YOU: Fix the US Energy Crisis

[russ_watters]

Uh, no.? I never said anything remotely about the "vast majority of the supply of energy".

Reread post #572, where the originator of the concept quoted you in his introduction of the concept.

What basis do you have that this kind of technology can't make a significant impact? Thermodynamics says that it can.

The fact that it hasn't yet proven to even work reliably after decades of serious attempts should be a clue, but read post #592 where I list four major obstacles to viability that are probably inherrent and likely unfixable. Consider this as an analogy: if the wind were only half as strong as it is, we'd have no wind power because it would be inherrently non-viable. Converseley, if the wind were twice as strong as it is, we wouldn't be having this conversation because wind would already be taking care of most of our energy needs. See, just saying there is enough overall energy in the wind doesn't tell you anything about how viable the recovery of that energy is. So no, the laws of thermodynamics say nothing whatsoever about the ability of this technology to have a "significant impact". You're confusing theoretical possibility with practical reality.

I think its obvious that the quantity and capabilities of any pumping devices used is dependent upon the height and capacity of the reservoir and even more so location.

No, it isn't. One need not even be associated with the other, as now obviously we use pumped storage a lot, but not wave power. And wave power could be utilized without pumped storage. Until/unless wave power became a large producer of energy, there is no need to associate it with pumped storage: that's why none of the wave power projects yet mentioned have been associated with pumped storage.

I disagree. Pumped-storage hydroelectric power plants are very common, reliable, and rather economical.

Again, that has nothing whatsoever to do with wave power, as none of them are powered by waves. That was my objection. Bringing pumped storage into it was a red herring.

The way I see it, only half of it. The water storage and power generation thing has been figured out.

Again, two completely unrelated issues. It's like saying we're halfway to fusion powered cars because we have cars figured out. Just because it is half of the sentence, doesn't make it half of the problem.

The only real issue I see is using waves to get the water into the reservoir.

Which.Is.The.Entire.Problem!

However, this isn't something that needs some major technological breakthrough, but rather just the right minded people to figure it out at a relatively low cost.

Clearly the concept is simple, yes - but that doesn't mean it has a chance of ever being economically viable. Again, see those 4 objections in post #592 and recognize the density problem discussed above with the analogy to wind.

I don't think it is. If the world was full of successful solutions that made it well passed the drawing-board phase, then this thread wouldn't exist.

Ehh - wind power has left the drawing board stage and has potential to make a serious impact, yet this thread exists.

Also, I never said this was something can and should be done, I just simply stated that it was "nifty".

You're not the one who originated the idea in this thread, but now you're putting an awful lot of energy into defending it.

So you're saying that we should just abandon the whole idea based on a few failures?

No, I'm saying until one shows some real results, I'm not interested. My goal in starting this thread was to discuss practical ideas that might have a real shot at making a difference. I included only one research component in my original plan: fusion. Everything else in my plan is doable now. I'm not suggesting anyone abandon anything, but a research project is not a solution.

Do you think we should have abandoned nuclear power after Chernobyl?

Nuclear power was already plenty viable before Chernobyl.

 

[mheslep]

Also, I never said this was something can and should be done, I just simply stated that it was "nifty".

Yes nifty, and that it "Gets around the entire baseload problem"

 

[Feliks]

Map wave height: (display region , and period )

http://www.lajollasurf.org/gblpac.html"

Andrew

 

[russ_watters]

Another important reason why I dislike ideas like tidal power is they are a distraction from solutions that actually are viable. This very example was provided as a counter to the absolutely correct claim that nuclear power must make up the vast majority of the solution to fossil fuel power. Not only is just plain wrong to assert that tidal power could make a substantial impact (given what is currently known), it is a dangerous distraction in a time when we need to be focused. Most people consider the reduction or elimination of fossil fuels to be an issue of extreme importance. But if they see and believe that there is a possibility that something like wave power could have a big impact, it could distract them away from supporting nuclear power, delaying the real solution.

 

[Feliks]

... Most people consider the reduction or elimination of fossil fuels to be an issue of extreme importance. But if they see and believe that there is a possibility that something like wave power could have a big impact, it could distract them away from supporting nuclear power, delaying the real solution.

Choosing energy solutions should not depend on faith, but from a very rational economic choices, and ensure safety.

Fortunately, people can still create new solutions that could be better than traditional solutions.

Here are some other new solutions are proposed:
Version at the deep end

Version of the shallow water (my propose half- rotate pump)

For achievement in such this collecting tube of flow 1 m3/sec and 10 bar , requirement 12 pump wanted for transport water on according to following specification 100 m height too reservoir.

Pump reconciles, for simplification about normal piston, should have 0,6 m diameter, and 3 m of height. During average jump of rippling 2 m, it will give during one cycle for composite tube 0,5 m3 water pushed (S= 28 dcm2 H= 20 dcm (2 meter) = 560 dcm3 (liter). For set up flow 1 m3, TWO such pumps should pump for collecting tube.
Taking into consideration that the peak of wave used to the work is coming every 6 seconds one should multiply the score through 6
For proper fabrication of pressure on exit of pump ( set up 10 bar ), wanted proper swimmer is.
There is simple account surface of piston of pump will together page (S) x 100 surface of swimmer.
In my example, surface of piston of pump it 28 dcm2, it signifies that swimmer)should have 2800 dcm2. In order to swimmer had such surfaces, it must have 20 m diameter, and definitely 1 m of height. It needs one kit about 12 pumps 12 swimmers 20 m each diameter, or about dimension one swimmer 12 x28 m2= 336 m2.

For behaviour some reasonable spans, it is possible to accept, that for such array for production capacity 1 m3/sec 10 bar, wanted near 700 m2 place rippling sea .

Need for continuous supplying tank for power station theoretically 700 m3/s (716 MW , 100 m height ) requirement 700 x 700m2 = 490000 m2 rippling sea . It is theoretically only 700 m x 700 m !, when 2 m average heights of waves.


Here, mathematical enumeration same only:

To 1m3/ sec
1 m^3/sec 10 bar(H=100m ), 600 mm diameter pipe and piston pump, S= 28 dcm2 Hwave= 20 dcm (2 meter) = 560 dcm3 (litre) for 1 m3 need 2 piece . but period are 6 sec , sum 6x 2 = 12 piece pump .

S pump= 28 dcm2 , 10 bar, F =28 T, Hfloat >1m, S float ~~=2800 dcm2 (28 m2) , D float =~~20m
12 piece x28m2 =336 m2 ~~ =100m x 7m using area =700 m2

700 MW (700 m3/sec), H=100m
700 m2 x 700 MW = 350000 m2 . ~~700m x 700m area of wave with float

Maybe today people are and what they consider the recording and reproducing sound, then the best solution is Edisons Phonograph.

Regards Andrew

 

[mheslep]

It seems to me that, especially given the recent short lived and failed attempts of actual wave/tide energy projects, the interesting engineering results lie not in demonstrating the energy output of a given scheme, no matter how elegant and clever. Instead, the interesting results would be in calculating the inevitably high shears and moments on the structure, the chemical affects from salt water, and demonstrating how such a design can tolerate these adverse impacts over long periods of time, using economically viable construction techniques.

 

[Feliks]

It seems to me that, especially given the recent short lived and failed attempts of actual wave/tide energy projects, the interesting engineering results lie not in demonstrating the energy output of a given scheme, no matter how elegant and clever. Instead, the interesting results would be in calculating the inevitably high shears and moments on the structure, the chemical affects from salt water, and demonstrating how such a design can tolerate these adverse impacts over long periods of time, using economically viable construction techniques.

The chemical affects from salt water -Now we live in the age of polyvinylchloride PVC
The maximum pressure can not exceed 10 bars, which corresponds to a pressure of water at home. Thus, for most of the elements you can use PVC.


In addition, all ships in the world with regóły swim in salt water and somehow cope.

Also, tanks can be built on the very edge of the sea, przz what can be designed with a smaller safety factor, because if failure of the water will run down a short path to the sea. If there will not allow people to stay, nothing anyone can, even during high-accident

And started all of my oscillating dynamo in which the oscillations are due to the use of unidirectional semiconductor diode meets
Here the role of the diode valve to go with a spring water valves .
Now you can see the very first ideas oscillatory dynamo:
background: http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/ph/p/id/133#toc1"

This time the mechanic replaced the electronics

Regards Andrew

 

[mheslep]

The chemical affects from salt water -Now we live in the age of polyvinylchloride PVC
The maximum pressure can not exceed 10 bars, which corresponds to a pressure of water at home. Thus, for most of the elements you can use PVC.

Is the device designed to be rigidly attached to the sea floor? If so what is the maximum depth? What's roughly the maximum sheer moment on the main float-piston shaft? What material must be used to withstand that sheer?

In addition, all ships in the world with regóły swim in salt water and somehow cope.

Do you think all the ocean going ship hulls could also be made from PVC?

The 'somehow' includes drydocking ships and resurfacing their hulls, which also mostly don't have exposed moving parts. How easy is that to do (remove and service) with this device that is apparently rigidly anchored to the the sea floor? That degree of difficulty is going to matter, as the device's maintenance costs must be balanced against its output. From some of the wave devices listed above in this thread and on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_power#Modern_technology", a single wave-float pump might be on the order of 100KW with at most a capacity factor of ~40%. Such a device produces approximately $32K worth of electricity per year, and its annual maintenance budget (removal and towed back to shore? resurfaced on location?) must be a fraction of that output.

 

[Feliks]

Is the device designed to be rigidly attached to the sea floor? If so what is the maximum depth? What's roughly the maximum sheer moment on the main float-piston shaft? What material must be used to withstand that sheer?

Do you think all the ocean going ship hulls could also be made from PVC?
....

You may need to ask the Japanese how they have managed to corrosion?
http://www.new4stroke.com/salt%20water%20pumped%20storage.pdf"

If you want answers to all these questions, you probably need to open a new new academic department.And then you can better edit the Wikipedia .

Until then, with the same idea as myself two years ago, came the Swiss firm, and produced a mobile phone, you do not have to be loaded.
Just hang on a tree growing near you some of these phones and you will have when it will be a little nod from the wind electricity for household
http://www.uncells.com/"

Regards Andrew

 

[mheslep]

You may need to ask the Japanese how they have managed to corrosion?
http://www.new4stroke.com/salt%20water%20pumped%20storage.pdf"

See that's the point, the significance of that article is in the saltwater aspect; there's nothing new about fresh water pumped storage. That pumped storage facility is 31 MW per pump; i.e. it has a relatively high power density. Thus they can afford an expensive corrosion prevention program: stainless or other special steels, active cathodic protection from an external electrical source, and possibly a full time maintenance crew continuously resurfacing the sea side of the system, just as is done for bridges like San Francisco's Golden Gate. These wave energy systems exhibit low power density per device; i.e. it appears some major innovation is required to economically maintain a salt water offshore 31 KW device. Perhaps it can be done, I don't know; certainly the problem is not trivial.

If you want answers to all these questions, you probably need to open a new new academic department.And then you can better edit the Wikipedia .

That's why these are the interesting questions(dealing with the marine environment).

 

[AlexES16]

Should i go for ME or EE if i want to work with renewable energy? or maybe both? I really would like to be both. I really want to know how energy is produced and how to make it better.

 

[mheslep]

Should i go for ME or EE if i want to work with renewable energy? or maybe both? I really would like to be both. I really want to know how energy is produced and how to make it better.

Probably English lit, fiction that is, would be best.

Seriously, probably depends on the actual type. Include chemical engineering and molecular biology in the list for the biofuels, and materials science might also be a useful gateway for solar PV. Many of the oil and gas companies seem to be betting large amounts on renewables, so even entering one of them with a petroleum (or chemical) degree and then switching over might be a plan.

 

[Feliks]

That's why these are the interesting questions(dealing with the marine environment).

and some new issue for the new Department:

Mutation pendulum dynamo

Or magnet tooth plate

[URL]http://www.new4stroke.com/pendulum300.gif[/URL]

So far we exploited the energy arising with the help of the pendulum only for stopping him.
Clik on picture, see animation.
http://ultra.ap.krakow.pl/~ogar/elektromagnetyzm/wahado_waltenhofena.html"

It is a next mutation of the swaying pendulum around it pivot :

[URL]http://www.new4stroke.com/caly400.gif[/URL]

And it is a conception of containing inside box a dozen or so of such pendulums giving the electricity under the influence of moving. Of course completely hermetically sealed box.


[URL]http://www.new4stroke.com/oceanwavve.jpg[/URL]

Principe oscillating disc dynamo (pendulum)

[URL]http://www.new4stroke.com/redpin.jpg[/URL]

[URL]http://www.new4stroke.com/view%20dynamo.jpg[/URL]

[URL]http://www.new4stroke.com/pendulum%20dynamo.jpg[/URL]


Regards Andrew

 

[AlexES16]

Probably English lit, fiction that is, would be best.

Seriously, probably depends on the actual type. Include chemical engineering and molecular biology in the list for the biofuels, and materials science might also be a useful gateway for solar PV. Many of the oil and gas companies seem to be betting large amounts on renewables, so even entering one of them with a petroleum (or chemical) degree and then switching over might be a plan.

Hhahaha the things is i suck in chemistry xD but love math and physics.

 

[brainstorm]

The ironic thing about conservation approaches is that they defy the inverse logic of modernization where technology increases energy-efficiency while consumption-culture intensifies to deplete the surplus. To conserve at the consumption level means moving in the direction of so-called "primitive" people who often use no vehicle, have no climate control besides fire when it's cold, rely very little on commodity shipping, etc. These "primitive" cultures are more energy efficient but they defy the western sense of entitlement to consume more in reward for progress.

The interesting sequel to this discussion would occur after people in the developed world would lower their per capital consumption to match those in the developing world. At that point, we could start talking about ways to increase the energy-efficiency of those processes that supplied large numbers of people with certain basic commodities. That would, in effect, achieve a level of global energy consumption that would be completely sustainable with renewable sources.

For example, a clothing factory could be streamlined by changing clothing designs. Furniture production or building architecture could be streamlined by designing plans that relied on less processed wood and other materials. Eventually, the biggest issue would be heating in cold climates, I believe. This would be solved by creating relatively compact spaces of rest and clothing that would allow people to keep warm with a moderate amount of physical activity. Another option might be for people to migrate by foot each fall to warmer climates for the winter. That may sound ridiculous, but if it could be made economically feasible, it would reduce energy consumption to practically nothing.

 

[Astronuc]

Wind Turbine Projects Run Into Resistance
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/business/energy-environment/27radar.htm

Moving turbine blades can be indistinguishable from airplanes on many radar systems, and they can even cause blackout zones in which planes disappear from radar entirely. Clusters of wind turbines, which can reach as high as 400 feet, look very similar to storm activity on weather radar, making it harder for air traffic controllers to give accurate weather information to pilots.

Although the military says no serious incidents have yet occurred because of the interference, the wind turbines pose an unacceptable risk to training, testing and national security in certain regions, Dr. Dorothy Robyn, deputy under secretary of defense, recently told a House Armed Services subcommittee.
. . . .

Beware of unintended consequences!

 

[Topher925]

Wind Turbine Projects Run Into Resistance
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/business/energy-environment/27radar.htm

Sounds like a bunch of right-wing nonsense to me. All of the issues mentioned can be easily overcome by just knowing where the wind turbines are. This sounds a lot like the "We need to stop making hybrid cars because blind people can't hear them" argument.

 

[mheslep]

Sounds like a bunch of right-wing nonsense to me.

Do you believe the source above, Dr. Dorothy Robyn, current deputy under secretary of defense, is a big right wing nutter?

All of the issues mentioned can be easily overcome by just knowing where the wind turbines are.

Location knowledge doesn't trivialize the problem.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=wind...adar+inter&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=728ef3750cf3a29c

 

[brainstorm]

Sounds like a bunch of right-wing nonsense to me. All of the issues mentioned can be easily overcome by just knowing where the wind turbines are. This sounds a lot like the "We need to stop making hybrid cars because blind people can't hear them" argument.

Blind people can't hear hybrid cars? Maybe they need bigger bass speakers.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Make the wind turbines stealthy.

 

[russ_watters]

Blind people can't hear hybrid cars? Maybe they need bigger bass speakers.

That is one potential solution, yes.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=are-hybrid-cars-too-quiet

 

[Topher925]

Found this seminar thing from bill gates and thought it was worth sharing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JaF-fq2Zn7I&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JaF-fq2Zn7I&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[brainstorm]

Found this seminar thing from bill gates and thought it was worth sharing.

Very inspirational speech. CO2=PxSxExC: nice clarity. The only thing I wonder is why do these kind of speeches always build up to suggesting more spending? Why doesn't anyone ever base their visions of progress on the idea that necessity will breed innovation? It seems to me that every time loads of money get thrown at change, the result is more spending on the status quo. How much money was invested in hydrogen and electric cars before it all culminated in cash4clunkers? How much has been spent on improving the energy efficiency of buildings and what has changed in terms of climate control practices? I would have expected many elegant designs for open-air work and consumption spaces. I would have expected to see more light vehicles with sun/rain canopies but no a/c. I would have expected to see cooperation between employers and city planners to move employers and employees closer together to promote pedestrian commuting. How much stimulus money does it take to initiate these kinds of innovations? Or is the truth that the stimulus was only ever intended to maintain cash flows at levels that would preserve the status quo of paying current utility costs, maintaining current machinery, paying off current mortgages, and renovating current infrastructure for current commuting patterns?

 

[OmCheeto]

Found this seminar thing from bill gates and thought it was worth sharing.

Never heard of a U-238 reactor before.

I'll check it out and get back to you.

(ten seconds later)

Oops. Never mind. Wiki says it's true:

U-238 can, however, be used as a source material for creating plutonium-239, which can in turn be used as nuclear fuel. Breeder reactors carry out such a process of transmutation to convert the fertile isotope U-238 into fissile Pu-239. It has been estimated that there is anywhere from 10,000 to five billion years worth of U-238 for use in these power plants. Breeder technology has been used in several experimental nuclear reactors.

I hate that Gates guy.

I hope his kids kick him in the shins when he gets older, or twist his nipples real hard when he's sleeping.

 

[brainstorm]

I hate that Gates guy.

I hate him for giving so much money away to people who couldn't give a damn about what he's saying. Bill, you're so right about everything but those people just sit and listen to you talk about zero CO2 so they can get your money to go buy more oil, coal, gas, and other high-energy products.

I would love to see him stand there and talk about zero emissions and then say that he's going to take the first step by not letting a penny of his fortune get into anyone's hands who uses any fossil fuel in any way. See if there's any applause after he says that.

 

[Topher925]

How can you hate Bill Gates? He created the Windows OS and is the worlds greatest philanthropist. Everything he does these days is to increase the quality of life for man kind.

 

[OmCheeto]

How can you hate Bill Gates? He created the Windows OS and is the worlds greatest philanthropist. Everything he does these days is to increase the quality of life for man kind.

But that has nothing to do with fixing the US Energy Crisis does it. I think what I hate more is that a 250cc gas powered car won the automotive x-prize just the other day.

Five million dollars!

Now that, I hate way more than Gates.

Gates is more a jealous kind of hate. I was a ML coder back in his day. Those were the days. I think I wrote over 2000 programs in a 3 year period.

Actually, given a year, and about $100k, I could kick http://www.edison2.com/" 's derriere too. Maybe I hate them both equally.

sigh...

 

[mheslep]

Found this seminar thing from bill gates and thought it was worth sharing.

Gates is referring to a Traveling Wave Reactor. There are several threads e.g:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2607653&postcount=24

and

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/files/TerraPowerGilleland.pdf

 

[OmCheeto]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/opinion/26friedman.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=electric car china&st=cse"
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
September 25, 2010
The New York Times
The Opinion Pages
...
Beijing just announced that it was providing $15 billion in seed money for the country’s leading auto and battery companies to create an electric car industry, starting in 20 pilot cities. In essence, China Inc. just named its dream team of 16-state-owned enterprises to move China off oil and into the next industrial growth engine: electric cars.
...
Europe is using $7-a-gallon gasoline to stimulate the market for electric cars; China is using $5-a-gallon and naming electric cars as one of the industrial pillars for its five-year growth plan. And America? President Obama has directed stimulus money at electric cars, but he is unwilling to do the one thing that would create the sustained consumer pull required to grow an electric car industry here: raise taxes on gasoline.

Bill Clinton mentioned something similar regarding this, which I think I didn't quite relay properly the other day, and had https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2896073&postcount=122":

...the rest of the stimulus money that's going to be spent now, it's all the clean energy money. And we can dominate that, or be left in the dust,...
China spent twice as much money as we did last year on clean energy technology.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-16-2010/bill-clinton-pt--2"

 

[Topher925]

There's a good reason why Obama hasn't raised taxes on gas, and its because people would go absolutely ape @#$% over it. Just look at how much aggression has been created by the Bush tax cuts ending. If Obama was to enforce an increase cost in gasoline the right wing republicans along with that whole "tea party" movement would tear down the white house.

I think its a very good idea though. Increase the cost of gasoline to help fund alternative energy development and maybe do it with providing a tax waiver for the poor. To bad us Americans don't know what's good for us.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

There's a good reason why Obama hasn't raised taxes on gas, and its because people would go absolutely ape @#$% over it. Just look at how much aggression has been created by the Bush tax cuts ending. If Obama was to enforce an increase cost in gasoline the right wing republicans along with that whole "tea party" movement would tear down the white house.

I think its a very good idea though. Increase the cost of gasoline to help fund alternative energy development and maybe do it with providing a tax waiver for the poor. To bad us Americans don't know what's good for us.

Either we do it strategically, in a controlled manner, to foster alternatives and end our reliance on oil, or we wait until the market does it for us, without controls, and live with the consequences of an avoidable disaster.

But you are right, the Republicans and tea partiers will have no part of it.

 

[Topher925]

Either we do it strategically, in a controlled manner, to foster alternatives and end our reliance on oil, or we wait until the market does it for us, without controls, and live with the consequences of an avoidable disaster.

My money's on the latter.

 

[mheslep]

There's a good reason why Obama hasn't raised taxes on gas, and its because people would go absolutely ape @#$% over it. Just look at how much aggression has been created by the Bush tax cuts ending. If Obama was to enforce an increase cost in gasoline the right wing republicans along with that whole "tea party" movement would tear down the white house.

I think its a very good idea though. Increase the cost of gasoline to help fund alternative energy development and maybe do it with providing a tax waiver for the poor. To bad us Americans don't know what's good for us.

It might fly with an exact revenue match in income tax reduction, where it could be sold with the pitch - save gas and you are ahead of where you were before the tax. Would have flown already I expect, except for the exceptional impact on large, sparsely populated states where its nothing to drive your F150 50mi to work every day.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

Why can't you just invent a better alternative to compete against gasoline powered transportation, rather than raise taxes to "research alternatives"?

I've got a better idea: give me the option to reroute my social security, medicare, and welfare taxes into alternative energy research. I'll go for that in an instant.

 

[Topher925]

Why can't you just invent a better alternative to compete against gasoline powered transportation, rather than raise taxes to "research alternatives"?

Why can't we just invent a perpetual motion machine that makes more energy than it consumes. If it were possible to wave a magic wand and instantly create an entirely new eco-friendly infrastructure out of no where that was just as economical as gasoline then there wouldn't be an energy crisis in the first place.

I've got a better idea: give me the option to reroute my social security, medicare, and welfare taxes into alternative energy research. I'll go for that in an instant.

I think we all would. Unfortunately routing money from programs that can't even sustain themselves financially to another one isn't a very wise course of action.