Breakthrough or bogus? I ask readers to help sort it out.
Every once in awhile something comes along that gives us a wow factor. This is one of those times.
What you see below is a frame from a video that shows a magnet pulling oil out of that water using a reusable binding agent called NAIMOR. I had to watch this several times, because I kept looking for the “trick”. I couldn’t find any. If there is a trick, it is way better than “Mike’s Nature Trick” because surely this stuff is tricking out nature to do what seems impossible.
This morning, my inbox contained a letter from Dr. Ivano Aglietto, which begins:
Dear Sir,
Through the columns of your esteemed blog I would like to bring to the notice of all the environmental groups, the development of a new eco-friendly nanostructure material for oil spill recovery.
Mind you, from the firehose that is my inbox, I get emails of all sorts every day with all kinds of nutty requests, and this one could have easily gone into the bit bucket, but I can’t quite get over the image of a magnet pulling oil out of the water, since it goes against everything I’ve ever known about the properties of hydrocarbons. At the same time the maxim “if it seems too good to be true, it probably is” comes to mind. I’ll let readers be the judge.
Here is the pitch on Indiegogo:
Environmental oil spill disasters such as the BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico may recur unexpectedly. The outcome of such disasters are enormous leading to the killing of marine creatures and contamination of natural water streams, storm water systems or even water supplies. We must be ready to confront such turbulences with effective and eco-friendly solutions to minimize the short term or long term issues.
There are many ineffective and costlier conventional technologies for the remedy of oil spills like using of dispersants, oil skimmers, sand barrier berms, oil containment booms, by controlled burning of surface oil, bioremediation and natural degradation.
A cost effective solution RECAM® – REactive Carbon Material, is developed for oil spill recovery but having some limitations in usage because of its structure and features. RECAM® comes in powder form and not effective for excessive usage in oil recovery.
To overcome the issues in RECAM®, a new revolutionary solution NAIMOR® – NAnostructure Innovative Material for Oil Recovery, was proposed. It is a three dimensional, nanostructure carbon material and can be produced in different shapes, dimensions. Highly hydrophobic and can absorb a quantity of oil around 150 times its weight. Light, strong, flexible and can be reused many times without losing its absorption capacity. Campaign video showcases the RECAM® and the new proposed concept NAIMOR® which needs your SUPPORT for becoming a reality.
…
NAIMOR® (NAnostructure Innovative Material for Oil Recovery) is a nanostructure material that can be produced in different shapes and dimensions with an incredible efficiency for oil recovery.
Main Characteristics and Properties
- Can absorb quantity of oil 150 times its weight.
- Inert, made of pure carbon, environmental friendly and no chemicals involved.
- Highly hydrophobic and the absorbed oil does not contain any water.
- Regenerable and can be used several times without producing any wastes.
- It is a three dimensional nanostructure and can be produced in different shapes, dimensions.
- Capable of recovering gallons of oil depending on the shape and dimensions of the carpet.
The video was a bit stereotypical for oil spills, using the same kinds of footage of oil soaked animals that tugs at your heartstrings and are the tools of the enviros to motivate people. But, like the fascinating magnetic recovery, then the guy drinks the water that has been cleaned of oil. It has all the makings of a snake oil scam, OTOH it has all the makings of a breakthrough done independently on a shoestring. We have many readers far more familiar with oil recovery than I, perhaps they can help sort out which it is.
Note: the solar panel on the boat can’t possibly provide enough power to do the job, so I’m skeptical of the entire claim. The pelican didn’t help either.
==============================================================
Since running an electromagnet over the ocean would be rather energy intensive and probably a bit slow on recovery, the simple solution proposed is to manufacture the stuff into carpets, put the carpets on the oil spill, pull them in, and then squeeze the oil out of the carpets using a roller, like the old ringer/roller washing machines would squeeze water out of wet clothing:
Is this a pie in the sky idea? Is it practical? I have no idea, but for the mere pittance the inventor is asking for, $55,000, it’s probably worth finding out.
More here if you want to help back the project: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/naimor-nanostructure-innovative-material-for-oil-recovery
Related articles
- Nanotechnology crowdfunding: Nanostructured material for oil spill remediation (w/video) (nanowerk.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m with you… I’d say it was possible if the NAIMOR material had iron in it. Now, you’ll notice that the picture with the magnet doesn’t specifically say it’s NAIMOR-only, and they’re not encouraging an electromagnet solution. Their real solution is a blanket of the stuff, then wring it out… AKA it’s like a micro-fibre sponge focused on oil… that, I have no real problem believing in, but it’s not especially novel either.. just another specialized binding agent.
Now, that said… Berkely Labs has said that carbon can be made ferromagnetic. Doesn’t sound like it’d be useful on an industrial scale though at this time though. Maybe I’m wrong though. Still, this is really “proof of concept.” If it took them a month to make that pile, it doesn’t really matter, right?
http://www-als.lbl.gov/index.php/holding/211-first-proof-of-ferromagnetic-carbon.html
[quote]Although it has long been suspected that carbon belongs on the short list of materials that can be magnetic at room temperature, attempts to prove that pure carbon can be magnetized have remained unconvincing. However, using a proton beam and an advanced x-ray microscope at the Advanced Light Source, a multinational team of researchers from the SSRL, the University of Leipzig, and the ALS finally put to rest doubts about the existence of magnetic carbon.
…
They proved that the magnetism originated only from the carbon, and that it was sustained above room temperature, where only a few materials stay magnetized. These findings have given researchers a way to understand and control magnetism in nanodevices such as graphene sheets and carbon nanotubes.
[/quote]
For a long time I have watched technological breakthroughs that weren’t scams but still, for one reason or another, didn’t live up to their promise.
Even if this isn’t a scam, don’t bet the farm on it.
His idea for mass oil recovery sounds like something you could probably do using existing oil absorbent mats already on the market if you put them on a roll: http://www.newpig.com/pig/US/absorbents-503/pig-oil-absorbent-mats-747/pig-oil-only-absorbent-mat-748/0/20
Thereare two tells that this is likely not true.
The claims that this a nano structured pure carbon.
Neither carbon nor oil is magnetic. It would be possible to embed iron nanoparticles, but then would OT be pure carbon.
Second, nano structures carbons are all hydrophilic to some degree, none are hydrophobic as claimed. As a familiar example, activated charcoal is a nano structured carbon, but with nanofatures too small to absorb oil molecules. It is highly hydrophilic. Carbon aerogels have a nano structure capable of adsorbing oil. They are also hydrophilic. And, since the oil is adsorbed not absorbed, they cannot be regenerated by ‘wringing the oil out’. So none of the claimed features comport with carbon science so far I know. And I have 3 issued patents on nano structured carbons for other purposes.
I’m suspicious. It seems that they could have used the money they spent on the video and PR material, rather than asking others for money – and only $55,000? If it has value I would think the oil companies, or spill mitigation companies, would be very interested.
Removing radioactive compounds from water, is the ‘jump the shark’ moment.FF 4:58…
The only way to bag radioactivity is with an Ion exchange unit…
REPLY: yeah I missed that one, probably the tipping point for the whole thing being bogus – Anthony
Pressure from being spun in a centrifuge doesn’t release the oil, but simple mechanical pressure does? LOL.
Aside from a few other inconsistencies in the messaging, let’s assume for a moment that this technology works as claimed. My immediate question would be, why bother with the teeny tiny spill recovery market when the massive and much more lucrative oil production industry itself would be crawling all over this? Many oil wells produce more water than oil. The oil has to be separated out from the water and the equipment to do that is expensive as is the maintenance of it.
So why whine to the environmental industry for $55K when the oil industry itself would throw tens of millions at this if they thought for a second that it had merit?
Mr. Aglietto’s credentials look real enough:
http://www.nanotech.net/speaker/ivano-aglietto
Shades of Volta… it wasn’t long ago that another Italian inventor’s claims were written about in these pages; Andrea Rossi and his demonstration of cold fusion.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/28/test-of-rossis-1-mw-e-cat-fusion-system-apparently-successful/
Here’s a Forbes magazine article discussing Rossi’s E-cat.
disclaimer: I know nothing about either Rossi’s device or the subject of this thread.
Oops.
Forbes link:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/05/20/finally-independent-testing-of-rossis-e-cat-cold-fusion-device-maybe-the-world-will-change-after-all/
Further thought… the LBL link mentions that it can be done with carbon nanotubes. If you apply the same magnetic dipole to all of the carbon in the tube, then the stacking effect of them could end up amounting to a measurable amount. Leave the pieces at each end for the water-repellent “grabbers” and you may end up with this material. This would jive with the video showing a “rope” of the material when it’s done, if all of the nanotubes end up aligning.
“So why whine to the environmental industry for $55K when the oil industry itself would throw tens of millions at this if they thought for a second that it had merit?”
Because the environmental industry just wants to save the planet. The oil industry wants to make money. Oil industry would probably insist on buying the patent to develop it, whereas the environmental industry may just fork over the cash, then once it’s done he can sell it to the oil industry as a completed product.
Seems plausible anyway.
They are called ferrofluids and are iron nanoparticles that are suspended in oil. They are used to keep oil in place and not creep somewhere else.
If anyone believes this b.s. I have a bridge in
Brookline……
upcountrywater says:
December 29, 2013 at 9:08 am
“Removing radioactive compounds from water, is the ‘jump the shark’ moment.FF 4:58…
The only way to bag radioactivity is with an Ion exchange unit…”
The Japanese have experimented with Uranium extraction from seawater using plastic sponges. They say it’s economic at current Uranium prices. This was before Fukushima, so now they don’t need it anymore as acceptance of Light Water Reactors is nil in Japan for the moment.
Chiefio talks about that extraction technique here.
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/ulum-ultra-large-uranium-miner-ship/
It might work and it might not. I can’t afford to invest in pipe dreams. I would take the idea to a good capitalist oil company before I’d give it away to the ecofascists.
I don’t care whether it is supposed to work or not…
Give me a piece to try out… Against all modern principles I know — but to me the questions are:
“Can I see it work?”; and second,
“Is it economic?”
Everything else is just talk…
This and all mass oil separation systems have the same problem. Getting enough oil to the collector to be efficient. The Kostner separator operated at the same recovery rate conditions allowed regardless of the capacity. You just can’t get oil to them fast enough to make a difference unless you have support vessels herding oil to your separator, and auxilliary vessels increase costs that somebody has to pay for. That would be us.
But here’s the kicker – all these high efficiency things do is provide less water to the refineries when the barge full of recovered crude is delivered to them, thus improving their profit margin. All the recovery vessels finally get all the oil they can reach – and the separating technology does not extend that reach nor is that the point.
This and other clean up methods are useful for very small and localized spills. I developed a method to clean up vey large slicks, completely and very quickly, and sent it everywhere I could, but no one showed interest. The idea is at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cVFurqCxQgo64DzzSn0hcKYlsjvjLUZG5Dq5bid9BGE/edit?usp=sharing
and simply uses the fact that oil floats on water and that a enclosed boom pulled in can enclose and concentrate a hugh area quickly. If anyone can tell me why this is not a complete and practical solution to spills like the Gulf one, please reply.
upcountrywater says: December 29, 2013 at 9:08 am “The only way to bag radioactivity is with an Ion exchange unit.”
And even then, the ion exchange zeolite resin doesn’t care about the radioactivity but only the chemical properties of the isotope. An ion exchanger is hardly different from your home water softener with an H-OH resin.
Ladies and Gentlemen
I think it is Fe3O4 finely powdered, that together with oil makes “magnetic fluids”
It was shown at the Venus festival in Oslo.
BTW,
I made a small scale version of the separation method and have a video of it sperated mixed oil and water. It works perfectly. The only trick is to have a spash plate to prevent entering mix from jetting to the bottom.
Isn’t that the definition of a scam?
The difference between a home water softener and magnetic beads is that no special apparatus is needed with the beads, so they can be used in the field. The technology was first tested on a large scale in the Chernobyl fallout area, where it helped remove Caesium from milk; it has since spread into many new fields, including pyrosequencing.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1194947382434 (3.2 Magnetic separation)
For oil cleanup, human hair has been used with great success (absorption is good, not sure about recovery).
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14584306/
Its a ferromagnetic material that bonds with the hydrocarbons somehow (sorry not a chemist) this or something similar was demonstrated on Dara O’Briens science club this last series.
It only works when magnetised by an electromagnet so would require lots of energy to make work for a large spill. But it is no scam. Only issue is whether it scales up.
Oil skimmers also work very well but a president who delayed their implementation for weeks, ( the ones the Dutch offered), in order make the BP disaster worse for the express purpose of capitalizing on its propaganda value for limiting fossil fuels — can be expected to do the SAME thing to any other effective means that comes along.