The Perfect Solution For Pollution

I have read many theories about "Global Warming", and "Global Climate Change", and at this point I really don't care if these theories are true or false. This is because it is absolutely logically obvious that our pollutants are not good for the environment, or humans, or animals, or anything at all, and we should do something about it.

I have read many proposed solutions to our pollution problems and most, if not all of them, seem really unnecessary. The most common solution, which takes the most time to accomplish, is to replace all gas powered vehicles to hybrid, and or electric cars. The point is to get rid of gas powered vehicles completely. This is a good solution, the ultimate goal actually. However, we can't just blink our eyes and have it the way we wish. It will take many years to get everyone to switch to a new vehicle. We need a solution that can work more quickly, and is the least cost effective.

As an inventor, and engineer of different types, when I look at a tailpipe of a vehicle, or the exhaust from a power plant, I am completely baffled by the total lack of engineering. When I look at them, for some reason I get this feeling that the engineer who designed the system just stopped engineering when he reached the tail pipe. Like an incomplete loop, or circuit. Almost like they decided, "oh well just dump it all in the air".

This is why I believe the perfect solution for pollution is the most obvious one:

CAPTURE THE POLUTION BEFORE IT IS RELEASED INTO THE AIR

There are multiple ways this can be done, the problem is finding the best solution. I have seen a couple patents for "capturing exhaust gases", but I haven't found any information about the current development stage, or anything of that matter. I believe the best thing to do is research and experiment with ways this can be accomplished.

An ideal product would be a device that you could easily install to the end of an exhaust pipe of a common vehicle, which collects the pollutants. Obviously over time, you would have to clean out the device, so there would have to be a mechanism that could easily be removed, cleaned, then replaced. Or a system of recycling where you can just swap the old device with a new device, and the old device will be cleaned, recycled, then resold by a business. The ideal time between each cleaning should be about a month, or maybe once every two weeks. It would be much like getting an oil change, however, you would be changing your exhaust waste, and it would be more often.

Creating a device to capture the pollution before it is dumped into the air could pretty much decrease pollution by 100%. Even if the devices are not 100% efficient, and they are maybe 50%, or even 10% efficient, if every car had a device installed it would drastically reduce pollution to more manageable levels.

Just holding your hand in front of an exhaust pipe for a long period of time while the engine is running will capture pollution, and ultimately reduce the amount released in the air. Getting other people to do it too, will make the combined effect even more noticeable. Now image a device that can capture more. Once the pollution is captured, I'm almost certain we can find another use for it! One man's trash is another man's treasure.

Do you realize that all the President of the United States has to do is, instead of giving 700 billion away to the bankers, and auto companies, he could just set aside maybe 5 billion? 1 billion? And that would be more than enough for research, development, and the initial production of this device, and it could pretty much save the world!

I see unimaginably large amounts of money being thrown around the world like a baseball, and all can think to myself is, "wow, that amount of money can save the world, and they are just throwing it away!"

------------------

I had the idea to use this thread for "brainstorming". Maybe the great researchers, and the out of the box thinkers here at ATS could come together and design a device to capture exhaust gases from vehicles.

So.... if you had to design a device to capture exhaust gases, how would you do it?

Better to go electric and forget the 110 year old engine. With salt batteries, hydrogen fuel cells, the list go on. It seems like such a waste to burn for a fuel when it makes a much better lubricate.

[edit on 19-12-2008 by guliver]

reply to post by ALLis0NE



Do you realize that all the President of the United States has to do is, instead of giving 700 billion away to the bankers, and auto companies, he could just set aside maybe 5 billion? 1 billion? And that would be more than enough for research, development, and the initial production of this device, and it could pretty much save the world!


YOU HAVE'NT EVEN SIGNED THE KYOTO PROTOCOL YET.....
MAYBE THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD PLACE TO START OR AT LEAST RESPECT THE NATIONS WHO HAVE.....

ALLis0NE, try this little experiment:

Inhale some air, put your thum and index finger in your nostrils, close and don't open your mouth, then try to exhale.

Surprise! Your entire respiratory system just failed, and if you don't remove your fingers you will soon die. Same goes for cars. You try to trap those exhaust gases and pressure quickly builds up - it's pretty much the equivalent of placing a banana in the exhaust pipe: Bad idea.

So instead of catching them, engineers came up with a brilliant idea: Convert the gases into something less harmfull. That's how the catalytic converter was born

Just holding your hand in front of an exhaust pipe for a long period of time while the engine is running will capture pollution

Please dont do that. You will end up with third degree burns before catching even 0.1% of the pollution generated by the car during that period.

BTW, give 1 billion for Ford and you will see more V6, V8, etc engines in the future(plus an even worse economy). Give 1 billion to the engineering department of any university and you will see more electric engines. The choice is yours - errr, I mean Obama's. Hope he makes the right decision.




[edit on 7-2-2009 by daniel_g]

well said.....simple

That's a good idea, until you realize that the reason fuels are burned is to obtain chemical energy by allowing the constituent elements to oxidize. For example, if you burn gasoline, you are essentially converting C8H18 into H2O and CO2. The H2O and CO2 have lower energy levels than C8H18, so that extra energy is released in the form of heat, to power your car.

Neither H2O or CO2 in this example are 'pollutants'... that is, both exist naturally in our atmosphere and both are necessary for life itself. But when either of these are designated as a 'pollutant', then it becomes impossible to produce energy without releasing 'pollutants'

There are many industrial exhaust components that are indeed polluting, interfering with the life process since they normally do not exist in any substantial amount in our atmosphere.... among these would be hydrogen chloride (hydrochloric acid), sulfur dioxide, several types of nitrates, ammonia, etc., etc. These are indeed normally removed at the source (and in most part sold for use in other chemical processes at other plants). But if you designate all exhaust components as 'pollutants', then there is no way to create energy from chemical means (including combustion) because the only way to make the exhaust free of such 'pollutants' is to put the elements back together the same way they were before the combustion.

In short, as long as Al Gore is warming the whole planet by opening his mouth and letting all that hot air out, the only acceptable exhaust from your car would be... gasoline! That simply won't do you any good.

Good idea, but impossible to accomplish from a physical point of view as long as CO2 is one of the 'pollutants'.

TheRedneck

reply to post by daniel_g



daniel_g,

I have invented 3 different types of passive filter systems. I never once mention anything about totally capping off the exhaust system.


I have built many engines in my time, and I know what is possible and whats isn't, thanks.

In my original post when I said:

Just holding your hand in front of an exhaust pipe for a long period of time while the engine is running will capture pollution.

I said put your and in front, I said nothing about touching, or completely blocking it off. I don't understand how you could think I said that.

The point I was making with the hand is, even if your hand is maybe 3 inches away from the exhaust, NOT blocking, or touching anything, and the exhaust gasses can hit your hand yet still pass around the sides, your hand will turn black over a period of time. The blackness, is pollution that would have probably been in the air instead, if your hand wasn't there.

The hand is not even a filter of any type, but it just a collector. Even though some exhaust gasses can pass around the hand (passively), the hand still catches a fraction of the pollution, before it escapes.


daniel_g, your tone on this thread is as if you aren't aware that exhaust collection systems don't already exist, when there is one or two already patented and working. This thread was a call to everyone to invent similar, or new ones, and get them on vehicles as soon as possible.

Electric cars and hybrids are the future yes, but we need to do something about the millions and millions of gas vehicles on the road right now.

All I know is, when you live in Los Angeles, and you are a kid in school, school's have "Smog Warning" days, where the smog is so bad they don't allow normal "Physical Education(PE)" to take place. Especially running. That is HORRIBLE.

-I have an experiment for you all: Park in a garage, close the garage door, and turn your car on, then roll down the windows.

Yes, it will kill you. Don't do it.


[edit on 7-2-2009 by ALLis0NE]

[edit on 7-2-2009 by ALLis0NE]

Originally posted by guliver
Better to go electric and forget the 110 year old engine. With salt batteries, hydrogen fuel cells, the list go on. It seems like such a waste to burn for a fuel when it makes a much better lubricate.

[edit on 19-12-2008 by guliver]

Yeah fuel cells are coming, methane fuel cells will work fine and
if you take all the human sewers and animal waste you got PLENTY
of methane to power cars.

No heavy lifting of splitting water into hydrogen, it is ready right now.

If at some point we get the hydrogen side worked out cheap as well
we can move that way as it will just be swapping one fuel cell system
out for another and both being electric drive.

The two methods to get hydrogen that caught my eye is blue
green algae releasing it when starved of air, and a solar thermal
method that can separate the hydrogen in water, and make steam
to run a turbine as well.

Biological Hydrogen production

High Temperature Hydrogen production

My twist on the high temp hydrogen production is use a solar furnace
like in Odeillo France.

Solar Furnace in France

We could set these up in Death Valley, and other Deserts, and
produce a great deal of hydrogen.

I'd so love to be apart of any of these projects, they could truly
change the world in just a few short years in my humble opinion.

The hand is not even a filter of any type, but it just a collector. Even though some exhaust gasses can pass around the hand (passively), the hand still catches a fraction of the pollution, before it escapes

...

All I know is, when you live in Los Angeles, and you are a kid in school, school's have "Smog Warning" days, where the smog is so bad they don't allow normal "Physical Education(PE)" to take place. Especially running. That is HORRIBLE

I think I you are a little confused. Maybe you think the black stuff coming out of your exhaust pipe is the cause of smog and global warming - that if you filter this black stuff then you will be free of 'Smog Warning' days and considerably reduce the planet's climate. Wrong.

The black stuff that get's stuck to your hand is called soot, pretty much fuel that didn't completely burn. However, due to its nature, a lot of it will 'stick' to whatever it finds in its path(your hand included) and it will not remain in the air for long unless its produced in really high concentrations.

The ammount of black carbon emitted by gasoline vehicles is so small, that if you were to put a filter on all of them you would not see a reduction of soot at all in your city.

Diesel engines, on the other hand, account for almost half the total black carbon in the atmosphere(the rest is nature). However, most (newer) diesel engines already have a filter that catches the soot and later reburns it. These filters are around 90% efficient. Common sense dictates that if we put a second filter in series with the first one, then maybe we can catch the remaining 10% of soot - I won't go into details, but I'll say this: Common sense is wrong.

Now let me explain smog. There are two types of smog:

1- A mixture of fog and smoke(including soot) but this will not cause any 'Smog Warning' days unless there is something like a major forest fire.

2- A reaction of sunlight with hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides released (mostly) by automotive emissions

I will talk about the latter, but before I proceed, let me quote you one more time:

-I have an experiment for you all: Park in a garage, close the garage door, and turn your car on, then roll down the windows.

Yes, it will kill you. Don't do it.

Why do you think this kills you?
If you guessed soot you are wrong. Like I said, gasoline engines don't emitt enough soot to kill you (as long as you don't breathe directly from the exhaust pipe). What really kills you is CO.

The catalytic converter does a fair job, eliminating about 99% of CO and converting it into CO2. However, that remaining 1% in an eclosed space is still enough to kill you. The converter also transforms nitrogen dioxides into nitrogen and oxygen - Good stuff coming out of your pipe actually.

Smog is mostly caused from CO and the nitrogen oxydes. Can we do better than the catalytic converter? I think your idea is to catch that remaining CO and nitrogen oxide right? Ok, design a filter, but remember this filter must let CO2 through or your car dies (uh-oh, dunno how you are going to do that, maybe a second catalytic converter? Life isnt that simple, not to mention that all those global warming fanatics are going to be all over you for adding 1% more CO2 to the total automotive emitted CO2)

Maybe you were thinking you could filter CO and let only the good stuff out without converting to CO2. Sad, but bloking that CO is equivalent to closing your nostrils and not letting air out(hence why I proposed that experiment). Your car would simply not run as there is no such thing as 'good' stuff coming out of it - unless the catalytic converter is present.

I have built many engines in my time, and I know what is possible and whats isn't, thanks.

Yeah, and 5 minutes ago you also thought your hand could help reduce smog and cool down the planet by placing it 'in front' of the exhaust pipe



[edit on 8-2-2009 by daniel_g]

We already do this. I don't get the point of this thread.

Originally posted by daniel_g
I think I you are a little confused.

I think you are confused actually, you think everything you say I don't already know, and you don't understand that I am obviously over simplifying my explanations.

Originally posted by daniel_g
Maybe you think the black stuff coming out of your exhaust pipe is the cause of smog and global warming -

I KNOW, not think, that the black stuff coming out of my exhaust is causing smog and global CLIMATE CHANGE. EVERYTHING that comes from an exhaust is causing smog, and in the future could cause other major damage.

Originally posted by daniel_g
that if you filter this black stuff then you will be free of 'Smog Warning' days and considerably reduce the planet's climate. Wrong.
-

I didn't mean just the black stuff. Once again you are reading my words incorrectly. I believe that if you remove even a small amount of pollution from an engines exhaust you can absolutely reduce the planets POLLUTION. Which then would slow down, and reduce the effects that pollution has on the environment.

Originally posted by daniel_g
The black stuff that get's stuck to your hand is called soot, pretty much fuel that didn't completely burn. However, due to its nature, a lot of it will 'stick' to whatever it finds in its path(your hand included) and it will not remain in the air for long unless its produced in really high concentrations.
-

That black soot is called carbon, and it would be great to keep it out of the air.

Do you see this black/gray s**t in the sky?

..well I want to stop it.

NEWS FLASH, when an object is black or gray that means it is absorbing all colors of light. Light = energy = heat. That black/gray s**t in the sky is absorbing heat.....

Most people claim CO2 is colorless, even though Carbon itself is black, unless it's a diamond then its "colorless" but, indeed, even a colorless object absorb light.

Originally posted by daniel_g
The ammount of black carbon emitted by gasoline vehicles is so small, that if you were to put a filter on all of them you would not see a reduction of soot at all in your city.

Wow, you are very wrong.

en.wikipedia.org...

Given black carbon’s relatively short lifespan, reducing black carbon emissions would reduce warming within weeks. Control of black carbon, “particularly from fossil-fuel sources, is very likely to be the fastest method of slowing global warming” in the immediate future, according to Dr. Mark Jacobson of Stanford University, and he believes that major cuts in black carbon emissions could slow the effects of climate change for a decade or two.

“[E]missions of black carbon are the second strongest contribution to current global warming, after carbon dioxide emissions,” according to Dr. V. Ramanathan and Dr. G. Carmichael.[13] They calculate black carbon’s combined climate forcing at 1.0 – 1.2 W/m2, which “is as much as 55% of the CO2 forcing and is larger than the forcing due to the other [GHGs] such as CH4, CFCs, N2O or tropospheric ozone.” [14] Other scientists estimate the total magnitude of black carbon’s forcing between + 0.2 to 1.1 W/m with varying ranges due to uncertainties.

Now I know not to listen to a word you say from here out, since you don't know basic science.

Originally posted by daniel_g
Yeah, and 5 minutes ago you also thought your hand could help reduce smog and cool down the planet by placing it 'in front' of the exhaust pipe

...and I was correct. I just proved it too...


[edit on 8-2-2009 by ALLis0NE]

reply to post by Johnmike



The point of this thread is stated in the original post... however since I am aware most people don't read, and they just comment, I will restate it.

The point of this thread was to think of inventions that could collect exhaust gasses, and to get people to realize that we don't need to wait for alternative fuel sources to start reducing pollution.

--

Since the atomic weight of C02, and the black carbon is greater than pure air, I suggest a type of centrifugal force that guides the heavy materials into a collection area.... Much like bag-less vacuum systems, that use vortex's to create the centrifugal force that separates the heavy particles.


[edit on 8-2-2009 by ALLis0NE]

Originally posted by ALLis0NE

Originally posted by daniel_g
The ammount of black carbon emitted by gasoline vehicles is so small, that if you were to put a filter on all of them you would not see a reduction of soot at all in your city.

Wow, you are very wrong.

Why? Sorry, but you are not supporting your answer. 99% of soot is caused by diesel engines and natural processes. Or might you be thinking that gasoline = diesel

That black soot is called carbon, and it would be great to keep it out of the air.

Do you see this black/gray s**t in the sky?

Now you are making false statements. The black 's**t' you see in the sky is not black carbon, it's a combination of Ground-level ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide. (hint: carbon monoxide is not black carbon, and its also not CO2)

...and I was correct. I just proved it too...

No, you just made a bigger fool of yourself.

The point of this thread was to think of inventions that could collect exhaust gasses, and to get people to realize that we don't need to wait for alternative fuel sources to start reducing pollution.

hmmm, as I recall on your first post you mentioned something about horrible engineering behind exhaust systems. Maybe you didn't read my previous posts, but I mentioned how gasoline vehicles already get rid of 99% of CO emissions, and how diesel engines already recycle 90% of soot. Oh well, keep typing blindly.



[edit on 8-2-2009 by daniel_g]

daniel,

It's not hard to understand really.

GET THE POLLUTION OUT OF THE AIR BEFORE WE DESTROY OUR WORLD!

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand.

Now should I go ahead and post several patents that remove the soot, and all other pollution?

What is your point here daniel?

Originally posted by ALLis0NE

What is your point here daniel?

I am really surprised you asked that, means you don't know how to read because I tried to make my points clear while supporting my arguments. Seems its too much wording for you so here they are again, simplified:

1- There is no lack of engineering on the exhaust pipe.
2- Do you want to remove soot? That's already being done.
3- Do you want to remove nitrate oxides? That's already being done.
4- Do you want to remove CO? That's already being done.
5- Do you want to remove CO2 by filtering it? Then your car won't run.

None of the methods are 100% efficient, but they do get pretty darn close. So go ahead, post whatever patents you want, I'll be surprised if they are more efficient than what's already under your car. You want 100% efficiency, you are not going to achieve that with a filter.

I thought this was pretty cool... it's related to this topic.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I always knew "ones man's trash is another man's treasure".

This is relevant too:

"Prepare for a climate-changed world, say engineers "

www.newscientist.com...

www.imeche.org...

What needs to happen?
The Institution of Mechanical Engineers therefore recommends the following:

-Rising sea levels and increased flooding will require serious consideration of the viability of settlements, transport routes and infrastructure

-To protect the welfare of its citizens governments must support climate adaptation

-More research, development and investment in renewable energy sources is required to offset the loss of fossil fuels

-We have to invest in Carbon Capture and Storage technology

-The industrialised world has to take the lead in taking responsibility for the economic needs of vulnerable nations

Invest in Carbon Capture and Storage technology.... It looks like some engineers may agree with this thread topic.


[edit on 22-2-2009 by ALLis0NE]

Wait a second... So to fix the pollution problem you're saying that we should not pollute? Let me get this straight.. Instead of polluting the planet we catch the pollutants to not pollute? What are we even talking about?

I have an idea, let's save the whales.. We just need to not kill them and they will live.

Originally posted by etombo
Wait a second... So to fix the pollution problem you're saying that we should not pollute? Let me get this straight.. Instead of polluting the planet we catch the pollutants to not pollute? What are we even talking about?

Well pretty much yes, just don't pollute and we can solve the pollution problems.

If you read the first post in my thread:

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
So.... if you had to design a device to capture exhaust gases, how would you do it?

This thread is supposed to be sort of like a place for people to "invest" their time trying to design a "pollution capture system".

I frequent many forums that do nothing but put their brain power to work and solve problems... and I wanted to see what ATS was capable of, however on this forum I think people are more worried about if the problem exists or not, and don't even want to bother with trying to fix any problems, just argue about them.

Not one person came up with any ideas one how to capture pollution in this thread....



[edit on 22-2-2009 by ALLis0NE]

Come on people!

The original post was a request for BRAIN-STORMING.
We're trying to deny ignorance here, not generate more.
There are no wrong answers.

Hey ALLis0NE,

Are you familiar at all with the scrubbers they install on power plant smokestacks? Is there any way to adapt this on a smaller scale?