Snow melting machine. Seems a bit energy-intensive.

Dec 28, 2022 12:16 AM

funkystay

Views

150865

Likes

1332

Dislikes

26

I feel there are more efficient ways to melt snow.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I see these used a lot for contaminated snow. Salt, oil etc, they can contain the contamination in the water for treatment

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

v

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Let's just melt climate change away

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Meanwhile I'll get taxed if I don't buy an electric vehicle that costs 20k more and still has huge battery pollution.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Needs to be atomic powered.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Seems like it could be less wasteful if they turned the heat down instead of trying to flash fry it.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Used these in the Arctic oil field when there was a small oil spill. One of the few ways to separate the snow from oil and dispose of it.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

How to separate snow from oil: Burn it all and let God sort it out. (/s)

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

In NYC we dump it in the rivers.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I don't know if that would even remotely begin to purify them...

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thats the most american thing I have seen today. And not in a good way. (Is there ever..?)

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

I’ve never seen such a stupid device like this… and I’ve had to live here the entire time…

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Looks like climate change is not yet severe enough if we choose to waste energy and pollute the air for such an idiotic use case.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Seriously…. This is a trump era device… fuck

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Ackchyually: Here in Helsinki Finland, it has been calculated that this would consume less energy than transporting the snow away to dumps.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Thought it was an industrial sized deep fyer from the thumbnail pic

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

At 5,800,000 BTUs, I don't see why this CAN'T be used as a deep fryer....

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Oh a climate changing machine

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I can see the use. One year NYC had so much snow that some piles lasted until August!

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Montreal almost went a full year in 2019. One of our snow dumps in an abandoned quarry formed into a glacier that fully melted late October

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I would struggle to come up with more wasteful ways to get rid of snow from desired surfaces.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The phase change from solid to liquid takes a lot of energy.

3 years ago | Likes 71 Dislikes 4

Oh fuck off, just go to Taco Bell like the rest of us

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The same amount of energy needed to melt one gram of 0° ice into one gram of 0° water (334 Joules) could heat that one gram of water 1/

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

all the way up to 80° ....and that's Celsius too.

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Even just heating water takes a fuckton of energy.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Tell that to my bowels

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's ok - we have an unlimited amount of this oil stuff we can burn with no consequences at all!

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

The trucks use a lot of fuel as well if you need to haul the snow somewhere

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Just get children to turn the snow into snowmen, wait till midnight, and shoot them down over a reservoir.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I know you ment that as a joke but: I watched in July at a wheeloader 2-stories (of snow) above ground level trying to rip the snow ->

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Mountain apart. All open bodies of water (including the sea) is frozen so pushing the snow on the ice would just cause more problems ->

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

3 years ago (deleted Feb 8, 2023 9:38 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

1 ton of snow is just under 100 cubic feet. It becomes pretty cheap snow removal.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

According to the manufacturer, they could melt 18 tons of ice (about 163 cubic metres of snow @10% water content) while burning 30-40 gal>

3 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

3 years ago (deleted Dec 28, 2022 3:02 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Sounds about right.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

So, half the consumption in the best case scenario? Yikes. Love me some counter-intuitive shit like this.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The alternative is to make the cities walk/ski friendly, which might not be a bad thing.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Yeah, I had made a similar assumption elsewhere here. Though, service and utility vehicles would mean the relative gains wouldn't be much.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

i mean, like anything improvements# is good. half the consumption IS an improvement, just not one we stop at. a next step would reasonably>

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

be to design a fully electric one (which would still be dirty because the grid isn’t clean yet) then get enough green energy to power it>

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Of heavy fuel/diesel. To ship the same amount of snow will require a full size dump truck to do about 15-20 trips at 5-6 miles per gal fuel.

3 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

http://www.snowdragonmelters.com/default.asp?ID=54 sorry about the edits/deletes, keep getting numbers mixed up.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

3 years ago (deleted Feb 8, 2023 9:39 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

It's a matter of volume. Snow is mostly air, so it takes up much more room than solid ice. The truck might be able to haul 13 tons/

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

but the box it's got might not hold 13 tons of snow volume-wise. If we go with 300 kg /m3 for packed wet snow, you got about 72 cubic yards/

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

how to kill a planet 101

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Remind me why climate change is happening again?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Some airports use this when space for piling is at a premium

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

In my city we put all the snow in one big ass pile and then makes bets about what day in July or August it’ll finally all be melted away

3 years ago | Likes 115 Dislikes 0

Edmonton???

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Lol yes

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I take the kids to the Target parking lot and we play on the massive snow mounds at night after they close.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We had a nice big pile here in Arizona. I took a picture.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We’re waiting!…….

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Ok, it’s Arizona, so I have to be impressed. But those are rookie numbers. Thanks for working on the pic!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I am sure that Flagstaff has done better. They are higher and get much more snow!

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They had to get the equipment out in September because it was clearly not going to melt before it snowed again this year.

3 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 0

They should have grown their own glacier. Those are threatened by extinction.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Alaska/Northern Canada?

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Fairbanks.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

That first snow this year was bonkers and threw off my whole rhythm.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This cannot possibly be the most efficient solution for this.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 5

What do you base this on?

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Hauling the snow away is less efficient. More efficient would be just having a pile in the middle of town but that's not always possible

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

Most efficient would probably involve consigning half the streetplan to the frost gods for a season, as well as subterranean transit magic.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

https://www.interstatepm.com/on-site-snow-melting/ kinda interesting

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

"Quiet operation – operates at less than 70 dB". ?

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 4

So, about that of a washing machine.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That's less noise than the machinery that dumps the snow into the machine.

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

And any work equipment below 70 dB(A) doesn't need to be labeled with its noise level (at least in EU)

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Now that global warming is over.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I did a paper on these in university! From an energy standpoint they are often more efficient as most urban areas truck snow out to melt

3 years ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 1

Fait point, I hadn't considered the transportation.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But what do they do with all the water?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Down the storm drain to mix in with all the fishes

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Okay, but why not truck it into a park or something?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So it's comparing running of these in place with a diesel motor or sending a number of dump trucks full of snow to drive for 8hr a day

3 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

This is obviously highly dependent on where snow would otherwise be removed to. In a small city it could be relatively close

3 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

But for major urban areas you can be looking at moving literal tons of material 100s of kilometers by truck to dump in a field somewhere

3 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

But park one of these bad boys on top of a storm drain and you can take potentially dozens of trucks off the roads, burning net less fuel

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

The main reason they aren't very widely used or known about is they are pretty expensive and super niche. Fleets of dump trucks can be used

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Now I got myself wondering how fast diesel and electric cargo trains drop out of the equation.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

My research was based on Canada and northern USA so trains are sadly not in the equation :(

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Or OR we stop relying on roads and cars for everything and build public transport and skip this step entirely

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Super down for this!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

What you do when there's no place left to put the snow

3 years ago | Likes 148 Dislikes 5

Move because it’s too crowded ?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

there is space, there are places left

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It occurs to me that our city designs might have flaws.

3 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 1

The joys of high density combined with buildings that don't like 100+ tonnes of snow on their roof.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Exactly. La Guardia has these, but waaay bigger. Nowhere to put the snow

3 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 2

and europe hasn't .... strange

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Isn’t la guardia by the water?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I am guessing they used to just push it off the end of that one runway that sticks into the water.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Probably, but you have to transport each bucketfull two miles round trip with the tractor, in a snow storm, at a busy airport

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Normally trucked away. This is 1 operator and probably less diesel.

3 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

Exactly, if it's taking less energy than driving it out of the city to dump, then it makes sense.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Specs on it are 18 tons of snow melted with 30-40 gallons of fuel. ...I have no idea how that compares to trucking.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

extremely favorably

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

Dump truck will get 5mpg in city at best. It's ~12 yards so ~ 3.25 tons of snow. 5.5 trips for 18 tons. 31.8 miles per trip with 35 gallons.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Huh. Even accounting for the truck needed to haul this thing to a site it definitely is more fuel efficient (unless the bobcat is a guzzler)

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

This.... Our towns use side streets, parts of parking lots, empty lots and fields.... Etc. And pile it high

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

To this day I see them, want to get out of my car and play on them

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Even when that is considered, there comes a point where you are running out of places to put it. In Finland I know they sometimes 1/2

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Have a snow dump so big it doesn't melt before the next winter starts.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

we do... some of them are stored on purpose though... to have early start on ski season, or to use on AC cooling during summer etc.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

yup, when you dump it into the harbor.. you dump a whole lot of other crap with it

3 years ago | Likes 47 Dislikes 1

Think about the salt content used around bodies of water. And what effect that might have on fresh water animals/insects

3 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

The next question is, where does the water from the melted snow go?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Probably right back into the water source. But hopefully its treated at least.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

there's fresh water in the Hudson?

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Not any more

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

There are 100k lakes here where i live. Most landmasses have lots with roads nearby. The runoff is ecologically bad.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Unless you think tons of salt and sand are good to just constantly introduce into an ecosystem that doesn't have it naturally.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What's as big as a house, burns 20 liters of fuel every hour, puts out a shit-load of smoke and noise, and cuts an apple into three pieces?

3 years ago | Likes 1375 Dislikes 4

@ops mom boom

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

http://www.snowdragonmelters.com/default.asp?ID=54 burns diesel at 30-40 gal/hr which equates to 670-900 lbs of CO2/hr.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

I guess global warming is one way to melt snow

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Fuel consumption of 30-40 gallons/hr (max)

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

That's about 110-150 litres per hour, so it's worst than a Soviet apple cutting machine.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

or worst than your Mom's vintage fuel powered vibrator. Sorry I could not stop myself

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

We ran a couple (briefly), it was more like 200L/hr, each...

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

They invented the AK-47 and decided that was enough engineering for a century.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

You mean the sturmgewehr 44 knockoff?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

SpongeBob SquarePants!

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Elon Musk?

3 years ago | Likes 54 Dislikes 9

Musk would promise a machine that cuts apples into a million pieces, and then show a protoype that cuts an apple in half... some of the time

3 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 1

And have a bunch of grown men falling over each other to suck his micropeen.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

You beat me to it you sommammabitch!

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

My wife?

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

mai wiiiife

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

i'm a panty-melting machine and i run on pure alcohol

3 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 3

Are the panties in question yours and do you melt them with your hot liquor sharts?

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

What? No. This dude is practically homeless and hasn’t owned a pair of panties in years. Too busy buying alcohol.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The GOP

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

my wife

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Wow, did they come out with a new model of juice loosener?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There's a new model? Does it come with a free sample of Sun and Run?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Your mom

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

For any oil tycoon or one of those loud gun crazy pickup truck owner, that's a real car for a real patriot.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

That's a trailer...

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Which movie is it?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Get it looks absurd, but in places with lots of snow, you run out of places to push it. Eventually, you have to melt it yourself

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

1) Dump the fresh stuff into a nearby river or lake. 2) 2nd-round stuff with salt goes into big storm drain openings. Let the crud settle.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then better planning is needed. Of we want a habitable planet we cannot make such excuses

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

A Soviet machine made to cut apples into four pieces!

3 years ago | Likes 1199 Dislikes 4

Do you want the window comrade?

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sounds like a Gnomish invention to me.

3 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Good one! v

3 years ago | Likes 244 Dislikes 0

"now you look like the minister for coal"

3 years ago | Likes 76 Dislikes 0

Apparently the actual minister of coal was a beefier dude respected by the miners because he was one.

3 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 0

that makes the casting a fantastic in-joke

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The Chernobyl podcast explains why they took the creative liberties they did, I respect it. But also how interesting this story is by itself

3 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

It's very good joke comrade, but unfortunately I must now escort you to gulag.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That is comedy gold right there!

3 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

She'll go 300 hectares on a single tank of kerosene.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

"Our" joke.

3 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

The people’s joke.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

No words...

3 years ago | Likes 309 Dislikes 8

Hard as fuck street ice that won't melt for months is my guess.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My guess is that anywhere to dump the snow is so far off that the gas used to transport the snow is greater than the energy used to run this

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

You should see the snow clearing process at a major airport like Denver. They have at least 6 that clear taxiways.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Wtf lads?!?!?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We have these at my work. Literally no where to put the snow and we can't leave it. Gotta melt it. Cheaper than moving the -->

3 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 3

Snow to another location via truck. Our melters also don't look like dumpster fires either.

3 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 2

Then come up with a better solution. People like this is why the environment is fucked.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

Come up with a better solution? You think we didn't try before we invested nearly $2M in these machines? Lol. K.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Yeah the burners are not running right at all on this one. She's running rich with all that black smoke. Should be smokeless, only steam

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Might be really dirty snow?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

the snow doesn't contact the flame. water from melted snow is heated as it's pumped through a boiler tube array and melts more snow

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I do wonder if this is more fuel efficient than trucking the snow to a field/whatnot.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Depends on how far you need to truck, on urban centers melting can be more efficient.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Depends on far you have to drive, but the energy consumption on snow melters is no joke.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Probably uses less energy than using a dump truck to move it away.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

No, but probably cheaper. Which dosent makes it right. Fuels is still to cheap if people is doing this.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

You realize that trucks run on the same fuel as this?

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I also realise how much energy is needed to melt snow. We cannot be this wasteful with energy anymore.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Actually now that I think of it, it's probably not the cost of fuel they are trying to save. It's the cost of the labor of the drivers to

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Actually less energy than trucking it out like they would normally have to do, and waayy less emissions, land, and vehicles on the road

3 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 3

This machine burns 30-40gal/hr diesel. Semis average 8. Sauce: googling and the melter’s website.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That for a round trip, or one-way?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The melter’s manufacturer said 30-40 gal of diesel fuel per hour. Google said a diesel semi traveling down the road uses 8 gal per hour.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Obv there’s variation in the truck based on load, fuel efficiency, speed, etc., but still that’s a pretty stark difference.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Alright, so that's 16 for an idealised round trip, at halved capacity. Pushing 32ish, before we even nuked fuel efficiency on low speeds.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Also, the melter’s website emphasized its purpose being removing snow from the top level of parking ramps.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0