Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

eppur_se_muova

(41,475 posts)

2. 803 million GJ is about 8 exajoules ?? Maybe 0.8 exajoules ?

Reply to NNadir (Original post)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 04:10 PM

Jul 2016

Interesting developments, thanks. If it saves industry big bucks, it will likely be implemented. Politicians make big noises while producing little results, engineers produce big results, quietly.

Engineers produce the egg, politicians, the cackle.

This may be more important from the POV of water usage than energy savings, but water usage will soon be a topic that cannot be ignored any longer.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A potential use for waste heat to approach zero waste water discharge. [View all] NNadir Jul 2016 OP

Or we can just skip the waste heat with something that is better. kristopher Jul 2016 #1

803 million GJ is about 8 exajoules ?? Maybe 0.8 exajoules ? eppur_se_muova Jul 2016 #2

Whoops. You're right. NNadir Jul 2016 #3