Oil Conversion rates

[Smithe37]

So if you heat oil into petrol, is that a 1:1 conversion? that is, does 1kg of crude oil become 1kg of petroleum?
And say you heat the petroleum to boiling, does 1kg of petroleum become 1kg of natural gas?

If both of these statements are true, then the most efficient use (mass wise) of crude oil is to heat it straight into natural gas, correct?

Another question, what determines the output temperature of oil from slicksters?

[Luminite2]

3 minutes ago, Smithe37 said:

So if you heat oil into petrol, is that a 1:1 conversion? that is, does 1kg of crude oil become 1kg of petroleum?
And say you heat the petroleum to boiling, does 1kg of petroleum become 1kg of natural gas?

If both of these statements are true, then the most efficient use (mass wise) of crude oil is to heat it straight into natural gas, correct?

Yes, yes, yes.

 

As for slicksters, I've heard some say that the oil temperature is the same as the CO2 temperature, but I have not confirmed that.

[Kiros]

3 hours ago, Luminite2 said:

Yes, yes, yes.

 

As for slicksters, I've heard some say that the oil temperature is the same as the CO2 temperature, but I have not confirmed that.

I've found that the temp of Slickster excretions (in this case crude oil) is equal to their internal body temp. I had a few with body temps over 1000F in an area that was around 200F and they weren't pooping oil, they were farting NatGas at their body temp.

[KittenIsAGeek]

2 minutes ago, Kiros said:

I've found that the temp of Slickster excretions (in this case crude oil) is equal to their internal body temp. I had a few with body temps over 1000F in an area that was around 200F and they weren't pooping oil, they were farting NatGas at their body temp.

Yeah, my CO2 is 20c and the pool of oil the slicksters are making is around 50c.  Which matches up with their internal temps.

[Smithe37]

Probably not that viable long term but perhaps we could heat slicksters up and just have them fart nat gas rather than heating up the crude oil. That being said they will lose heat to their environment over time so that may not be viable.

[avc15]

3 hours ago, Smithe37 said:

Probably not that viable long term but perhaps we could heat slicksters up and just have them fart nat gas rather than heating up the crude oil. That being said they will lose heat to their environment over time so that may not be viable.

Nat Gas  (60g) -> NGG -> CO2 (82.5g) -> Slickster -> Crude (41.25g) -> NG (41.25g)

                                       -> PW (67.5g) -> Fert Synth -> NG (44g)

Oh my. 60g NG in, 85g NG out. or a little left over water. But then, what percentage of the output power is used to boil the crude?

Perpetual motion machines, anyone? I think before we could breed slicks you at least had to provide some water to keep the process going.

[Smithe37]

5 hours ago, avc15 said:

Nat Gas  (60g) -> NGG -> CO2 (82.5g) -> Slickster -> Crude (41.25g) -> NG (41.25g)

                                       -> PW (67.5g) -> Fert Synth -> NG (44g)

Oh my. 60g NG in, 85g NG out. or a little left over water. But then, what percentage of the output power is used to boil the crude?

Perpetual motion machines, anyone? I think before we could breed slicks you at least had to provide some water to keep the process going.

Doesn't matter, heat is useless so im just making use of free energy from a volcano

[Jigsawn]

So heating crude to natural gas is more efficient than refining to petrol and then using that in a petrol generator? Do you get a better power return from Nat gas gens? 

If so it needs rebalancing. Making petrol and getting a petrol gen up and running is a big task and requires high level tech. Gameplay wise having it more efficient to just heat oil and ignore that whole process that is pretty lame. Petrol gen is a nice progression and gameplay challenge that should be rewarded.

Maybe rather than nerfing Nat gas gens, then petrol gens or petrol production just needs to be better/faster?

[travaldofan]

i found petrol gen is good reliable generator but not for 247, when needed it can make lot of power but running on long term they really really produce too much heat

petroleum is easier than steam and better than them

[PhailRaptor]

If they wanted to buff the Petro Gen, it would be really easy.  Simply let it run without requiring a Dupe to man it.

[JonnyMonroe]

11 hours ago, Smithe37 said:

Probably not that viable long term but perhaps we could heat slicksters up and just have them fart nat gas rather than heating up the crude oil. That being said they will lose heat to their environment over time so that may not be viable.

We played with this idea during the ranch pre-release build and it is viable. Just keep your slicksters in a sealed room with your volcano and they'll maintain high enough body temp. You'll need to be a bit clever with pumping in co2 and reading pressure to take the gas out but you can use the gas to cook oil from your oil well if you pre-heat it a bit.

 

Expect this to get fixed at some point. I doubt slicksters are meant to be able to survive at 900kelvin

[travaldofan]

1 hour ago, PhailRaptor said:

If they wanted to buff the Petro Gen, it would be really easy.  Simply let it run without requiring a Dupe to man it.

it is only oil refinery they need to work on. Just store up your petroleum. 

[Kiros]

2 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

So heating crude to natural gas is more efficient than refining to petrol and then using that in a petrol generator? Do you get a better power return from Nat gas gens? 

If so it needs rebalancing. Making petrol and getting a petrol gen up and running is a big task and requires high level tech. Gameplay wise having it more efficient to just heat oil and ignore that whole process that is pretty lame. Petrol gen is a nice progression and gameplay challenge that should be rewarded.

Maybe rather than nerfing Nat gas gens, then petrol gens or petrol production just needs to be better/faster?

Petrol Gens: +2000w, +500g/s Co2, +1250g/s pW, -3000g/s Petrol

NatGas Gens: +800w, +82.5g/s Co2, +67.5g/s pW, -60g/s NG

The current problem is Petrol Gens produce less material in terms of mass than they take in, while NG gens actually produce more mass than they take in. Since their waste materials can be converted into more fuel, NG gens only make more sense atm. Honestly I'm surprised NG gens haven't been nerfed yet, but I'm sure it's coming.

[Argelle]

Polluted water, I see a way to get energy with it (indirectely with hydrogen generator) but CO2 ?

[Luminite2]

2 minutes ago, Argelle said:

Polluted water, I see a way to get energy with it (indirectely with hydrogen generator) but CO2 ?

Hydrogen isn't what people usually mean when talking about power potential of PH2O. It can be turned into natural gas in a fertilizer synthesizer, and the gas produced is enough to get more power out of a natural gas generator than was required to run the synthesizer.

For CO2, it can be fed to slicksters to produce crude oil, which can then either be heated or refined into petroleum, which can then be fed to a petroleum generator or, more efficiently, be boiled into natural gas which can go into a natural gas generator.
 

[onlineous]

4 hours ago, Luminite2 said:

Hydrogen isn't what people usually mean when talking about power potential of PH2O. It can be turned into natural gas in a fertilizer synthesizer, and the gas produced is enough to get more power out of a natural gas generator than was required to run the synthesizer.

For CO2, it can be fed to slicksters to produce crude oil, which can then either be heated or refined into petroleum, which can then be fed to a petroleum generator or, more efficiently, be boiled into natural gas which can go into a natural gas generator.
 

That's why I actually quite liked the system with the nerfed geysers in the early ranging builds. It feels just a bit too easy to produce as much polluted water as possible to run in through fertilizer synthesizers. With water becoming more limited you had to be more careful with water usage.