Hello,
Read this article:
http://phys.org/news/2016-07-electricity-salt-three-atoms-thick-membrane.html
Bertus
Read this article:
http://phys.org/news/2016-07-electricity-salt-three-atoms-thick-membrane.html
Bertus
Yup, fresh water mixing with sea water is just wasteful. We should really build a storage tank for all the volume of the great rivers so they don't dump into the salty oceans - maybe we'll build it in your backyard.Wonder about the cost-benefits? We need desalinized water for life. Electricity is optional.
John
Because that 1MJ is absorbed by the 1 metric ton of water that was used to generate that heat (about 0.25 °C).Something seems fishy here.
"The potential of the new system is huge. According to their calculations, a 1m² membrane with 30% of its surface covered by nanopores should be able to produce 1MW of electricity - or enough to power 50,000 standard energy-saving light bulbs. "
At the end of the day, you have a certain amount of seawater that has been mixed with a certain amount of freshwater. This is a description of state so the system has less energy after the mixing than it had before. How much water passes through this 1 m² membrane in a second? I can't imagine the flow rate can be very high, but whatever it is that amount of saltwater has 1 MJ less energy after mixing with the freshwater. Because this is a description of state, it doesn't matter how this mixing occurs, which means that if you simply mixed that amount of seawater with that amount of freshwater, 1 MJ of energy has to be given off somehow. That seems like a very noticeable amount of energy, so why don't people notice all of this energy being given off as rivers flow into oceans?
In fact, it is precisely not.The concept is fairly simple. A semipermeable membrane separates two fluids with different salt concentrations. Salt ions travel through the membrane until the salt concentrations in the two fluids reach equilibrium. That phenomenon is precisely osmosis.
Blame the reporter, not the researcher.I suppose one could start with this sentence:
In fact, it is precisely not.
Thus, the factual accuracy of the remaining text is questionable, IMHO.
Where did it indicate that this was for one metric ton of water? All the article said (that I saw) was how water flowing, at some unspecified rate, through this 1 m² membrane could produce 1 MW of power.Because that 1MJ is absorbed by the 1 metric ton of water that was used to generate that heat (about 0.25 °C).
Heat of mixing and heat of solution is very common in chemistry and much more dramatic than mixing pure after with a 3.5% salt water solution.
Duh! The article said so: "Into 50,000 'standard' energy saving lightbulbs."Where would that much current go?
I read it that the 'positive ions' were traveling, via 'osmosis', across the membrane.Where did it indicate that this was for one metric ton of water? All the article said (that I saw) was how water flowing, at some unspecified rate, through this 1 m² membrane could produce 1 MW of power.
Agreed. So the question here is just what the reporter screwed up. Is it an osmotic process that was misdescribed, or what it a properly described process that was misnamed?Blame the reporter, not the researcher.
Third possibility: neither.Agreed. So the question here is just what the reporter screwed up. Is it an osmotic process that was misdescribed, or what it a properly described process that was misnamed?
Actually, only 30% of a meter-scale. Not so absurd anymore...Claiming that the effect from a single angstrom-scale pore can be scaled to an array of pores on a meter-scale is absurd.
From the article: "The potential of the new system is huge. According to their calculations, a 1m² membrane with 30% of its surface covered by nanopores should be able to produce 1MW of electricity - or enough to power 50,000 standard energy-saving light bulbs."The article says a single pore was studied. Not a square meter of pores.
Why would should I find this sheet of material in hopes that you will make ME king? I'm not the one claiming that a one meter square membrane is going to produce 1 MW of power -- THEY are.Also, MoS2 is a graphite-like 2-dimensional material that seems to exist in pretty small particles. Usually a component in Moly-greases. So, find me a 1 square meter sheet of MoS2 (single-layer) and I will make you king.
Yes, that is their theoretical scale-up calculations. Read the next paragraph...From the article: "The potential of the new system is huge. According to their calculations, a 1m² membrane with 30% of its surface covered by nanopores should be able to produce 1MW of electricity - or enough to power 50,000 standard energy-saving light bulbs."
by Jake Hertz
by Jake Hertz
by Jake Hertz
by Aaron Carman