It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Solar jet fuel has been created for the first time

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2014 @ 11:44 PM
a reply to: daaskapital

Cool stuff, S&F.

It would be kind of silly to not put any effort into effectively converting our most abundant resource ie the sun, into useable energy's, in fact everybody does it already from plants to animals to even minerals, all are merely just a byproduct of the suns energy's. To say that this technology has no future and is unsustainable or would cost to much is kind of silly when we see this very technology in its myriad of processes at work each and every single day, for what like the past millions of years or so it has worked in one fashion or another. I think that right there says something about its viability as an energy source. And besides even the sun wont be around forever.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 01:52 AM

originally posted by: StoutBroux
Gotta agree with Stirling and other of like mind. How much did it cost to make this fuel?

The scientists, who've been working at this for four years under the SOLAR-JET project, have only made a jar of the solar jet fuel so far but they imagine a future where 20,000 liters of jet fuel could be made per day from a full-scale version.

Sorry OP, doesn't sound all that promising. After 4 years only one jar? And to imagine a future when a whopping 20,000 liters of jet fuel could be made per day from a full scale version? How many full scale versions would be needed to produce enough jet fuel to make a difference? And how much energy would be used to create enough of the jet fuel needed?

How much jet fuel does a jet use if a jet used jet fuel???

reading comprehension?

it took four years for the research not four years for a jar of fuel...... but im sure you knew this (i really hope you did)
no energy would be needed on our end it would be harnessed from the sun (they use simulated sunlight in the experiments so that they have control of the environment to prevent fluctuations in the levels of light etc. so they could get an accurate calculation of how efficient the process is)

as for your last question...... yeah thats about the level of maturity i expected from such a well informed and thought out post

but hey my grandpappy didnt need nun a that and neither do i
also i dont understand it and that makes me feel uncomfortable (maybe because it makes me aware of my own shortcomings) so imma mock it
lol silly sceintist dontcha know you can git gas for four bucks a gallon .....and how many years and dollars spent to make one jar of fuel!?!?!? just like scientist a bunch of crackpots on the dole
edit on 6-5-2014 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:17 AM

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: daaskapital

Water, CO2 and sunlight eh?

If carbon dioxide becomes valued as a component of this sort of process, then that would totally change the way that vehicle manufacturers treat the issue of exhaust management, the way that other industries treat their own releases of CO2. If this comes off, then companies will treat waste CO2 as unacceptable, like throwing money away, and will seek to capture it for recycling into fuel.

This process also means that now, a barrel of oil will have more accessible units of energy inside it, because even the waste from burning the product of that barrel, will release more fuel components. If rolled out in a clever way, this technology could see the end of carbon dioxide as a waste product in the developed world. I would certainly have thought that China would be very interested in this technology, this breakthrough, as it would go some way toward solving many of their air quality problems, which they have been experiencing in their major population centers for some time.

All in all, I find this research, and the potential exhibited by it, to be very impressive.

Carbon Monoxide, not CO2, either of them don't burn anyway, they are whats produced when something is burnt.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:40 AM
a reply to: pikestaff

Interesting...the process could make use of CO2. Whether flammable or not, it IS a waste product of burning organic compounds, and IS a component which this process can use to make a viable fuel, so it's flammability in and of itself is no longer relevant.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in