This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Plasma gasification article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Environment This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Chemical and Bio Engineering (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Chemical and Bio EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringChemical and Bio Engineering Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology Physics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Requested articles This article is within the scope of WikiProject Requested articles, because it is used for the administration of the Requested articles process or it was formerly listed at Requested articles.Requested articlesWikipedia:WikiProject Requested articlesTemplate:WikiProject Requested articlesRequested

Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below. Merged Plasma arc (history) → Plasma gasification Merged Plasma Converter (history) → Plasma gasification Merged Plasma Pyrolysis Waste Treatment and Disposal (history) → Plasma gasification

Material from Plasma gasification was split to Plasma gasification commercialization on 14 March 2012. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution.

There is good information on Plasma Garbage conversion at this url: Popular Science [1]. User:Jarany 5:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

404 - Mountainninja (talk) 22:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, instead of FIRST vitrifying the inorganic byproduct, could metal be first recovered before the vitrification ? For example, ADEQUATE AMOUNT of scrap aluminum is sacrificed by adding to the waste UPSTREAM so elements below aluminum on the reactivity series are reduced to metal when all inorganic materials are vitrified. The metal being denser than slag, can be recovered by centrifugal separation. Obviously, aluminum can reduce silica to produce silicon and the purpose of adding aluminum is to recover some other metals, say copper; so only adequate amount of scrap aluminum is needed. -- Mountainninja (talk) 23:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ideas for thought: Fractional crystallization (chemistry) Betterton-Kroll process Betts electrolytic process Parkes process -- Mountainninja (talk) 15:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Both the academic papers and respected popular science articles I've come across say that there is usually a gain in net energy production (and any loss seems to really depend on whether a processing plant takes advantage of the energy production or not). Even a simple article such as seen in reference source [7], from "How stuff works", talks about processing plants selling back the extra energy they've produced to the grid; that the process produces more energy than it uses (which fits with the physics - as I understand them anyway). Yet, under the "Disadvantages" section in this Wikipedia article it says: "Little or even negative net energy production" (direct quote). I can't find/access any information to support this, but my research into this topic has not been very deep and there might be something I'm missing. Does anyone know whether this should be kept as it is or changed? (203.122.247.182 (talk) 19:34, 27 April 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I have evaluated several plasma gasification processes. They usually have a significant consumption of oil, gas and/or puriried oxygen in addition to the main fuel. If you include this in your equation, the net gain is often negative - or very small. In the source [7] case they say that they consume 300 t/day high calorific value waste and produce "4.3 MWh". A rough estimate of heating value of a mixture of shredder residue and MSW could be 15 MJ/kg leading to a waste energy input of 52 MW. If they meant production of 4.3 MWh per day , the net efficiency without even considering any use of oil, gas or oxygen, would be approximately 0.3% net power efficiency. If they ment 4.3 MWh per hour (=4.3 MW), it would be 8.3% net efficiency before considering consumption of oil, gas or oxygen. To me the [7] case confirms the "little or even negative net energy production". My experience is that this is very typical.

I challenge you: Can you find an example where plasma gasification net power efficiency exceeds say 10% when you have subtracted the electricity that any added oil or gas would have produced in a conventional power plant? I have failed to do so for working real life implementations. Ideal desktop studies may be different. Claus Hindsgaul (talk) 10:50, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Plasma gasification. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090420003312/http://www.zerowasteottawa.com/en/About-Project/ to http://www.zerowasteottawa.com/en/About-Project/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110509083529/http://www.afsoc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123253735 to http://www.afsoc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123253735
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130307175931/http://www.alternrg.com/press_release_94553 to http://alternrg.com/press_release_94553

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the title says it all :)

Could the frequent maintenance and limited plant availability problems be solved by a newer, longer-lasting design of the plasma torch: This could be Forever: New Design Prolongs the Lifespan of Plasma Torches Mar 19, 2024 | By ZHAO Weiwei https://english.hf.cas.cn/nr/bth/202403/t20240319_658605.html 2A02:1811:B7B4:E800:D148:BB9A:904B:2484 (talk) 06:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]