is.

My current notions. Everyone has notions.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Yesterday 18:12:52)

Void · Today 09:36:27

So, the idea of sun following economic cycles may not be a wrong path. "Superpower", or "Surplus Power", may be a gift that we will want to utilize.

Alright EV's and Robots, might migrate North and South with the sun. Perhaps very large Semi Trucks with factory process inside of them.

Presumably they would be making things using electric power.

So, in a rational North America, they might be in Canada and Alaska in Mid Summer. In the Mexican Deserts in Mid Winter. Leaving Canada and Mexico out of it, the USA could do a lesser process.

Mid Summer in the North, Mid Winter in the South. So, they would be soaking up excess energy from the local grids, to make useful product.

In some places in the south excess energy might be devoted to making clean water. Recycled water, and maybe desalinization. The new method of desalinization on the Ocean Floors, seems like it may be less disruptive of ecology.

And surplus electric energy in the south may allow pumping water to places like reservoirs, and to refill aquifers.

As far as humans go, then some migration of humans along with the machines might make sense as they also consume water and energy and may want the product that the machines would create. So, perhaps some parts of housing could be mobile as well.

For America this may require some calculation of what the population is for use in the House of Representatives, and the Electoral Colledge.

Ending Pending

This would avoid moving electrical surges across the continent, and also to some extent moving water to satisfy humans. Instead, you would move some of the humans and let them enjoy the best weather situations. If you are not exposed to extreme weather, then you do not need as big a dwelling space as you may be outdoors more.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Today 09:51:18)

Void · Today 10:54:58

Here is the set of solar maps that might suggest migration potential in the USA: https://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar-resource-maps Image Quote: solar-annual-dni-2018-01.jpg?sfvrsn=73d2ae64_1

The lower set of montly charts are interesting.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Today 10:57:09)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2025-08-19 09:45:09

Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#2 2025-08-19 10:11:42

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#3 2025-08-19 10:14:24

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#4 2025-08-19 11:26:28

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#5 2025-08-19 14:57:44

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#6 2025-08-21 20:13:38

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#7 2025-08-22 07:32:06

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#8 2025-08-22 18:05:22

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#9 2025-08-23 04:26:52

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#10 2025-08-23 11:41:17

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#11 2025-08-24 09:18:08

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#12 2025-08-24 10:46:00

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#13 Yesterday 08:00:34

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#14 Yesterday 10:11:16

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#15 Yesterday 17:47:48

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#16 Today 09:36:27

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

#17 Today 10:54:58

Re: Maximum Use of Conductors, Distributed Electric Storage, Aspin Farms.

Board footer