When you say, there already exists such a thing, what are you talking about? J.Lang asked if you could recover energy from stored nuclear waste.
About fuel cells: using hydrogen to feed a fuel cell is, as you say, clean. The trouble is that contrary to what you say, there is not a lot of hydrogen around. You can make hydrogen, by electrolysing water. But then you have a fuel cycle that consists of using electricity to make hydrogen and then using the hydrogen to make electricity. Factor in inefficiencies and you have a net consumer of electricity, not a net producer. This may be useful for energy storage and distribution, but it doesn’t mean you’re burning less coal.
If and when you do have a fuel cell heat-and-power unit in your home, it will probably be fed with methane.
Ideas for a direct system. The nuke waste thingy was just his (her?) example.
You are right about the hydrogen, though. I should have said “hydrocarbons”.
Peace,
mangeorge
Seriously, what about ideas for direct generation?
My idea, for example… Solar Panels are sensitive to solar radiation, so it’s already close, and wouldn’t the emissions from waste inches from the panels be thousands of times wore powerful then solar radiation coming 93 million miles? We’re struggling to hit 20% efficient solar panels, if I remember right… seems these could be so much more. And it’s energy that’s just sitting there.
Seems to me this could also create a safe, stable way to store high-level waste, one that pays for itself. The more I think about it, the more intrigued I get.
Assuming that this kind of radiation could be used by a modification to current solar power technology, of course.
While I am not a solar expert, it seems that that photoelectric effect as we know it relies upon photons, as opposed to radioactive decay particles or gamma radiation. I personally do not know of any method of direct energy conversion using alpha, beta, gamma, or slow or fast neutrons as the source as one does in solar.
Nuclear waste is simply bad stuff, and is a hodgepodge of many, many different isotopes of elements with varying composition. And these range from relatively “tame” non-volatile solids to highly radioactive gases. There have been many ideas and proposals put forth to utilize heat energy from decaying nuclear waste (which does generate considerable heat when concentrated, and is in fact a danger). Overall, the reason none of it has gone forward is very simple - the heat output is relatively low when you consider the tremendous potential for contamination and extreme protective measures required. It simply is not worth it at all. Personally, I also rather think it would be safer and more politically viable to build an “endangered species incinerator”[sup]1[/sup] for power before resorting to playing around with nuclear waste.
[sub]1) This is a wild exaggeration and a crude joke. I don’t want to run around chasing endangered species of any sort and generating power from them. In fact it’s silly that I can no longer make a dry, crude joke without being accused of so many things anymore. Oh well, it comes with the territory I suppose…[/sub]