The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: Robert Latest on 26 Sep 2007 08:17 John Larkin wrote: > Imagine a gigantic weight, mounted on springs, that wiggles around > roughly once a day, driven by the moon's gravitation. Couple that > motion to a generator. Do the math. > > Of course, we'd eventually slow down the moon, and it would start > clipping off the tops of mountains and cell-phone towers. Actually we'd be speeding up the moon (as the tide forces are already doing), further expanding its orbit. See: "Why is the moon slowing down?", David W. Hughes, Nature 290, 190 (1981). robert
From: Eeyore on 26 Sep 2007 08:57 BradGuth wrote: > JosephKK <joseph_barr...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > Well, hell, there you go throwing some large numbers around. where do > > they come from? Do you even know? Where did you get 64,000 > > terawatts? Where did you get 7.2E20 kW? - Hide quoted text - > > > physics and math, pretty much works each and every time unless you're > stuck with having to use some hocus-pocus conditional physics that > doesn't take little pesky things like the actual truth into account. > > 64,000 teraWatts of terrestrial solar energy is conservative. That's what makes the earth function. > There's actually lots more solar energy that doesn't manage to get > sufficiently through our polluted plus somewhat wet and reflective > atmosphere, No, the above figure includes all of that. The problem with solar energy is the huge cost of harnessing it for man's needs. Not to mention that you only get that energy when the sun shines. > so perhaps as such it doesn't hardly count. Of orbital > physics that relates to working against the mutual pull of gravity is > exactly what it is. In the case of the Earth/moon consideration it's > worth roughly 2e20 joules per each and every second, and the last time > I'd checked there were still 3600 of them seconds per hour. There's no ENERGY required to keep the moon in orbit. The moon is held in place by a gravitational FORCE. Force is not the same thing as ENERGY ! This is where your clear lack of scientific education results in you making idiotic statements. The tides that the moon creates do have energy but it isn't easily or economically tapped. Graham
From: The Ghost In The Machine on 26 Sep 2007 08:37 In sci.physics, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote on Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:26:07 +0100 <46F91A7F.4A7B8C02(a)hotmail.com>: > > > MooseFET wrote: > >> Eeyore wrote: >> > paradox137 wrote: >> > > I read a report on a high density capacitor that could be charged in 5 >> > > minutes and used as a battery for a hybrid vehicle. On one charge the >> > > average car could go 500 miles. Assuming no technical problems this will >> > > be a life saver. >> > >> > Complete rubbish. You read no such thing and made up the rest. >> > >> > Capacitors (even the latest gee-whizziest ones) don't have the required energy >> > density. A car might go half a mile on an ultracap. >> >> No, there is a group claiming the same energy capacity as a lead acid >> battery from a capacitor. So far, you need a microscope to see their >> experimental unit. Unfortunately I don't remember the link. > > You mean EEStor. > > They've yet to make even a 'prototype'. I suspect they've misunderstood some basic > fundamentals about barium titanate dielectrics. Like their voltage coefficient ! > > It may simply be a scam. Even if legitimate, the best they can do is about on par with a standard battery, and one has to assume capacitor electrodes about 2 atoms wide to get there. > > Graham > -- #191, ewill3(a)earthlink.net Windows. Because it's not a question of if. It's a question of when. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: The Ghost In The Machine on 26 Sep 2007 08:34 In sci.physics, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote on Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:15:04 -0000 <1190646904.000103.215000(a)50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>: > On Sep 23, 9:13 pm, The Ghost In The Machine > <ew...(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote: >> >> And the creation of H2O2 is done precisely how, again? >> Clearly this is the fuel of the future (if one can deal >> with the fact that it's highly explosive, but that's a >> technical detail), but can neither be harvested from plants >> nor extracted from minerals without some sort of process. >> I'd like to know the details thereof, if you don't mind. > > You've been off-world again, haven't you. > > Which "The Ghost In The Machine" is it this time around? The naysaying Yiddish one, of course. Hmm...where'd I put my yarmulke? Do I even *have* one??? Closest thing to a driedel I have is a six-sided die, and I'm not sure where my AD&D dice have wandered off to today.... :-) I might have some candle holders, but they're singles, not 8-candle or 7-candle chanukah/hannukah units. Yes, I do have a beard. Yes, you are still an idiot. > > What part of a 40 kw/m2 worth of tower footprint is way over your > head? I'm still curious as to the details of this tower construction. Best I can do is about 200 W/m^2, and that's with rather exotic PV cells with 40% sunlight extraction efficiency, over the course of a 24-hour period. More conventional PV cells might get one 50-100 W/m^2, again over the course of a 24-hour period. This energy, which is electric, can be used to synthesize h2o2. (It's probably better used to electrolyze water, generating straight h2.) In theory one might build a tower 10 km high (the highest building is currently about 560m in height -- the Burj Dubai) and use the temperature differential as an energy source. Or are you contemplating stringing a power cable between here and LP2 Venus? :-) > > Haven't you ever heard of Warren Buffett, or physics? > > If enough h2o2 is created via renewable energy that's every bit as > squeaky clean as solar, wind, tidal and geothermal, then where's all > the nasty pollution you speak of coming from? > > BTW, you don't really recharge the h2o2/aluminum battery. It's more > like a fuel cell of stored energy, and actually lots of it per kg. To the extent that concentrated h2o2 might indeed be a dangerous explosive, yes. Watch out if it crystallizes! > - Brad Guth - > -- #191, ewill3(a)earthlink.net Linux. Because Windows' Blue Screen Of Death is just way too frightening to novice users. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: BradGuth on 26 Sep 2007 10:39
On Sep 25, 8:27 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > BradGuthwrote: > > John Larkin wrote: > > >BradGuth<bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >The likes of Warren Buffett, William Mook and myself will take care of > > > >supplying all the spare/surplus capacity of clean renewable energy for > > > >creating such nifty products of stored energy, > > > > Hey, talk to Warren lately? How'd he doing? > > > He's doing loads better off than most of us combined, and he's damn > > proud of it. Must have a little something to do with all of that > > renewable and clean energy he's providing us > > What clean energy is that ? > > Graham Now you're being that silly jewboy of denial again, arnt you. BTW, your MIB army of Yiddish spooks and moles are rather busy at deploying their usual gauntlet of usenet spermware/fuckware, trying to terminate my poor old PC once again. - Brad Guth - |