When you are 100% sure that the transformer was setup right, then it must be an IC2 issue. There are by now quite a few blocks that do not implepent IC2s own API correctly.
[1.7.10][LISTED] InfiTech 2 Modpack v3.2.21 [HQM][GregTech balanced hard-mode modpack]
- Thread starter Jason McRay
- Start date
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
I mean, actually seeing the pollution effects is something I can toggle on or off. I neither want nor need an effect that permanently obstructs my view of the Minecraft world like the way in which Azanor implemented the warp effects. Also, some visual effects get in the way of actually visualizing how an area I'm working on will look and feel. I want to toggle them on or off temporarily, is that really too much to ask? It's a game, not a "simulate real life and fog up your view" simulator!
Well, GregTech itself is already geared to give the player anything they want to accomplish in it, and "win" it. I'd say the pollution effects should be equally winnable, along the same lines GregTech itself is. Bruteforce around the problem, or do you mean, actually and really expend resources you were going to use to get to the next tier? The whole point of my post is that if done properly, pollution can be minimized effectively, but at large scale costs, just like building GregTech infrastructure.
Blood mentioned that the pollution would be tied to chunks. He has neat ideas about pollution entities that could probably be effected by the things you mentioned, but for the primary pollution problem itself...talk to him maybe about making mufflers and such on machines an actual thing that people care about
I may do that, but at the moment I'm interested to hear if he's willing to go to the time and effort needed to develop the pollution concept so that it can be cleaned up if done properly. I'm therefore willing to discuss it right here, as it would impact the Infitech modpack: in other words in that kind of context.
If he can get his idea off the bedrock, and develops it to the point where it's an actual programming concept, I'd call all of my above response a request for mod development and feature implementation, and would expect to find a link to a forum post detailing how far along he's got building this mod.
I'd be happy to respond there if he wants to take his concept to an implementation stage.Cheers ...
BrickVoid
Yes, that was my predicament. For the mean-time I just use MFSU's as buffers for the reactors, although guess they are now disabled so it's not really a good solution
Z
zbtiqua
Guest
I mean 5 different battery buffers with batteries in them. This is important for the fusion reactor for example, where I need to make sure the machines making fuel get power before any extra power is sent to other machines like ore processing.
Reposted from above:
Is there any way in this pack to prioritize or at least predict where energy will go first on a line? for example:
4 Amp Power Source (i.e. transformer) ==== Battery 1 ==== Battery 2 ==== Battery 3 ==== Battery 4 ==== Battery 5
Since there are 4 amps and not all 5 batteries can receive power at once, there must be some decision making process as to where that power goes first, right? I would like, ideally, to control which one fills first. So maybe Battery 1 and 3 are the most important and need to be full, and the others should not get power until they are. Is there any way to do this?
You can put energy detectors on the battery buffers and machine controller inbetween the cables to disconnect them and then place some redstone to connect it all correctly.
I'm 100% sure.
Z
zbtiqua
Guest
I tried this, and the energy detector was outputting redstone signal regardless of whether the battery buffer was full or empty. This is because the energy detector is reading the block's internal buffer, not how full the battery inside it is. So basically, this wont solve the problem. Is there another way?
reference: http://ftb.gamepedia.com/Energy_Detector
You need to be in the correct mode after using the screwdriver. Its one of the last modes. I use this ability all the time and can confirm it works.
Z
zbtiqua
Guest
I can't tell you how many problems this solves for me! thanks haha.
Well, depending on how advanced the pollution and pollution control systems eventually get, I throw the following ideas on the wall to see what sticks:
For players who choose not to control their pollution at all, they could simply leave the muffler hatch open to atmosphere and suffer. Perhaps the chunk gets poisoned which could affect the player's health and possibly reduce plant growth rate.
However, for players who would like to invest the time and resources necessary to control their pollution, here are some ideas that are sorta based on real life:
IRL, SO2 is one of the major emission control parameters when burning Coal. It can be removed by passing the exhaust through a scrubber that mixes SO2 with a slurry containing limestone or lime. The equations look something like these:
Limestone slurry: CaCO3 + SO2 = CaSO3 + CO2
Lime slurry: Ca(OH)2 + SO2 = CaSO3 + H2O
In GT, players could make a slurry of CaCO3 or Ca(OH)2 by adding the ingredients to water in a Mixer. Then we would need a new block called a "Scrubber". The exhaust from a muffler and the slurry would get plumbed into the Scrubber, and the Scrubber would produce CaSO3 as a dust which could be voided (or better yet, centrifuged to reclaim the components). The CO2 and/or H2O could be assumed to escape to the environment with no consequence.
Similar uses for the Scrubber could be assigned for different types of pollution.
For example, when burning petroleum products (oil, diesel, gasoline, natural gas, etc), the major pollution problem could be NOx (oxides of nitrogen). (Technically, NOx is also a concern when burning coal too, so a coal burner might need to control this too perhaps.)
One method to control NOx is by using NH3 (ammonia). Technically it's probably aqueous ammonia which is NH4OH in water, so the equation would look something like this:
NH4 + NO2 = N2 + 2(H2O)
The products of this reaction could be released to the environment with no consequence.
We would need a way to make ammonia, but I'm sure there is a machine we could pick to heat N2 and H2 in the presence of an iron or iron dust catalyst. Apparently it can be made from just water and air IRL. Here is a tiny bit of info on it: http://phys.org/news/2014-08-air-ammoniaone-world-important-chemicals.html
Carbon monoxide could also be a concern for some petroleum burners like diesel engines. This could be scrubbed by passing the exhaust through a palladium, platinum and aluminium oxide catalyst which could be slowly consumed over time. Not sure if the Scrubber could do it or if we would want another block called a Catalytic Converter.
These are just some ideas and are certainly not 100% accurate
For players who choose not to control their pollution at all, they could simply leave the muffler hatch open to atmosphere and suffer. Perhaps the chunk gets poisoned which could affect the player's health and possibly reduce plant growth rate.
However, for players who would like to invest the time and resources necessary to control their pollution, here are some ideas that are sorta based on real life:
IRL, SO2 is one of the major emission control parameters when burning Coal. It can be removed by passing the exhaust through a scrubber that mixes SO2 with a slurry containing limestone or lime. The equations look something like these:
Limestone slurry: CaCO3 + SO2 = CaSO3 + CO2
Lime slurry: Ca(OH)2 + SO2 = CaSO3 + H2O
In GT, players could make a slurry of CaCO3 or Ca(OH)2 by adding the ingredients to water in a Mixer. Then we would need a new block called a "Scrubber". The exhaust from a muffler and the slurry would get plumbed into the Scrubber, and the Scrubber would produce CaSO3 as a dust which could be voided (or better yet, centrifuged to reclaim the components). The CO2 and/or H2O could be assumed to escape to the environment with no consequence.
Similar uses for the Scrubber could be assigned for different types of pollution.
For example, when burning petroleum products (oil, diesel, gasoline, natural gas, etc), the major pollution problem could be NOx (oxides of nitrogen). (Technically, NOx is also a concern when burning coal too, so a coal burner might need to control this too perhaps.)
One method to control NOx is by using NH3 (ammonia). Technically it's probably aqueous ammonia which is NH4OH in water, so the equation would look something like this:
NH4 + NO2 = N2 + 2(H2O)
The products of this reaction could be released to the environment with no consequence.
We would need a way to make ammonia, but I'm sure there is a machine we could pick to heat N2 and H2 in the presence of an iron or iron dust catalyst. Apparently it can be made from just water and air IRL. Here is a tiny bit of info on it: http://phys.org/news/2014-08-air-ammoniaone-world-important-chemicals.html
Carbon monoxide could also be a concern for some petroleum burners like diesel engines. This could be scrubbed by passing the exhaust through a palladium, platinum and aluminium oxide catalyst which could be slowly consumed over time. Not sure if the Scrubber could do it or if we would want another block called a Catalytic Converter.
These are just some ideas and are certainly not 100% accurate
R
r3pbl4
Guest
Hey guys, mb u can help me... I have a bug with charcoal pit controller - I couldn't found it at NEI, I found only the book which say how to make charcoal pit. And when I checked the recipe of book in the middle, when must be a charcoal pit controller a block with name ".name" and he doesnt have a texture.
You apparently are on 3.1.23, which has the books but not actual new machines. I found it better to just push all guide books out when I made them so I will not need to care about it for tom... v3.2 update.
I can get lucky some of the time on the pokies, but I wouldn't count that kind of lucky as meaning anything!
Most of the time I don't have money to blow on them, so I would say your chances of seeing an update will be determined by what Jason wants to push and when. ;-)
Cheers ...
BrickVoid
I think the polution thing could be really interested but i do agree you should be able to set up a system to avoid the problems, and maybe even gain something from it (give them a cookie for trying).
Sulfur can be removed in a number of way. I'm working on the biomass side of things and then they even use it to avoid even worse problems by adding SO2 to the flue gas (to avoid KCl). I would use a low temperature wet scrubber in this case thought. At low temperatures and in the presence of steam SO2 forms sulfuric acid which condensate and can be removed quite efficiently.
NOx is usually a problem once go you past 1200 celsius as the nitrogen in air becomes oxidised more and more as the temperature increases from there. Althought if the fuel also contains a lot of inherent nitrogen it will also form NOX. However high temperatures are usually the main culprint.
Wet scrubbers work with NOX removal as well althought not as efficiently however it is usually the most cost efficient solution if you dont have to remove all of it (usually there is a limit you need to stay under).
So if i wanted a somewhat realistic approach i would probably go for a wet scrubber where you input water and get waste water out of it that can be refined into sulfuric acid, nitric acid and maybe som carbon and inorganics (it captures fine particles as well)
It would be simple to implement and you could get an bonus production of power from the acids that i think could be a nice touch.
Side notice, the 40 or so low tech coke ovens everyone seems to have would produce a enourmous amount of polution in the form of fine particle emission from soot and tars. I would not want to live close to that
Carbon monoxide should not happen during combustion as long as you have excess air. And as long as you have decent combustion you should not have a problem with soot or tars either.
If someone who does the programing thinks this is of interest i could spend some time working it out with the machines you have in GT5u. Ive always wanted more realistic combustion/gasification process in GT where you dont simply ignore polution and produce carbon from ashes (this part really makes me sad). Since i don't know java though it has always been a mute point thought
Sulfur can be removed in a number of way. I'm working on the biomass side of things and then they even use it to avoid even worse problems by adding SO2 to the flue gas (to avoid KCl). I would use a low temperature wet scrubber in this case thought. At low temperatures and in the presence of steam SO2 forms sulfuric acid which condensate and can be removed quite efficiently.
NOx is usually a problem once go you past 1200 celsius as the nitrogen in air becomes oxidised more and more as the temperature increases from there. Althought if the fuel also contains a lot of inherent nitrogen it will also form NOX. However high temperatures are usually the main culprint.
Wet scrubbers work with NOX removal as well althought not as efficiently however it is usually the most cost efficient solution if you dont have to remove all of it (usually there is a limit you need to stay under).
So if i wanted a somewhat realistic approach i would probably go for a wet scrubber where you input water and get waste water out of it that can be refined into sulfuric acid, nitric acid and maybe som carbon and inorganics (it captures fine particles as well)
It would be simple to implement and you could get an bonus production of power from the acids that i think could be a nice touch.
Side notice, the 40 or so low tech coke ovens everyone seems to have would produce a enourmous amount of polution in the form of fine particle emission from soot and tars. I would not want to live close to that
Carbon monoxide should not happen during combustion as long as you have excess air. And as long as you have decent combustion you should not have a problem with soot or tars either.
If someone who does the programing thinks this is of interest i could spend some time working it out with the machines you have in GT5u. Ive always wanted more realistic combustion/gasification process in GT where you dont simply ignore polution and produce carbon from ashes (this part really makes me sad). Since i don't know java though it has always been a mute point thought
Last edited:
Not trying to be picky or anything, but you're looking for the word "though", not "thought".
Posts here are editable.Your comments are most interesting, and hopefully we would soon see a pollution minigame in Infitech!
Cheers ...
BrickVoid
Hmm, why we'll couldn't remove pollution if we'll have lots of catalytics material, few megawatts of energy and, at least, hell's bagel of fusion?
Why we need Palladium if we can't put it in a muffler or making catalytics converter?
Palladium is used in the creation of carbon fibres, whatever the ic2 one is, although that might be a 5.09 thing.
The more complex carbon fibers are GT5.09 only.
Also, i just noticed that this thread now has the most replys of all modpacks.
Also, i just noticed that this thread now has the most replys of all modpacks.