h a l f b a k e r yYou could have thought of that.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Cheaper LNG transportation
Just have the container be deep sea so the pressure is minimal on the structure, link to a bag of water above to provide greater benefit | |
I read that ultra gigantic mega LNG (methane) ocean
transporters could be a Billion US$ (as compared to 200
million US$ now) This is a way to make them for vastly
less, perhaps just a tenth that.
Just build the giant pressure vessel then place it at deep
water such that the external pressures
match those from
the LNG. along with equipressure the mass load is
minimized.
completely isolated from humans as well as surface
structures the precision of the engineering is milder.
If things get really crazy you could just sink it along the
deepwater route where even if the container imploded it
might become a giant pile of methane hydrates Talk
about Deep Horizons.
Its possible that those people that repeatedly move a
giant bag of water or ice towing companies could benefit
from being the upper surface of a connected LNG
transporter. The big bag of moving water keeps things
away from the very deep LNG while also possibly running
off LNG. Middle East area Cities or countries with LNG
facilities would also have waterports as well, bringing
benefit to many of those countries.
Cheap transport of LNG reduces incentives to war.
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
LNG is not stored at elevated pressure, but at reduced temperature; it's impossible to liquify methane above its critical temperature, which is 190.7K. |
|
| |
I've just read someone else on this site suggesting using methane as a lift gas for balloons, might be a way to go. |
|
| |
You still have to have a way to get the LNG to the end-
user, which is much more complicated if the product is
sunk deep underwater. By making one part of the process
'simpler,' another part has become more complex. |
|
| |
could it not be stored at aqueous water temperature if the surrounding pressure on the pressure container were equal. |
|
| |
I think they only do the fridge thing as the engineering requirements would be greater with a liquid at STP |
|
| |
I do not have a plausible reply to the LNG port, I just figure its possible. truly I figured if they can do apollo soyuz or refuel jets mid air they can link a LNG transporter to a pipe. |
|
| |
Oh, I'm not denying that it's possible, even plausible. Even
if I were in the practice of throwing bones, which I am not,
I wouldn't bone this idea. I'm merely pointing out a possible
complicating factor that does not exist with the current
method. |
|
| |
Well, I'm denying that it's possible, even plausible, as per my first annotation in which I used the word 'impossible'. If it ain't liquid, it ain't LNG. |
|
| |
Aye, that be true, matey. |
|
| |