• XanderTheGrey
    111
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Inside_of_the_electrostatic_precipitator.jpg

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Collection_electrode_of_electrostatic_precipitator_in_waste_incineration_plant_in_Gdansk.jpg


    These are modern day electrostatic precipitators(the most effective, and energy/economically efficient air filter known to man). They have been arround since the 1920's or 30's, starting with the Cottrell precipitator as seen below.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/Electrostatic_precipitator.svg/640px-Electrostatic_precipitator.svg.png


    That is about as much as I know about them. Why are they not in widespread use? What effect would they have if they where in widespread use? Is there any flaw that makes them less practical than they seem to me, given my small knowledge of them.
  • T Clark
    3k
    Electrostatic precipitators are widely used. The equipment is expensive and expensive to operate. Industry won't use them unless they are required to.
  • XanderTheGrey
    111
    Electrostatic precipitators are widely used. The equipment is expensive and expensive to operate. Industry won't use them unless they are required to.T Clark

    It's clear that my next objective is to examine the cost and range of use of electrostatic precipitators, objectively; so that we can define "widely used", "expensive" and or "cost & energy efficient". As well as the production cost in comparison to the "asking price". Basically I'm now only concerned with whether or not they are practical in of themselves, without considering monetary economic factors.

    If they are indeed practical purely on an environmental and resourceful level, my next question will be; why is this technology not government sponsored?

    It really is a rather small issue compared to something like industrial scale animal agriculture regarding global warming and pollution. World Watch Institute Insists the animal agriculture is responsible for ~50+% of global GHG emissions. However I like to examine scenarios like this as; if nothing else, a form of personal social exercise.


    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08940630.1988.10466413

    https://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf
  • javra
    698
    If they are indeed practical purely on an environmental and resourceful level, my next question will be; why is this technology not government sponsored?XanderTheGrey

    Speaking as an ignoramus when it comes to the details, maybe it’s because over 6% of the global GDP is spent instead on subsidizing the fossil fuel industry. Go figure. (btw, “subsidizing” is newspeak that translates into “providing welfare for” … not exactly the invisible hand of laissez faire capitalism [not that I’m against welfare for homeless kids and the like: that whole starting out with equal opportunity thing])

    A new study finds 6.5% of global GDP goes to subsidizing dirty fossil fuels
  • T Clark
    3k
    It's clear that my next objective is to examine the cost and range of use of electrostatic precipitators, objectively; so that we can define "widely used", "expensive" and or "cost & energy efficient". As well as the production cost in comparison to the "asking price". Basically I'm now only concerned with whether or not they are practical in of themselves, without considering monetary economic factors.XanderTheGrey

    Are you in the United States? If so, I suggest you spend some time looking into the federal Clean Air Act and it's requirements for air discharges from industrial sources and permitting. That should set the context by which you can understand the use of this type of equipment. This is not my area of expertise.

    If you are not in the US, I'm guessing other countries have similar requirements.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.