Talk:Chemical looping combustion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chemical and Bio Engineering articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Recent news[edit]

Ohio State University Office of Energy and Environment announced January 19, 2013 Successful 200+ Hour Continuous Operation of Coal-Direct Chemical Looping Combustion Technology. It's a 25 kWth sub-pilot plant, but according to the press release, there is funded follow-on study work, in parnership with Babcock and Wilcox Power Generation Group, toward a commercial 550 MWe power plant based on the process.

I think this is a significant development, but haven't tried to edit it into the article. I didn't see an easy place to add it without breaking the flow of what's there. So I'll leave that job to bolder editor. Agnostic Engineer (talk) 08:02, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue of Thermal Efficiency[edit]

I don't understand how chemical looping was supposed to enhance efficiency of power plants. I understand reversibility and the efficiency of quasi-isentropic processes, but I don't see how the oxidation and reduction reactions of chemical looping could possibly be quasi-isentropic. The thermal energy liberated in combustion by chemical looping is the same as the energy liberated in straight combustion; the fact that it's liberated at a lower temperature is irrelevant.

To get more work output from the same amount of fuel in any heat engine, the only possibilities are to operate at a higher source-to-sink temperature delta, or to somehow use the potential energy in the fuel to pump heat. But the latter would require a below-ambient process step where thermal energy was obtained from the ambient environment. There is no such step in the process shown.

The paragraph explaining the initial intent for achieving higher efficiency is referenced, and I don't question that there was indeed a paper suggesting that chemical looping could do that. However the referenced paper is not online, and I don't have access to a library that would have hardcopy. It's possible that I'm misunderstanding something, but it would be nice if somebody with access to the paper could review it and clarify the paragraph that cites it. Agnostic Engineer (talk) 21:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chemical looping combustion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)