Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

The 660 Gallon Brewery Fuel Cell

Posted by samzenpus on Wed May 02, 2007 07:48 PM
from the drinking-electricity dept.
Power Science
An anonymous reader writes "Australia's University of Queensland has secured a $115,000 grant for a 660-gallon fuel cell that should produce 2 kilowatts of power. A prototype has been operating at the university laboratory for three months. This fuel cell type is essentially a battery in which bacteria consume water-soluble brewing waste such as sugar, starch and alcohol, plus in this instance produces clean water."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

The 660 Gallon Brewery Fuel Cell 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Me Homer (Score:5, Funny)

    by wmwilson01 (912533) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:52PM (#18965939) Homepage
    Call me Homer Simpson, but all I heard was "beer, beer, beer, Mmmmm beeerrrr".
    • As an aussie... I assure you that this was just logical progression.

      1. make beer
      2. drink beer
      3. make power with beer
      4. ????
      5. profit

      I just hope they don't use XXXX waste for it... the bacteria will spend more time throwing up than making energy.
      • Don't forget the waste : Co2 (carbon dioxide, aka, greenhouse gas)

        Easy! CO2 powered keg tappers!

        The symmetry of the solution appeals to me for some reason.

        *wanders off in search of a breakfast beer*
            • Well I realize that the process would be carbon neutral once you're growing plants to process, I was mainly thinking of the fact that since we're producing CO2 in high concentration, we may as well use it in high concentration to boost plant growth. The next step would be just making sure the CO2 isn't able to hit the atmosphere at large before the plants have a chance to use it. Other than that, you're right- it doesn't really matter if the CO2 gets out there as long as there are plenty of plants to compen
  • that's 20 100 watt bulbs.

    Not bad.

    • More importantly, Zima has found a market!

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by maxume (22995)
      How many 20 watt bulbs would it be?

    • Re:Just for reference (Score:5, Interesting)

      by fyngyrz (762201) * on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:22PM (#18966251) Homepage Journal
      that's 20 100 watt bulbs

      Or 200 10 watt compact florescent bulbs, which is all we use. Not 200 of them, of course. But in a 5000 square foot home, we do have quite a few.

      More importantly, that's an average rate, so storage during off hours could yield considerably more output. If you sleep 8 hours of a 24 hour day and aren't home for another 8 while you work, that leaves 8 hours at 6 kilowatts if you control your inactive power consumption decently, and even if you don't, you could still end up with a great deal more than 2KW available to you. Storage also allows for short peak usage (startup of furnace blowers, refrigerator motors, air conditioners and so on... takes a lot more to start most motors than it does to keep them turning, even under load.

      I would definitely be willing to make room for a 700 gallon or so tank; I wonder what the feeding, cleaning, and environmental requirements for a production version will be. I've been seriously considering solar, but the high installation cost and the relatively short lifetime of silicon cells (20 years or less) doesn't work out very well. If this thing can run long term and isn't a maintenance nightmare, I'd jump on that puppy instantly.

      • I would definitely be willing to make room for a 700 gallon or so tank; I wonder what the feeding, cleaning, and environmental requirements for a production version will be.

        Me too. And I'm pretty sure I don't only speak for myself when I say that I want details, not a stupid Yahoo article.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by jandrese (485)
          Uh, your report talks about installing skylights, not lightbulbs that produce the full spectrum. I'd be willing to wager that people perform better with a skylight for psychological reasons. Using it as a reason to scoff CFLs seems like a huge stretch to me. I will buy the argument that you need an incandescent (even full spectrum) bulb if you're doing something that requires you to match colors or design something for outdoor viewing (like a billboard), but 99% of the time people don't care about their

    • Which is not that great for the space.. (Score:4, Informative)

      by plasmacutter (901737) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @09:16PM (#18966825) Journal
      660 gallons is a LOT of fluid. for reference the average 100 gallon tank will be 2 yards by 1.5 feet by 1.5 feet.

      so this thing would be about the size of a king sized bed at the least, and it's only generating enough to power 20 100 watt bulbs. From the energy ratings i remember on our appliances it wouldn't even power a single family home.

  • I think somebody misunderstood the process. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BSarp (222084) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:52PM (#18965949)
    Alcohol isn't brewing "waste" -- it's the entire point!

    • Re:I think somebody misunderstood the process. (Score:5, Funny)

      by dan828 (753380) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:56PM (#18966005)
      It sounds like a bunch of grad students got together and convinced someone to fund a brewery that they had rigged up in the basement of the science building. I can just picture a bunch of guys sitting around drinking beer and trying to write a grant proposal. "Oh hell, just tell them it's a fucking fuel cell...."

  • Good idea (Score:5, Funny)

    by JanneM (7445) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:53PM (#18965959) Homepage
    So it sits on the campus consuming sugar, starches and alcohol. Just like a graduate student then, except you also get some useful output. Should revolutionize academia; just imagine what this device is capable of once it gets tenure.

    • Re:Good idea (Score:4, Funny)

      by daeg (828071) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:59PM (#18966033)
      You could generate even more power by placing treadmills 360 degress around the tanks and paint the tanks to look like free & cheap beer.

    • So it sits on the campus consuming sugar, starches and alcohol. Just like a graduate student then, except you also get some useful output. Should revolutionize academia; just imagine what this device is capable of once it gets tenure.
      its a WKF that when you're pissed, your pee is 99% H<sub>2</sub>O anyway.

      all good campus toilets have the notice: "please flush twice, its a long way to the bar"

    • Re:Good idea (Score:5, Funny)

      by SurturZ (54334) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:24PM (#18966281) Homepage Journal
      I'm glad they've found another use for vegemite.

      For those that aren't from Australia, Vegemite is a foodstuff by-product from brewing. It's chief ingredients are yeast, salt and pain.

        • Re:Good idea (Score:4, Funny)

          by magarity (164372) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @10:26PM (#18967419)
          Do yourselves a favour and try some Marmite.
           
          I travelled to the UK for the first time this last January. At the hotel breakfast buffet there were some little containers labelled 'Marmite' in with the usual jams, butter, and such so I picked it up. I put it on some toast as I would some jam and took a bite. It was, bar none, the worst culinary experience of my entire life. Whatever you do, DO NOT eat the Marmite! It's so excruciatingly awful it must exist purely as a hidden camera type trick the Brits play on tourists.

  • Bender (Score:4, Funny)

    by WFFS (694717) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:54PM (#18965967)
    Am I the only one who immediately thought of Bender [wikipedia.org] from Futurama?

  • Good to feel again (Score:3, Funny)

    by kilodelta (843627) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:55PM (#18965989)
    It'll be nice to know that beer is saving the planet!
  • What will all the freshmen drink?

  • It won't be long now... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by umbrellasd (876984) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @07:58PM (#18966021)
    before we see a press release claiming a breakthrough in power generation: "By placing horses in a giant wheel that is connected to a turbine and then racing them, scientists have found a way to generate all the power we need on a steady supply of oats and barley. Also generates lots of gambling revenue for the state."

    • "Also generates lots of gambling revenue for the state."
      I like where you're heading. Perhaps we can tap into those darned gaming machines also. These got to be a heap of excess kinetic energy when you slap those buttons.

      Ditto sex. The three BIG EVILS of the Conservative universe - drinking, gambling and prostitution - could just turn out to be the saviors of the world

      • Re:It won't be long now... (Score:5, Funny)

        by Stickerboy (61554) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @09:10PM (#18966757) Homepage
        >I like where you're heading. Perhaps we can tap into those darned gaming machines also. These got to be a heap of excess kinetic energy when you slap those buttons.

        >Ditto sex. The three BIG EVILS of the Conservative universe - drinking, gambling and prostitution - could just turn out to be the saviors of the world

        In the bedroom:

        "Honey, what's that?!?!"

        "They call it Sex@Home. We have to do our part to stop global warming..."

  • Not entirely clean (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:05PM (#18966087)

    Note that TFA indicates that this is a method to remove brewer's waste, with the byproduct of producing electricity. As a method for producing electricity in general, it is not a clean method because you'd first have to produce alcohol (which would then we cleaned by the bacteria). Producing alcohol produces *VAST* amounts of CO2.

    I have worked as an assistant winemaker at a small vinyard. Our vats are 3000 litres apiece. Even with these small vats, the temperature reached by the yeast cell division is HOT to the touch (but not enough for thermal electricity generation). If you were to walk into the room where the vats are without first ventilating the room, you would pass out because the oxygen in your lungs feels like it is literally sucked out (not sure of the actual physical process involved). If no one were around, you would die from asphyxiation. It is wierd sensation, let me tell you.

    • Re:Not entirely clean (Score:5, Insightful)

      by malsdavis (542216) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:13PM (#18966173)
      Its funny how these days, any "alternative" form of energy is automatically considered by many to be "clean", "green" or "environmentally friendly".

      Just for the record: Biofuels are definitely NOT environmentally friendly and Hydro-electric plants are amongst the construction projects most often protested AGAINST on environmental grounds.

      Just thought that need to be said.

      • Re:Not entirely clean (Score:5, Insightful)

        by fractoid (1076465) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @09:18PM (#18966859) Homepage
        I'm curious how (sustainable) biofuel isn't environmentally friendly? It's carbon neutral, leverages our existing overproduction of food crops, seems all good all round. The only thing I can think of is that it's smelly and bad for your valve seats... obviously logging old growth forest for biomass doesn't count here, just things like maize and grain crops.

        Hydro plants are protested against because they flood large areas of wildlife habitats and peoples' homes. That's an 'environmental' issue but not an emissions one.

        I agree, though, that jumping on the 'alternative' bandwagon is far too fashionable and often counterconstructive - take, for example, the fact that the Prius [consumeraffairs.com] uses more fuel than the Golf TDi [about.com][1]. Like any other engineering issue (and conservation is one at heart) you have to look at the data and not just follow the emotive hype. For instance, modern nuclear reactor designs [wikipedia.org] are far safer than the old, cold-war era designs, and potentially very fuel efficient. If it weren't for the "nuclear is bad" mindset of the general public, they would be the perfect mid- to long-term energy solution.

        [1] Of course, that's not a fair comparison because the TDi runs diesel fuel which has a higher energy density, but I'm pretty sure the total energy cost of a Prius over its lifetime is higher than that of a TDi.

          • Re:Not entirely clean (Score:5, Informative)

            by fractoid (1076465) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @10:08PM (#18967291) Homepage
            Integral fast reactors consume any transuranic element.

            From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:

            Compared to current light-water reactors with a once-through fuel cycle that uses less than 1% of the energy in the uranium, the IFR has a very efficient (99.5% usage) fuel cycle. The basic scheme used electrolytic separation to remove transuranics and actinides from the wastes and concentrate them. These concentrated fuels were then reformed, on site, into new fuel elements.
            Non-trans-uranic (sub-uranic? pre-uranic?) waste products are a short term storage proposal only.

            Another important benefit of removing the long half-life transuranics from the waste cycle is that the remaining waste becomes a much shorter-term hazard. After the actinides and transuranics are removed from the spent fuel, the remaining waste elements have half lives of a few decades at most. The result is that within 300 years, such wastes are no more radioactive than the ores of natural radioactive elements.
            In laymans' terms, it can't explode (no high-pressure radioactive coolant), it can't melt down (passive self-limiting design), it doesn't produce long-lived radioactives (any that it does produce it re-burns into short-lived waste). Nuclear looks pretty ideal short-term to me, and with this type of reactor it's good for mid- to long-term too. Solar will be good once solar cells can actually pay for the costs of their own manufacture in less than 20 years.

    • Re:Not entirely clean (Score:5, Funny)

      by evwah (954864) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:17PM (#18966207)
      "If no one were around, you would die from asphyxiation. It is wierd sensation, let me tell you."

      you have personal experience dying from asphyxiation? that has to be a first

    • Re:Not entirely clean (Score:4, Informative)

      by kkerwin (730626) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:24PM (#18966283)
      "If you were to walk into the room where the vats are without first ventilating the room, you would pass out because the oxygen in your lungs feels like it is literally sucked out (not sure of the actual physical process involved)."

      Diffusion of oxygen against a concentration gradient. It's basically the same process that happens when you sprinkle salt on a slug and it dies: the salt lowers the water concentration outside of the slug, and water flows out of the slug to balance the water concentrations in and out of the slug.

      Partial pressure of oxygen outside of the lungs (pressure produced only by oxygen molecules, nothing else) is much lower than the partial pressure of oxygen inside the lungs. Oxygen flows out of the lungs to equalize the partial pressures. CO2 flows into the lungs to replace the displaced oxygen.

      And, you die, just like the slug. :-)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by hal2814 (725639)
      "As a method for producing electricity in general, it is not a clean method"

      No, it's not. But if you were producing alcohol anyways as part of a brewery, it would be a great way to run your operation more efficiently. Given the amount of waste needed, I doubt this system would ever be useful outside a brewery. The cost to transport that much waste water probably outweighs any off-site use of these fuel cells.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by GooberToo (74388)
            Fuel from corn in America is foolish. Corn is often grown with water taken taken from an underground aquifer. The aquifer is getting so low, most people that are aware of it are starting to become very concerned. The government already has restrictions on who gets the water and what can be done with it. Worse, there are already predictions on when the acquifer will run out, or run low enough to significantly effect crop productions across America. Yet we are now starting down a path which will place ad

  • I hope it gets better (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:10PM (#18966139)
    660 gallons is about fifteen barrels. 2 kW isn't that much so maybe for my house I need 6 kW. That's approx. forty five barrels. That's a lot of barrels in the back yard.

    • Re:I hope it gets better (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fyngyrz (762201) * on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:33PM (#18966383) Homepage Journal
      2 kW isn't that much so maybe for my house I need 6 kW

      Do you need 6 kw while you sleep? Do you need 6kw while you're at work? If not, that same system might serve to give you 6kw for 8 hours by storing the other 4 kw generated during the 16 or so hours of low duty time periods. Storage makes all the difference in the world. Some people might actually consume 6kw all the time, but that seems like an awful lot. I don't, and I live in a pretty big home with a whole slew of electronic gear.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by TooMuchToDo (882796)
        Well put. With regards to storage, your water heater at home is a thermal battery. If everyone switched to more efficient tankless hot water heaters (simple heat exchanges), huge amounts of energy would be saved (since energy is used only when water is flowing) but since more energy is drawn down to heat water from 50 degrees F to 115 degrees F, utilities would have a higher peak demand to plan for. With water heaters, more energy is lost to standby heat but the water heater buffers demand for the utilities

  • Imagine (Score:5, Funny)

    by WED Fan (911325) <`ten.liamhsart' `ta' `egihaka'> on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:18PM (#18966213) Homepage Journal
    Imagine a beo...(hic)...a be...(hic)...imagine a...(hic)...imagine...what was I saying?...(hic)...Imagine...John Lennon was the best Beatle.

  • New Belgium Brewery (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tooyoung (853621) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:25PM (#18966301)
    New Belgium Brewery [newbelgium.com], most famous for Fat Tire and Sunshine, produce 10% of their electricity using the methane that is produced from bacteria feeding off of their waste water.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Hepneck (876605)
      Here is the link for New Belgium Brewery's site about how they process their wastewater. The energy that they use at the brewery that is not generated in-house is provided from wind farms in Wyoming (a half hours drive north of Ft. Collins. This makes them the only brewery in the US that is powered not only by renewable energy, but energy that is also sustainable. So enjoy that Fat Tire or Sunshine Wheat guilt-free (well, other than the excuses you make for why you got home from work so late).

      Link:
      http://ww [newbelgium.com]

  • I can see the Guinness advertisement already (Score:3, Funny)

    by the_tsi (19767) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:32PM (#18966369)
    "Six bottles in one hand? That's nothing, those lads at Guinness are powering the entirety of Dublin with their brewery!"

    "Electrical power from beer effluvia?! BRILLIANT!"

  • Waste? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Mr. Flibble (12943) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @08:36PM (#18966411) Homepage

    in which bacteria consume water-soluble brewing waste such as sugar, starch and alcohol


    Waste? Waste?! Methinks they have not thought this "brewing process" through.

  • Fosters *ugh* (Score:3, Funny)

    by Bester (27412) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @10:21PM (#18967379)
    Finally someone found a good use for Fosters beer. It's certainly not good for drinking.

    Although we do manage to sell it to the Americans and claim that it is beer, they seem to buy it.

    Charles
    --
    Violence is the first refuge of the idiot.

  • Thus the profit spake, (Score:4, Funny)

    by HackingYodel (847061) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @10:59PM (#18967701) Homepage
    Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. --Benjamin Franklin.


    A man who knew a bit about both beer and electricity. Think he's smiling down from heaven about this, or puzzled it took us so long?

  • It would give a new meaing to (Score:4, Funny)

    by Mogster (459037) on Wednesday May 02 2007, @11:13PM (#18967815)
    the phrase 'drunk with power'

  • Waste material??? (Score:3, Informative)

    by simm1701 (835424) on Thursday May 03 2007, @06:26AM (#18970311)
    Ok so what waste material are they talking about?

    In making beer (and I do this at home so I feel I know atleast a little about it) you have several stages with "waste" product - but I wouldn't exactly describe them as starch, sugar and alcahol - to be honest its mostly fibre... or atleast so I thought...

    First you malt the barley (basically a slow roast though thats an oversimplification).... can't really see any waste coming from here.

    Then you mash the grains, ie keep in water at about 60-65C for a couple of hours, this causes the enzymes in the grain to convert the stored starch in the grain into sugar that yeast can later consume.
    You then sparge the grain (think pouring a watering can with a fine spray) over the grain the gentle extract this sugar. How you throw whats left of the grain away (waste product 1 - mashed grain)
    Now you boil the water you collected along with hops to add flavour, strain off the water and you are left with hops (waste product 2, hops that have been boiled in high sugar content water)
    Then you leave the beer to ferment and for a commerical brewery parsturising, carbonate and can/bottle the beer (a terrible and evil process, but then not everyone has the taste for real ale) there will be sediment left in the fermenter than is the final waste product, this will also have some beer in it... waste product 3.

    So we have the malted barely that has been mashed and sparged, mashing should have converted as much of the starch to sugar as possible. Spraying should has washed off as much of that sugar as possible, the remains? the non starch part of the grain

    The hops will have soaked up some of the wort (effectively sugared water) and then you have the material the hops are made of, some starch and mostly fibre like any seed.

    The sediment should not contain and sugar, but it will hard the same or close) alacohol content as the final beer... it probably also contains plenty of yeast (dead and still viable)

    Actually I think writing this out I may have convinced myself.... its stuff that they would be throwing out anyway and it is fairly well concentrated (atleast compared to raw harvesting of bio matter) as long as the alcohol is not too toxic to the baterial breaking it down I start to see how this would work...

    Interesting idea... not worth trying myself - making 5 gallons of beer I wouldn't have enough waste product to fill a 1 gallon bucket, but scaled up it would be interesting to see!!

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.