How efficient? Does it take more energy to make the fuel than you get from burning it? If so, it is worthless.
This is excellent. The problem with recycling is value addition. At the moment the game add from selling it for reuse as a bottle is low. But it's it was a feedstock for jet fuel then you can charge more. It's worth subsiding because the positive impact on society is high. All you need is you get to a compact stage where such plants can be placed next to landfills. But if we ban single use plastics this tech may need a wider range of plastic inputs.
Should I buy a landfill site full of plastic? It might be an oil-well waiting to happen!
Cost per gallon? Remember the biofuels at $22 per gallon?
Waste pyrolysis has been around for ages - - the article needs more information as to what makes this version better
From the original article, "You have to separate the resulting product to get jet fuel," Lei said. "If you don't separate it, then it's all diesel fuel."
Uh - this is at best a vague statement of the end of the process - would like to see actual detail.
Expanded Viewpoint
I've read a few articles about bio-fuels, but not even one of them ever mentioned a price point or any efficiency levels. Which ALWAYS leads me to wonder why they are doing it, if it's not cost effective. Talk about a dollar waiting on a dime! $22 for a gallon of bio-fuel?? That cost really needs to be brought down for anyone to take it seriously.
If one uses solar generated heat this might work...if you have to use other sources of heat it seems like a dog chases tail problem. It would be a way of "storing" the solar heat in a long term fashion while getting rid of waste plastic. If it works well the EPA will probably ban its use though...
If milk cartons are made of plastic should we still be calling then cartons? (carton being the french word for cardboard)
Yeah, just what we need to do - convert more solid carbon compounds into CO2, with engines that utilize less than 33% of the chemical energy in the fuel.