Gravity fed electrical generation system

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Technology > Gravity fed electrical generation system > Page 10

Page 10 of 16

08-05-2019 19:04
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	dehammer wrote: No, I'm a person that lives in the real world. Everyone lives in the real world, dumbass. dehammer wrote: I do not have the money to hire people to do the work. Get it, whiner. dehammer wrote: I never asked for sympathy, nor do I accept it. Lie. You are asking for sympathy even now, whiner. dehammer wrote: As I have said, the entire point of this is that people that are capable could do it if they really thought that the future of the human race depended on them reducing co2 emissions. Perpetual motion machines do not reduce CO2. There is no need to reduce CO2. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-05-2019 19:06
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	Unlike some here, I have never pretended I was perfect. I do try to understand others which you obviously have no interest in doing.
08-05-2019 21:53
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	dehammer wrote: Unlike some here, I have never pretended I was perfect. I do try to understand others which you obviously have no interest in doing. Lie. I have told you the theories of science you are ignoring and why. Others have filled you in on some of the engineering problems as well. You have NO interest in trying to understand anyone else. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
08-05-2019 22:29
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	Sure, sure.
08-05-2019 22:42
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	dehammer wrote: Sure, sure. Back to trolling again I see. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

08-05-2019 23:11
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	When you deal with a troll....
09-05-2019 02:14
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	dehammer wrote: When you deal with a troll.... What's a "troll"? Oh, wait! This just in ... From the MANUAL Denier or Troll: noun Non-believer; anyone who does not accept Climate Science or who is even willing to express opinions that differ from the Marxist party line. Deniers and Trolls are analogous to "orcs" in the Lord of the Rings. I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
09-05-2019 02:32
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	Sorry, but your religious text is wrong. this is the definition of a troll. A person whose sole purpose in life is to seek out people to argue with on the internet over extremely trivial issues. Such arguments can happen on blogs, Facebook, Myspace and a host of others. see "IBdaMann" or "Into the night" for examples
09-05-2019 02:50
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	dehammer wrote: Sorry, but your religious text is wrong. this is the definition of a troll. A person whose sole purpose in life is to seek out people to argue with on the internet over extremely trivial issues. Such arguments can happen on blogs, Facebook, Myspace and a host of others. see "IBdaMann" or "Into the night" for examples Religion isn't a trivial issue. Too bad you think it is. Science isn't a trivial issue. Too bad you think it is. Mathematics isn't a trivial issue. Too bad you think it is. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 09-05-2019 02:51
09-05-2019 02:57
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	Trolls like you can make anything trivial. We could be talking about saving the world and humanity, and you would trivialize it.
09-05-2019 03:11
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	dehammer wrote: Trolls like you can make anything trivial. We could be talking about saving the world and humanity, and you would trivialize it. Inversion fallacy, troll. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
09-05-2019 03:31
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	I guess you cant discuss the science of this idea because you are too much a troll and all you can do is throw out words as if it has meaning. Its nothing more than your leucocholy for magniloquent grandiloquentry.
09-05-2019 03:39
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	dehammer wrote: I guess you cant discuss the science of this idea because you are too much a troll and all you can do is throw out words as if it has meaning. Its nothing more than your leucocholy for magniloquent grandiloquentry. Inversion fallacy, troll. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
09-05-2019 03:46
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	IBdaMann wrote: dehammer wrote: When you deal with a troll.... What's a "troll"? Oh, wait! This just in ... From the MANUAL Denier or Troll: noun Non-believer; anyone who does not accept Climate Science or who is even willing to express opinions that differ from the Marxist party line. Deniers and Trolls are analogous to "orcs" in the Lord of the Rings. Shame on you!!! Orcs are people to.
09-05-2019 04:11
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	certainly more intelligent than certain internet trolls you an I know on this site.

09-05-2019 05:48
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	dehammer wrote: certainly more intelligent than certain internet trolls you an I know on this site. I happen to like Isn't and IBNot DaMann. I just wish they knew the difference between Using the formula. P = ε σ A T4 Where. σ = Stefan-Boltzmann Constant = 5.67 × 10−8 W/m2 K4 ε = Emissivity. A = Surface Area. T = Temperature. P = Radiation Energy and KE = 3/2kT. I mean seriously, they just don't get it. It can be frustrating but is no need for me to hate on them. They're like orcs. They're people too
09-05-2019 05:53
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	How do you do the smileys? Ill take your word for them being human. Edited on 09-05-2019 05:54
09-05-2019 06:33
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	dehammer wrote: How do you do the smileys? Ill take your word for them being human. Just look below the window for writing something in. You don't get it do you? It'd be boring if everyone agreed with each other. You could say that a degradation of thought would occur because no one would be challenged. And with me, if anyone tried mocking me by calling them IBNotDaMann and Isn't, I'd probably be offended. To educate you, "Is" and "Isn't" are the same things. Is the glass half full, half empty or just stoned? It's not personal. Debate is good. Like with the thread I started, how to educate people about environmentalism? And in here I am public enemy #1 because I'm an environmentalist. I mean they'd like me more if I thought that CO2 was causing global warming. Kind of why I get along with them. Fökked up, isn't it? Thing is dehammer, that's life.
09-05-2019 08:25
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	James___ wrote: IBdaMann wrote: dehammer wrote: When you deal with a troll.... What's a "troll"? Oh, wait! This just in ... From the MANUAL Denier or Troll: noun Non-believer; anyone who does not accept Climate Science or who is even willing to express opinions that differ from the Marxist party line. Deniers and Trolls are analogous to "orcs" in the Lord of the Rings. Shame on you!!! Orcs are people to. People to what? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
09-05-2019 08:31
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: IBdaMann wrote: dehammer wrote: When you deal with a troll.... What's a "troll"? Oh, wait! This just in ... From the MANUAL Denier or Troll: noun Non-believer; anyone who does not accept Climate Science or who is even willing to express opinions that differ from the Marxist party line. Deniers and Trolls are analogous to "orcs" in the Lord of the Rings. Shame on you!!! Orcs are people to. People to what? They "is" as you "is". We have yet to define what "is" is.
09-05-2019 09:03
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message.
10-05-2019 22:23
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost.
10-05-2019 22:51
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. Steam that is not contained is at atmospheric pressure, even superheated steam. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 10-05-2019 22:52
10-05-2019 23:29
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. Steam that is not contained is at atmospheric pressure, even superheated steam. https://www.researchgate.net/post/1_Litre_of_Water_produces_how_much_litre_of_steam_at_5_bar_pressure_Kindly_suggest_the_formula_to_claculate It might be interesting to see if a diagram could be made showing if a surplus of energy could be be realized. The efficiency of the electroltzer would need to be factored in as well. Kind of why platinum is preferred. It's possible that a more economical electrolysis can be realized but without a system that it would work with then there wouldn't be much interest in it.
11-05-2019 00:02
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. Steam that is not contained is at atmospheric pressure, even superheated steam. https://www.researchgate.net/post/1_Litre_of_Water_produces_how_much_litre_of_steam_at_5_bar_pressure_Kindly_suggest_the_formula_to_claculate It might be interesting to see if a diagram could be made showing if a surplus of energy could be be realized. The efficiency of the electroltzer would need to be factored in as well. Kind of why platinum is preferred. It's possible that a more economical electrolysis can be realized but without a system that it would work with then there wouldn't be much interest in it. Electrolysis doesn't have an efficiency rating. It takes 237kJ to split 1 mole of water into hydrogen and oxygen. Any metal can be used as the electrodes. I use copper for mine. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2019 00:13
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. Steam that is not contained is at atmospheric pressure, even superheated steam. https://www.researchgate.net/post/1_Litre_of_Water_produces_how_much_litre_of_steam_at_5_bar_pressure_Kindly_suggest_the_formula_to_claculate It might be interesting to see if a diagram could be made showing if a surplus of energy could be be realized. The efficiency of the electroltzer would need to be factored in as well. Kind of why platinum is preferred. It's possible that a more economical electrolysis can be realized but without a system that it would work with then there wouldn't be much interest in it. Electrolysis doesn't have an efficiency rating. It takes 237kJ to split 1 mole of water into hydrogen and oxygen. Any metal can be used as the electrodes. I use copper for mine. I get it Isn't. You're like the Taliban or Hamas. How delicious. You Americans are ingenious.
11-05-2019 01:05
Into the Night★★★★★ (21588)	James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. Steam that is not contained is at atmospheric pressure, even superheated steam. https://www.researchgate.net/post/1_Litre_of_Water_produces_how_much_litre_of_steam_at_5_bar_pressure_Kindly_suggest_the_formula_to_claculate It might be interesting to see if a diagram could be made showing if a surplus of energy could be be realized. The efficiency of the electroltzer would need to be factored in as well. Kind of why platinum is preferred. It's possible that a more economical electrolysis can be realized but without a system that it would work with then there wouldn't be much interest in it. Electrolysis doesn't have an efficiency rating. It takes 237kJ to split 1 mole of water into hydrogen and oxygen. Any metal can be used as the electrodes. I use copper for mine. I get it Isn't. You're like the Taliban or Hamas. How delicious. You Americans are ingenious. That doesn't even make sense. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
11-05-2019 01:22
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. What I envision was having the steam sent past Tesla turbines. This would remove a consider amount of the extra energy lowering both the pressure and the heat.
11-05-2019 01:28
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	James___ wrote: The efficiency of the electroltzer would need to be factored in as well. From what I was reading nickel/iron is about 60%-80% efficient. That's the best for the money I could find.
11-05-2019 01:58
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. Steam that is not contained is at atmospheric pressure, even superheated steam. https://www.researchgate.net/post/1_Litre_of_Water_produces_how_much_litre_of_steam_at_5_bar_pressure_Kindly_suggest_the_formula_to_claculate It might be interesting to see if a diagram could be made showing if a surplus of energy could be be realized. The efficiency of the electroltzer would need to be factored in as well. Kind of why platinum is preferred. It's possible that a more economical electrolysis can be realized but without a system that it would work with then there wouldn't be much interest in it. Electrolysis doesn't have an efficiency rating. It takes 237kJ to split 1 mole of water into hydrogen and oxygen. Any metal can be used as the electrodes. I use copper for mine. I get it Isn't. You're like the Taliban or Hamas. How delicious. You Americans are ingenious. That doesn't even make sense. You'e a disruptive force because you want things to be the way you want.

11-05-2019 02:32
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	dehammer wrote: James___ wrote: The efficiency of the electroltzer would need to be factored in as well. From what I was reading nickel/iron is about 60%-80% efficient. That's the best for the money I could find. This research would tend to disagree with you. Water electrolysis has not yet established itself as a method for the production of hydrogen. Too much energy is lost in the process. Researchers have now doubled the efficiency of the reaction. https://phys.org/news/2016-03-efficiency-electrolysis.html And then there's this, they also mention the doubling in the efficiency of producing hydrogen; Event Complex Aberdeen (TECA) to Feature UK's Largest Hydrogen Fuel Cell Installation https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/event-complex-aberdeen-teca-to-feature-uks-largest-hydrogen-fuel-cell-installation/ Condensing the steam generated is a novel idea but you don't seem to have any understanding of what you're proposing. Can't you at least draw a diagram on a piece of paper with a pencil and a ruler? Then you could look at each part of the system and what each one requires. The invention that was posted, you said 1,000 feet straight up. Not going to happen. If you look at what I posted and this as well https://www.iter.org/, you need to take some interest in ideas that you want to promote. You and ITN talked about the real world, how much heat is lost when steam powers a turbine? It's temperature entering the turbine and it's exhaust temperature? Inlet and outlet pressure? That would be to start with. There is this; https://www.ee.co.za/article/co-generation-hybrid-fuel-cell-gas-turbine-systems.html This last part shows that if there's a way to remove the heat from the exhaust of a fuel cell, then that could be something that makes a difference. And as I mentioned, putting something 150 feet down into the ground could be worth it if it's a cost effective source of energy. This is funny in a way because I've been working on a way to cool the exhaust of a coal fired power plant. That has to wait though because it's highly technical and I'd need to show I know something first.
11-05-2019 03:42
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	dehammer wrote: James___ wrote: dehammer wrote: I see the smileys, but cant put one in the message. With this invention, what type of cooling system will be used? I think with fuel cells that their exhaust is dumped into the atmosphere. For what you're talking about, 1000° F. might be the exhaust temp. of it's exhaust. If you know anything about steam turbines, super heated steam is also about 1000° F. It's pressure can be as little as 600 psi or as much as 1,200 psi and will use a condenser and air ejector. With nuclear power plants, many will use a pass through heat exchanger. This simply means that the waste heat is moved into the atmosphere as air passes through the heat exchanger. In the posted invention I saw none of these things. If a height of over, say, 150 - 200 feet I doubt anyone would be interested. With that said, it'd probably be best to put the electroltzer and hydro blade buried in the ground. If there was catastrophic failure then all that might happen is that a fireball would be shot up into the atmosphere. Hydrogen can be explosive. And as I said, the invention posted didn't include any information that could allow it to work. There's other things like heating water in the ground to preheat the membrane where the hydrogen is "burned" could save on some cost. What I envision was having the steam sent past Tesla turbines. This would remove a consider amount of the extra energy lowering both the pressure and the heat. when steam exits the turbine, what will it's temperature be? This calculator is for calculating the energy in steam at a given pressure. https://www.tlv.com/global/US/calculator/steam-table-pressure.html and if the hydrogen and oxygen derived from electrolysis is used to "burn" the hydrogen then we're simulating a rocket powered by burning hydrogen. http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=1617 It seems as most of what you want is already in the works. This basically leaves "How to cool the exhaust gases?". https://www.ge.com/reports/hydrogen-generation-gas-turbines-can-run-abundant-element-universe/ With me, in the future I hope to work on a better solar panel. I need to demonstrate that I know something about physics then. A better solar panel might allow for condensing water vapour. Said solar panel might also help to clean up coal fired power plants. Cooling the exhaust would require them to use less fossil fuels and cooler emissions would be cheaper to filter. Then again I'd also like to improve the efficiency of wind turbines. Have to understand current theory and application of which I am familiar with them. I've taken the time to do my homework. edited to add; I did mention about Hackaday's contest next year. I have what might be a fairly simple idea that no one is doing. And if it works, then it would be something that would help humanity. And am I familiar with seawater desalination? Yes I am. With hackaday, I would be saying let's try something different of which the principal has been observed in engineering/physics. Edited on 11-05-2019 03:53
11-05-2019 05:00
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	The only way to know any of that would be to build test facilities. You are expecting me to give you the results before the first trial test are done. For the smaller units I could build, the best way would be to use a small motor such as they use on lawn mowers. The mower would run a generator, while the exhaust would go though the tesla turbine to gain a small addition electricity as well as reducing the temperature to a level that could be liquid.
11-05-2019 05:10
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	@All, This is for fun, okay? What would allow for copper molecules covering a platinum electrode allow for the efficiency of they hydrogen generation process to be doubled? We all now that copper is an excellent conductor of electricity which consists of electrons, right? So how does platinum fit into all of this? Platinum is Pt #78 on the periodic elemental table. When mixed with alminum it makes platinum-alumnide. That is a coating used on gas turbines to protect the rotors from high temperatures. And we all know that it's a beotch to weld aluminium because of it's ability to dissipate heat, right? Then platinum would be to harden aluminium. This would create a strong but heat resistant coating because of the combined properties of both platinum and aluminium. Basically when copper is used as a coating on platinum it acts as a heat shield. The waste heat that platinum emits might be converted into more electrons. Electrons are considered to have a wave/particle duality. This all goes back to E = hf, Planck's constant for black body radiation. And with a thin coating of copper then that becomes resistance relative to the conductivity potential of copper.
11-05-2019 07:07
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	Copper is reactive, oxidizes, corrodes, doesn't conduct so well. Bet you thought insulation was to keep you from getting shocked...
11-05-2019 07:23
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: Copper is reactive, oxidizes, corrodes, doesn't conduct so well. Bet you thought insulation was to keep you from getting shocked... And yet ALL of my household wiring is copper. Just another Fun Fact. Water doesn't conduct electricity. The funny part is that people believe that it actually does. I'll give you the answer. It's the impurities in water that conducts electricity. If water is purified using reverse osmosis, you can stand in it and someone could drop a live electrical wire into it and nothing would happen. Wouldn't that be the way to scare someone? Let them think they're going to be electrocuted when nothing can happen? I bet they'd crap their pants over that one! And if you're wondering, this all comes back to transferring electrons. H2O simply doesn't allow for it when it's all about H2O. And Harvey, this actually has something to do with sea water desalination. You don't know that in water that NaCl becomes two distinct elements which maintains an ionic association? Right? This is why people can't be electrocuted in water when electricity passes through it. It's nothing personal Harvey. People just don't find this stuff interesting. For me it'd be like saying some God created a universe but had no clue. These people are all Romanians and are probably from Iasli, Romania. I help to support a few musicians through Patreon and with this group the lead singer is Andreea Munteanu and the guy with the black hair that looks like Slash is Andrei Cerbu. Andrei has won awards internationally for playing the guitar while Andreea has an absolutely amazing voice. If you listen to some of their music, I think you'll understand why I like them. It's not rocket science. Okay? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uqf48mTPZyI I'm going to link some songs by Andreea and Andrei. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtiIFiXNoIQ There is one gal I think of when I hear this song; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFZGdQN6cW8 And with this, there is one gal that knows that i wonder if we could be like Andreea and Andrei. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6nDX0qh49k Edited on 11-05-2019 07:40
11-05-2019 16:05
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	James___ wrote: It's the impurities in water that conducts electricity. Absolutely correct. This is the origin of the word "electrolytes." (notice that I didn't write "what it has evolved to mean.") James___ wrote: If water is purified using reverse osmosis, you can stand in it and someone could drop a live electrical wire into it and nothing would happen. ... except that by standing in the water one would be introducing large amounts of impurities. Wouldn't that be the way to ruin a practical joke on someone, i.e. think nothing is going to happen because the water has been purified prior to dropping in the electrical wire? I bet they'd crap their pants over that one! I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-05-2019 17:03
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	Something I have been wondering about is the proper shape of the electrodes. IF the gas is released at the surface, would it be better to have a coil shape to have larger amount of surface? A cone? a pyramid shape? Would "hair" (many straight wires in close position) be best?
11-05-2019 17:37
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	Pure water is a poor conductor, but you can pass current through it. It's not the voltage that causes the shock, it's how much current that flows through the skin. Copper isn't the best conductor either, it's just cheap, plentiful, and easy to form into wire. Not sure what gypsy music has to do with all this, except maybe the folk that listen to it, tend to play it obnoxiously loud, so everybody can enjoy it in the neighborhood. Electrolysis is used for several other things, besides just splitting water. You can deposit a thin layer of one metal over another (plating). You can use it to remove layers of oxidation and corrosion from metals as well, few chemical reactions can be started/controlled with it as also. Same basic process, just depends on the voltage, current, and materials used. You can throw pretty much anything together, and achieve some results, as a demonstration, short term solution. If you want keep using the setup for a while, you need to chose your materials, voltage, and current carefully. The electrolyte and concentration also has a lot to do with how long your electrodes will last. Might consider looking up the Stanley Meyers fuel cell. He was a scamster, but he got a lot of people believing, that just couldn't let go. Been a lot of work, trying to produce fuel from water, using electricity. The basic belief, is that if they can improve the fuel cell, they could run their car entirely with water.
11-05-2019 18:32
dehammer ★★★☆☆ (480)	I saw another system other than the one you pointed to, but I cant find it any more. They guy build his car himself and no one noticed how unusual his frame was, at least not until he disappeared with a lot of money. He had created the frame to act as capacitor. Therefore, when he drove it, it appeared to work since he was willing to show that the battery could not hold as much electricity as was needed for the system to work. When no one was looking he charged up the capacitor to hold a lot of extra electricity.

Page 10 of 16

Join the debate Gravity fed electrical generation system:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Gravity	10	30-03-2024 02:38
Gravity Has Energy Debate	33	03-02-2024 17:02
The USA electricity system - Hourly billing.?	108	02-02-2024 20:52
The Weather, Climate Change Are Revealing The Truth Of This Corrupt Society System	50	10-01-2023 16:48
Russia just hacked the US emergency alert system, and in more important news the FBI is	0	01-09-2022 13:50