link12313 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 It would be much more realistic and would give you an early water source while building in the starting biome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kasuha Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 I don't think it would be more realistic. Coal is mostly carbon, even the worst quality coal (lignite) has 60% carbon and only 6% hydrogen so amount of water produced in burning is very small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincie Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 Well... Coal has pretty high energetic capacity. Maybe... Instead of regular coal deposits make it more realistics - introduce rocks, dropping both base rock (like sandrock or ingenious) and a lump of coal. Coal is ~20MJ/kg, so a coal generator could use a 1kg heavy lump of coal to provide us with those minus heat loss. Since it's 600W of power and the heat output is 45W, it's efficiency is 93% (just ot be exact). 20MJ/645W gives us 31000 seconds. It should also consume 1,75kg of oxygen during the process. To make it more ballanced let's say, that in this world coal is not 21MJ/kg, but 0,93MJ/kg, so a 1kg lump would be burned a round cycle and the generator could hold like 5 of those. Ofcourse the spawn rates of coal containing rocks should be adjusted to keep the ballance. On the other hand, please, make it an option to attach a gas pipe vent to this machine. It's sad I need to use another gas pump just to make any use of my CO2. Generator with no output pipe could just behave like it used to. P.S. I never have more like one of those because of them being such a crude solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botaxalim Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 we have water purifier with sand filtration to convert polluted water before we find steam geyser, and recent update game i never ran out sand, even after i found geyser. with game progress balance right now, i don't think we need another water source, unless they increase water usage by introducing new machine like oil well which consume lot of water Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyNet_65 Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 The hydrogen generator should generate clean water as result of hydrogen combustion. Right now you can build some kind of perpetuum mobile by using electrolyzers and hydrogen generators, which is way to op if you ask me. Water shouldn't be such an efficient energy source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Plum Gate Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 ...My guess is that it would be polluted water if there were water at all in that case. Since it doesn't require an O2 source, I can only speculate that it's some sort of catalytic lung - and that coal in the game isn't coal as we know it. The coal generator has no appreciable byproducts - 20g/s of CO2 and some heat. As if there's an exothermic reaction occurring in the fuel that causes it to decay into heat and a little CO2. The loss of mass is astonishing, My take on how things currently work, without O2, it should be putting out the other reactant or the base medium ...maybe sand or some other mineral. The hydrogen generator makes the least sense of all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincie Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 The hydrogen generator seems to be an extremly unefficient fusion devide actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.
Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.