backtop


Print 17 comment(s) - last by Xs1t0ry.. on Feb 28 at 7:06 PM


Rhodococcus bacteria are among the strains useful in bioremediation for their absorption of mineral contaminates.  (Source: University of Cambridge)
New research promises sustainable filters, fuel, and a better understanding of fluid dynamics

Bioremediation, the study of using living organisms to remove pollutants or contaminants from the environment, is a hot new field of research.  Nanotechnology, including carbon nanotubes, nanoparticles, and nanomembranes is another extremely hot field, which promises to one day provide revolutionary improvements to nearly every field of science.  Combine the two fields and you get the University of Nottingham's new research.

Rather than just study nanofilters with nanopores or waste-eating bacteria, the English researchers at the University of Nottingham -- headed by Nidal Hilal, Professor of Chemical and Process Engineering in the Centre for Clean Water Technologies -- combined the two exciting fields to develop a new prototype system, which provides a glimpse at the potential future of water filtration.

The water enters the system and is first passed through colonies of bacteria, which eat contaminants.  The water then flows through an adjacent nanofilter, featuring pores, which are between ten thousandths of a millimeter to one nanometer thick. 

The work is similar to other research funded by the Middle East Desalination Research Centre on nanofiltration and ultrafiltration.  The goal is to be able to create pure, drinkable fresh water from sea water or water contaminated from industrial processes.

The key improvement in the Professor Hilal's system is the use of bacteria.  The bacteria eat the contaminates which prevent the filter from getting clogged and keep the water flowing.  The tech can thus be used in a closed system without the need for regular membrane replacement. 

The research is sponsored by a tech partnership with Cardev International, an oil filtration company based in Harrogate, England.

One fortunate benefit of the process is that the waste it generates in the form of contaminate-laden bacteria has a high calorific content, meaning that it makes an ideal fuel.  This could improve the efficiency of many types of industrial power generation. 

Another benefit of the research is by using state-of-the-art atomic force microscope equipment at the University, researchers are studying fluid movement at the nanoscale, which will allow for a better understanding of how liquids flow and pull apart at the nanoscale.  This could have broad applications in mechanical engineering, including improving oil flow and thus efficiency in automotive engines.  Researchers are testing liquids over a broad temperature range from -50 deg. C to 150 deg. C, which should help to yield a broad understanding of behavior.

Professor Hilal sees the research as unparalleled in terms of both the study of fluids at an atomic level and in providing a sustainable nanofiltration system.  He states proudly, "Examining the properties of liquids has never been done before at this scale.  By using bioremediation and nanofiltration technology combined, the water cleaning process is integrated — using far less energy than current processes. Add to this the recycling of waste products as fuels and you have a greener technology."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Morality
By DCstewieG on 2/22/2008 12:59:21 PM , Rating: 3
Apparently nanotech is immoral:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/08021...

<sigh> Sometimes I wonder about this country...




RE: Morality
By deeznuts on 2/22/2008 1:16:14 PM , Rating: 1
I dont' quite get how nanotech itself is immoral, usually scale doesnt' factor into morality ...

but does anyone get the creepy crawly feeling something nano is going to F this world up?


RE: Morality
By arazok on 2/22/2008 2:15:06 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
but does anyone get the creepy crawly feeling something nano is going to F this world up?


Not really.


RE: Morality
By surt on 2/22/2008 3:14:09 PM , Rating: 3
I doubt that we're close to capable of designing anything nano that can seriously outcompete the bacteria that have ruled this planet for over a billion years.


RE: Morality
By Ringold on 2/22/2008 1:35:23 PM , Rating: 2
That's got to be the lamest thing I've read all day (your link). What does "morally acceptable" mean? How are they phrasing this question?

Is a car morally acceptable? What about the invention of the wheel?

I got a feeling some professors at the University of Wisconsin needed something to validate their continued existance in life, and thus produced this meaningless study. I wonder how many tax payer dollars funded it via the NSF.


RE: Morality
By clovell on 2/22/2008 2:01:56 PM , Rating: 2
Right on, Ringold. Maybe if this 'researcher' had included questions about religion on the questionnaire and the results had shown a directl correlation between religion and attitudes we could say the article was without spin.

As it is, it's probably the biggest production of hand-waving since Circle-Squaring went out of style.


RE: Morality
By B3an on 2/22/2008 2:29:47 PM , Rating: 2
"Oh no something bad about us americans, lets all mock it"

Come on, it's so painfully obviously religion plays a big part in the average american views. It's ridiculous and backwards. If the US didnt revolve around money so much i'm sure things would advance at around 1/4 the rate.


RE: Morality
By Gondorff on 2/22/2008 9:00:44 PM , Rating: 2
Religion certainly plays a large role in the US, but the above posters' critiques of the article were dead on. The researcher found in his studies that many people thought nanotech was immoral, yet the connection to religion was entirely speculation.
quote:
The answer, Scheufele believes, is religion

Note that there is no evidence behind this claim. It is simply the researcher's own ramblings, and completely unscientific. Therefore, it is rather objectionable that the story should show up in the news as "Religion Colors American's Views of Nanotechnology", when no correlation was shown. Only biased opinions.
Additionally there is the issue of the wording of the question, which is not explained.

It would seem far more plausible to me that the issue is simply that people don't know what nanotech really is (note that it is only by the researcher's own word that we learn that the survey respondents understood nanotech. How does he know that? He cites no source for that information). This would also agree with the related article on that same page that describes the low level of public awareness about nanotech.


RE: Morality
By Hexus on 2/22/2008 2:44:16 PM , Rating: 3
I agree, so let's look at this, if I use the "moral" logic used in that article by the opponents to nano-tech, if I'm wearing a CrySuit, then I am God.

MAXIMUM GOD POWER!


How?
By clovell on 2/22/2008 12:00:49 PM , Rating: 2
>One fortunate benefit of the process is that the waste it generates in the form of contaminate-laden bacteria has a high calorific content, meaning that it makes an ideal fuel.

An ideal fuel for what? How?




RE: How?
By AnnihilatorX on 2/22/2008 12:07:05 PM , Rating: 2
For some strains of bacteria you can extract oil from them.
I wouldn't think they mean directly combusting them.

The word ideal means the fuel is green because the energy is generated from bacteria eating waste.


RE: How?
By JasonMick (blog) on 2/22/2008 12:15:02 PM , Rating: 2
Somewhat.

Its ideal in its "calorific content" meaning it has lots of energy in a small space. Caloric/calorific content is a key measure of how good a combustible fuel a resource would make/contains. Calorific content is why oil is a better fuel than carpet or the silicon in your pc -- aside from other chemistry involved, it simply contains more energy released during oxygen combustion reactions, hence why it burns so readily and nicely ("There Will Be Blood", anyone?).

The idea is that the waste material contains a lot of combustible material in a small space. If the excess bacteria could be harvested and this fuel extracted, it could easily be burned to produce substantial power.

The burn might not be green or "clean" as it would likely release carbon, just like any fossil fuel, but at least it would raise total efficiency of power generation, but squeezing a bit more energy out of power plant's waste.


RE: How?
By clovell on 2/22/2008 1:57:22 PM , Rating: 2
Very cool.


RE: How?
By drank12quartsstrohsbeer on 2/22/2008 3:49:07 PM , Rating: 2
Depending on the contaminant, burning the bacteria would just release the pollutants back into the environment.

The atricle doen't specify what types of pollutants could be used with this process.


RE: How?
By Xs1t0ry on 2/28/2008 7:06:27 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, it's all about the caloric content. Every substance has one... things like fossil fuels just have higher caloric content. It's funny... if you drink gasoline you will get a temporary burst of energy (then die). They used to give it to cheap horses to carry heavy loads up hills because it was cheaper to replace them when they died at the top (gold rush era).


Keep it coming!
By kattanna on 2/22/2008 4:51:45 PM , Rating: 2
one day i know we will get to the point that one will simply need to attach a, cheap and easy to use, nano-filter/cleaning unit to a standard pump pumping water out of any source, wether well, dirty river, or ocean, and it will produce clean drinking water.

when that happens, one of the biggest sources of disease will vanish.

it will be a good day.




RE: Keep it coming!
By rudolphna on 2/23/2008 11:49:08 AM , Rating: 1
I agree. All that crap about the "morality" of it is nonsense. Cars, computers, aiplanes, hell even something as simple as a lightbulb, are not found in nature. Its absolutely ridiculous. I agree though, keep it coming. If it can help make life better and easier, why not? Im tired of Religious nuts sticking their nose in science, where it doesnt belong.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki