"Likely Feasible Solution to World Energy & Carbon Crises" by Warren D Smith

James___ wrote:

duncan61 wrote:
At the moment the efficiency of generating hydrogen and then converting it into water is about 42.5%. Once the efficiency is about 60% then such a system could start generating power.

I thought the plan was to generate electricity with ocean based wind farms then use the electricity to make hydrogen to run a power plant on land.Can you explain how making water from hydrogen creates electricity.

With what Warren suggested, generating AC current and then having transmission lines on the sea floor might be more efficient. This is one reason why with what I wrote I mentioned the efficiency of generating and converting hydrogen into clean energy.
To generate hydrogen, that efficiency is rated at about 75% while converting hydrogen into electricity is rated at about 60%. This is why I suggested onsite conversion might be preferable. A lot of loss in generating, transporting and converting would be removed from consideration.
And this would put the focus on improving the efficiency of generating hydrogen and then converting hydrogen into electricity. Then the water that is the waste generated would provide for hydroelectric power while providing material that can be converted back into hydrogen.
And this also means that it won't matter if the skies are overcast or if there is no wind today. A constant source of energy could be realized. This is why I asked him about making me a coauthor on his paper. If you consider the gigawatts of power that industrialized countries need, then basically the technology that can allow for such power plants IMO should be pursued.

James___ wrote:
This is why I tend to like science. For something like a better hydrogen generator, that can be done with a minimal investment. Some of it might go all the way back to basic principles in electrical fields. After all, Tesla realized the A.C. generator back in 1887.
And with converting hydrogen and oxygen back into water, I think this is something that I might see about building in the coming years. I'll need to pursue my atmospheric chemistry experiment first. It's with the PEM type cell they use, after all, Harvey as his electronic devices and this would be me with mine. This might actually be fun to play around with.

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:
This is why I tend to like science. For something like a better hydrogen generator, that can be done with a minimal investment. Some of it might go all the way back to basic principles in electrical fields. After all, Tesla realized the A.C. generator back in 1887.
And with converting hydrogen and oxygen back into water, I think this is something that I might see about building in the coming years. I'll need to pursue my atmospheric chemistry experiment first. It's with the PEM type cell they use, after all, Harvey as his electronic devices and this would be me with mine. This might actually be fun to play around with.

You deny science.

Warren D Smith wrote:It is purely based on the fiction of a stationary earth,

Warren D Smith wrote:I found a list claiming to give the top 50 posters on climate-debate.com and it appears only one of them claims to be a climate scientist, and she/he quit posting many years ago.

James___ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:
This is why I tend to like science. For something like a better hydrogen generator, that can be done with a minimal investment. Some of it might go all the way back to basic principles in electrical fields. After all, Tesla realized the A.C. generator back in 1887.
And with converting hydrogen and oxygen back into water, I think this is something that I might see about building in the coming years. I'll need to pursue my atmospheric chemistry experiment first. It's with the PEM type cell they use, after all, Harvey as his electronic devices and this would be me with mine. This might actually be fun to play around with.

You deny science.

I went to a seance once. It just wasn't for me. It was like going Into the Night.
It's just not a place that I think we're supposed to go. Might be why some of us live in the "light" or E = hv.
And from this we derive hv = hc/λ. v is the frequency while lamda (λ) is its wavelength. As Einstein realized, it's all relative.

p.s., with my previous post, Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) is used for the fusion process of generating electricity by creating water. With my atmospheric chemistry experiment, it's about whether or not astrophysics influences our atmosphere and allows for the natural occurrence of a different fusion process.
With the PEM, it might be interesting to try some different experiments with them. It is interesting to think that a small shop would be sufficient for such research. Realistically speaking, it will probably take a fusion process to provide the gigawatts of energy needed to allow for anything close to our way of life.
I do support slowing the economy but that would hurt profits.And this is in disagreement with capitalism which is not about sustainability or quality of life.
In a democracy, 2 out of 3 would win.

Warren D Smith wrote:
1. reply to to "James blank":
The usual assessment of "total kinetic energy of air motions" in earth
atmosphere in the sources I was citing, leaves out the fact the earth is
spinning, orbiting the sun, sun orbiting the galaxy, relativistic
effects, etc. It is purely based on the fiction of a stationary
earth, because all that other stuff is irrelevant and unhelpful for climate thinking
purposes. I do not deviate from that convention. Nor, normally, does
anybody else. Those sources mainly used large worldwide many-year
datasets of balloon-radiosonde tracking data to compute wind speeds to deduce
these facts about the earth. (The meteorology books I cited and
warned-to-avoid had just stated numbers with no sources, no evidence, no
calculations at all. They still were right to within a factor of 3,
but that is pretty bad.)

2. Also, somebody had claimed (with zero evidence, and when asked for evidence
refused to provide any) the Hywind Scotland Array had suffered severe
anchor drag, plus anchor chain corrosion requiring expensive replacement.
So I contacted HS and asked about this - confirm? deny? elaborate? Anything?
Alas, no reply ever came back from them after months.

3.To anybody: I'm wondering if there are any actual climate scientists
on this forum.
(Since, e.g, recent posts often seem to have no connection to climate at all.)
If so, can anybody point out some interesting posts by them.
Especially during last 2 years. Thanks.
I found a list claiming to give the top 50 posters on climate-debate.com
and it appears only one of them claims to be a climate scientist, and
she/he quit posting many years ago. Most of those top 50 have fake or
incomplete names.

--Warren D. Smith
http://RangeVoting.org

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:
This is why I tend to like science. For something like a better hydrogen generator, that can be done with a minimal investment. Some of it might go all the way back to basic principles in electrical fields. After all, Tesla realized the A.C. generator back in 1887.
And with converting hydrogen and oxygen back into water, I think this is something that I might see about building in the coming years. I'll need to pursue my atmospheric chemistry experiment first. It's with the PEM type cell they use, after all, Harvey as his electronic devices and this would be me with mine. This might actually be fun to play around with.

You deny science.

I went to a seance once. It just wasn't for me. It was like going Into the Night.
It's just not a place that I think we're supposed to go. Might be why some of us live in the "light" or E = hv.
And from this we derive hv = hc/λ. v is the frequency while lamda (λ) is its wavelength. As Einstein realized, it's all relative.

p.s., with my previous post, Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) is used for the fusion process of generating electricity by creating water. With my atmospheric chemistry experiment, it's about whether or not astrophysics influences our atmosphere and allows for the natural occurrence of a different fusion process.
With the PEM, it might be interesting to try some different experiments with them. It is interesting to think that a small shop would be sufficient for such research. Realistically speaking, it will probably take a fusion process to provide the gigawatts of energy needed to allow for anything close to our way of life.
I do support slowing the economy but that would hurt profits.And this is in disagreement with capitalism which is not about sustainability or quality of life.
In a democracy, 2 out of 3 would win.

Random phrases. No apparent coherency.

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:
This is why I tend to like science. For something like a better hydrogen generator, that can be done with a minimal investment. Some of it might go all the way back to basic principles in electrical fields. After all, Tesla realized the A.C. generator back in 1887.
And with converting hydrogen and oxygen back into water, I think this is something that I might see about building in the coming years. I'll need to pursue my atmospheric chemistry experiment first. It's with the PEM type cell they use, after all, Harvey as his electronic devices and this would be me with mine. This might actually be fun to play around with.

You deny science.

I went to a seance once. It just wasn't for me. It was like going Into the Night.
It's just not a place that I think we're supposed to go. Might be why some of us live in the "light" or E = hv.
And from this we derive hv = hc/λ. v is the frequency while lamda (λ) is its wavelength. As Einstein realized, it's all relative.

p.s., with my previous post, Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) is used for the fusion process of generating electricity by creating water. With my atmospheric chemistry experiment, it's about whether or not astrophysics influences our atmosphere and allows for the natural occurrence of a different fusion process.
With the PEM, it might be interesting to try some different experiments with them. It is interesting to think that a small shop would be sufficient for such research. Realistically speaking, it will probably take a fusion process to provide the gigawatts of energy needed to allow for anything close to our way of life.
I do support slowing the economy but that would hurt profits.And this is in disagreement with capitalism which is not about sustainability or quality of life.
In a democracy, 2 out of 3 would win.

Random phrases. No apparent coherency.

I'm not sure if I would refer to James__'s post as "random phrases." I see more of a haphazard melange forming an eclectic blend of muddling gulling.

.

HarveyH55 wrote:

I'm not sure if I would refer to James__'s post as "random phrases." I see more of a haphazard melange forming an eclectic blend of muddling gulling.

.

James___ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

I'm not sure if I would refer to James__'s post as "random phrases." I see more of a haphazard melange forming an eclectic blend of muddling gulling.

.

The less wordy version... Kentucky Corn Whiskey.

HarveyH55 wrote:

James___ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

I'm not sure if I would refer to James__'s post as "random phrases." I see more of a haphazard melange forming an eclectic blend of muddling gulling.

.

The less wordy version... Kentucky Corn Whiskey.

Has that "Florida Sunshine" fried your grey matter? Once again you went off topic. Since you live in Florida I have to wonder, do you have that seniors disease?
You know, the Bingo halls are closed.
Just not sure why you guys can't grasp a simple, even basic concept like the Coulomb effect.
Coulomb's law states that the electrical force between two charged objects is directly proportional to the product of the quantity of charge on the objects and inversely proportional to the square of the separation distance between the two objects.
Please tell me guys you get this. This is basically Newton's theory of gravity applied to objects that have an electrical charge. Basically astronomy/astrophysics meets the molecular world. It can't be an easier than that.