Pet rock has solved the world's cheap, clean, recyclable, energy needs!!! No doubt this has been thought of before and obviously I'm expanding on an existing energy producer but this is slightly different;
HYDROELECTRIC for municipalities, homes, autos!!!
First of all this is essential to spin a turbine as fast as possible to produce the electricity-a water pump.
Imagine. if you will, water pumps at the base of the towers if needed, forcing a 150 mile an hour water flow into electric turbines or pipes coming down from the forcing water through a small orifice to create a jet stream over the turbines. A good sized could produce several kilowatts of power and after start up the turbine produced electricity would power the pumps. Additional water pumps would send the water back up to the towers or ground based tanks for recycling! Each turbine would be connected to electric transformers and tied into the towns electric grid and powering all the street lights, street lamps, schools, etc.!!!
Here is a small hydroelectric generator. Something much larger could be at the base of these towers, many of them in an array.
This generator runs on steam, how about a small water pump that can be started by a battery then pumps water over a small turbine that would spin the electric generator producing electricity and recharge the battery!!! The water would be recycled back to the tank!!!
A much larger model could power a house
This car uses one liter of water per hour drawing the hydrogen electrons from the water. How about a water pump to spin an electric turbine to produce electricity to power the cars electric motor!!! Batteries in the vehicle would be charged and aid in powering the engine. Again the water would be recycled back to an on board tank -no waste and no pollution!!!
Replies
"This generator runs on steam, how about a small water pump that can be started by a battery then pumps water over a small turbine that would spin the electric generator producing electricity and recharge the battery!!! The water would be recycled back to the tank!!!"
Where in this process is the water converted into the steam that is nescessary for the turbine to run? A water pump can not produce steam. Steam is water that is under pressure and have a temperature of over 100 degrees celsius. How do you accomplish this?
"This car uses one liter of water per hour drawing the hydrogen electrons from the water."
How is this accomplished, and how are the free electrons distributed in the water without making the water static?
that's good if you live in Iceland but this could work without dams in the desert-a water pump, like a power washer pump from home depot, forces the water over the elec. generator enclosed tirbine and another pump send the water back to a holding tank-no waste no pollution, all pumps hooked up to the generator and after start up the pumps would be powered by the generator-this all depends on the kinetic force of the water-or you could use the large tanks for centrifigal force and without water pumps force the water coming down into a 2 inch diameter hole making a water flow of about 300 miles an hour to force the turbine
The main problem is that you can't generate more energy than the existing when the system starts in an isolated system (that means you are only re-using the same water all over again).
And because no system is perfect and efficient at 100% you will have energy loss, so after some time it will stop.
That's why machines like this don't work:
(Watch other perpetual motion machines videos from that channel, cool concepts and you think they may work, but not thanks to the laws of physics).
The hoover dam converts the force of the falling water to energy but it doesn't pump the water all the way back.
but if you use a water pump to force water throught a smaller orifice to create 2000 pounds of pressure to spin a turbine to create many wats of power that means there is surplus to power the additional pumps to return the water to the tank and you may not even need a 165 foot tank maybe just a ground level holding tank-here is some math for you, note the part where 150 mph of water falling corresponds to a 4 inch diameter hole where water could be forced through with a pump at the turbines;
The height of the water behind the dam is the relevant height for the potential energy calculation, even if a given parcel of water is collected at the bottom of the dam. This is because the pressure of the water above provides the motive force. In the absence of turbines or other restrictions, the water would emerge from the penstock at a velocity ofv = sqrt(2gh) so that a flow, F, would require an area A = F/v. For example, Hoover Dam, at 222 m high (in the days when Lake Mead was full!) would eject water at a stunning 67 m/s (150 m.p.h.) if a big hole opened up in the bottom. At the nominal flow rate of 1000 m³/s, this corresponds to a hole about 4 m in diameter. I think we should do it.
Now, it is the job of the turbine(s) to extract some of the kinetic energy this water would have if it were allowed to shoot out of the bottom of the dam. As a consequence, it comes out at a much more sedate pace. Some of the 10% inefficiency in hydroelectric dams is due to generator inefficiency, but some is because you can’t take all of the kinetic energy out of the water or it would stop flowing and stall the flow of the next batch. But nature is kind here, since kinetic energy goes as the square of the velocity. The velocity of the energy-sapped water is therefore sqrt(1 − η). So if we pull 96% of the energy out of the water, its flow velocity is 20% of the free-flow value (13 m/s in the foregoing example). Or we can grab 99% at a 10% exit speed (7 m/s, or 15 m.p.h.). This sounds much more reasonable—and seems like a good bargain. The area needed now expands accordingly, but that’s what large turbines/penstocks are for.
"but if you use a water pump to force water throught a smaller orifice to create 2000 pounds of pressure"
Hold it. That would mean that you would have to produce 2000 pounds of pressure with THAT pump first.
"to spin a turbine to create many wats of power that means there is surplus to power"
No, because this is nothing but a transfer of power from a source of energy to a generator of energy, but since you use machines as well as a medium that does not transfer 100% of the energy back into the generator (for that to happen every molecule of water would have to hit the turbine blade) + friction, heat, vibration and noise-losses from the pump and generator, you'll get back even less than what you put in.
In theory, if you could find a spot in space that is free of every form of influence from x-ray and thought to infrared and gravity, you could get a system that would run, but only itself. The moment you put even a molecule of load on it, the flow will collapse.
It has some applications, but only in select areas and on a small scale. Everyone is into having enough sufficient power for electric knives to carve brisket meat, electric dishwashers to clean up the mess, electric treadmills to run the fat off, and electric computers with bells and whistles to tell an internet world about yourself being smart and everything.
This proposal is similar to solar power in the sense that power generated may help out a survivalist but not a yuppie.
It all depends on how much pressure is needed to power a good sized turbine and how many watts can be produced from each turbine-I'm going to do more research -at the hoover dam each turbine is connected to a 30 foot diameter pipe the spins the turbine-a 4 foot diameter pipe at 150 psi would spin a decent sized turbine but this is all engineering and needs study-thanks Malcolm
The Hoover dam is not so much about the turbines and their design as it is about the ammount of water that is being stored in there for the pressure it produces.
If you want to build cheap and VERY efficient turbines to experiment with, look up Tesla Turbines. They're fairly easy to build as well and are most efficient with flowing water.
Thanks for trying to find a solution for free, or cheap energy- the more we think about that, the more solutions we find.
That won't work... it breaks the first law of thermodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_conservation_of_energy
First of all, even if the system had not energy loss and an eficiency of 100%, you would not be able to generate enough power for the water to be pumped all the way back up (I'm guessing you meant to have the turbines at the bottom so they would catch the falling water right?) AND have an excess of electricity to send to the electrical grid I guess.
If you still don't belive me I'm sure someone can give you the math side of it, or look in google ;)
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next