Bunker fuel and other alternative fuels for steam

Quote
HLS
Hi Ernie
A merry Christmass and a great New Year to all


Sulfer is a problem Clean coal has it removed however it cost twice as much as dirty coal but only a tenth of diesel. I think the addition of lime to the combustion would remove it, I am not sure. Water contamination would generate sulfuric acid. I will talk to my friend Jim Moden about this. this is up his alley. He invented Moden fuel for underwater craft using a cyclone engine. I feel Coal would be a better fuel because of the cost but we could use the bunker and with out smoke. Any hi compression engine is going to be dirty ie, diesel nitrious oxide. particals, and the real killer that you donot hear about benesepyrine ( spelling?) a realy bad carcinagine 40 times that of cigaretts. I have a dream..... sucking the algea and plankton from the sea water to run the engine. Most would be extracted at dockside. I saw a water algea seperater while in DC that was real neat and could do a great job of this. A large whale will produce about 300hp going through the water running on plankton at 25% efficency......nice dream
Harry

Quote
Bill Gatlin
Hi Guys,

Why wouldn't the recently developed digester that turns garbage and organic waste into clean fuel be of use with this bunker fuel?

Best, ---- Bill G.

Quote
Brent Laird
Clean coal is a relative term. There really is no such thing as clean coal. Maybe less sulfur and such but you still have heavy metals such as mercury, uranium, and thorium in the coal.

Bunker fuel is the stuff left over after they take the good stuff out of the oil. It does no good to run it through another digester because that is what a refinery does. Now if you could take out the sulfur at the refinery that would be good. But the cost is very high to do that and that why it is not done.

I have attached a file written taken from this site.
[www.energyfromthorium.com]

Consider Ammonia generated from cheap thorium nuclear power used as a motor fuel.