Hi everyone. This forum is to expose David Schmidt. He is a hidden Gem.
Super intelligent and very future forward with his company. (He is our future to cleaning the planet and bringing futuristic technology into our home)
First here are his current awards.
https://lifewave.com/sihlanick/home/awards
David Schmidt is someone to review.
Please respect this post. There will be no discussion about what is real and what isn’t. David has ground breaking machines to creat our future forward dreams.
Here is one.
David 20 years ago made an energy photobiomodulation body tech that blew the wold away.
Her is how he stared.
This is nothing new. just a hype. And it is over since 8-10 years now. Waste also has many different compounds like heavy metals, moisture. inorganics, etc in it. And it is not homogenious but varies strongly. The result of wet pyrolysis, with or without a catalyst, is a broad spectrum of aromatic compounds: furans, phenols etc. (very long list of toxic substances) or you need to dry it first. That would need energy. You will get more toxic waste and less energy out than if you would burn it. Many companies were trying to cash in on it, trying to ride the CO2 scam wave. Most of them are gone by now.
Wrong!
Why? Because you believe him? He is talking about "waste", but his slide shows biomass. Dry biomass to be precise. Biowaste contains more than 80% moisture. And also plastics, metals, sand and so on. Other biomass is no waste but valuable for compost, organic enrichment of the soils, etc. Why degrade that to charcoal when you can feed the worms and soil bacteria with it? So there is no "waste" dry clean biomass! It already has important use in agriculture and sustainable forestry. Used as mulch or for bioenergy and biogas. That is the first thought error. (And let me tell you, I know exactly what I am taking about, because I worked in research exactly in this field.)
To dry something with 80% moisture needs a a lot of energy. Nearly as much energy or (even more) what you get out in form of dirty syngas (remember, you want the coal carbon not to be used to "store" the CO2, so the gas return is just a small fraction of the total C). Not to tell about the transport costs, emissions and energy for the excess water you have to get rid of at the central plant. To make charcoal from wood is nothing new or special and others do this as well. Also including the reuse of the gas to fuel the the process. But you get more -and much cleaner- gas by just using the normal biogas procedure. And you don't loose so much energy as excess heat and you still have the soil nutrients to bring them back to the field.
To "store" CO2 by "sequesting" it apart from enhancing soil or plant biomass is also total BS. Just ideology and money generation.
This is neither economically nor environmentally senseful.
Come on -be honest- do you even have a slight clue about what this guy is talking about? This show is not about technology - it is a believe system.
And you cannot fool us by pretending you want him "exposed". He owns you...
Ah. So you are arcturian. I know you. And we have connect before. That’s why your TV looks like that.