Renewable Energy is The Scam We All Fell For - Page 6 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Pollution, global warming, urbanisation etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15211120
ckaihatsu wrote:

Yeah, don't get me started.... I've been looking into a *lot* of this stuff lately.


What do you think about using prison labor to push boulders up hills for this gravity energy?
#15211163
*That's* your political concern, regarding 'gulagism' -- ?

You really think / thought that revolutionary-leftist types (like myself) would want to be historically *backward*, and bring back chattel slavery, for the sake of 'busywork' -- ?

I think you don't understand what prisons are for, either currently, or in a revolutionary situation -- prisons, currently, are a *class war* tactic. They allow the ruling class to keep a permanent 'underclass' of prisoners on hand for the tasks that no one in society would do *willingly*, even for pay, yet those tasks need to get done, like burying the corpses of those who have died from COVID-19.

So the racist criminal justice system easily converts any person's crimes-against-property into 'gulagism', meaning a racist system of class warfare against the historically disenfranchised -- BIPOC people.

In a *revolutionary* situation the same tactic could be used by the *revolutionary* side to make sure that the forces of capital wouldn't be able to restore capitalism and commodity relations. So those who were actively counterrevolutionary could be 'gulaged', if-you-like.
#15211175
ckaihatsu wrote:
(He got confused by the avatars.) (yeesh)



My avatar is always Carl Fredrickson from the movie UP. I've used it in a number of forums without issue. For some reason, they had a problem with it here. So I don't have an avatar...

Image
#15211176
late wrote:
My avatar is always Carl Fredrickson from the movie UP. I've used it in a number of forums without issue. For some reason, they had a problem with it here. So I don't have an avatar...

[img]https://www.orlandosentinel.com/resizer/YElfLuTB18oz7Wg9U8CR1t7bbh8=/800x560/top/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YQ4ZPN5RNJDADMVQ5T4B5EJKGM.jpg[img]



Duly noted, and -- funny (politically).
#15211177
ckaihatsu wrote:
You really think / thought that revolutionary-leftist types (like myself) would want to be historically *backward*, and bring back chattel slavery, for the sake of 'busywork' -- ?


no. I'm just having fun.
#15211193
ckaihatsu wrote:Not a toy, not a scam -- it's a *demonstration* model.

All that's required is to get the water from the bottom, to up-above the waterwheel / turbine itself. By 'beating' gravity for that short distance one can 'reset' the water level up to that of the reservoir ('tank', in the model), so that the water can again flow down, over the waterwheel, to produce endless electricity without using fuel or making pollution.

Please note that in the *second*, 'corn farm' video, the water is being sucked-up from the river *below* (against the force of gravity), and distributed onto the ground's downslope via the long pipe for irrigation.

---

Again, not a scam because the (continuously) falling water creates a *suction* / vacuum in the raised tank, which draws in the water (continuously) from below. All that's required is to 'prime the pump' by filling the tank initially, then starting the draining, to create the initial suction.

Here's another video that shows vertical piping being filled initially with water so that, after being stood up, the water rushes downward with gravity and creates the initial suction to get the water flowing indefinitely.

The *point*, of course, is that *no* business or government would want to do this kind of implementation because it's *bad business* -- better to make profits by selling a more *logistically complicated* approach, of digging up fuel, etc., so as to exploit labor for monetary gain.


The $50 Water Turbine -DIY, Portable, Powerful, and Open Source




---


material-economic exploitation DRAFT

Spoiler: show
Image


This toy is an example of a perpetual motion machine.
The laws of nature say this is impossible.
The level in the plastic tank was going down while I watched. In order for it to work for a long time the water level must not go visibly down. I saw it going down.
I studied materials engineering in college in the late 60s. I'm telling the lurkers this machine is a scam.

Your denial, is asking me to ignore 2 things.
. . 1] The law of conservation of energy that says that you can't extract energy with the generator from the down flow of water and still have enough energy left to raise an exactly equal mass of water back up with the suction. Not to mention other friction (etc.) in the system.
. . 2] My own eyes that saw the water level going down as the machine ran for just a few seconds of footage. I'm not going to disbelieve my eyes on your say so.

So, ckaihatsu and lurkers, watch the video for yourselves and see what I saw. Your eyes should convince you after you know what to look for.

ckaihatsu, if you continue to assert the truth of this scam, your credibility on all other subjects will be destroyed, in my eyes at least.
.
#15211201
Power generation has become the number one political question in Europe after the last few months of extreme price hikes. Power consumption is increasing as transportation and industry are moving away from fossil fuels to electricity at a record pace while we are closing down nuclear power plants is a catastrophic combination. Geopolitical tensions with Russia resulting in cuts of natural gas suplies has put Brussels into a frenzy and are now trying to lable both gas and nuclear energy as green alternatives.

The most nuclear powered member of the EU in France, which produces more energy from nuclear power than all other members combined, has delayed plans to cut their dependence on nuclear power and have even opened up the possibility of constructing new reactors. Their latest flagship Flamanville plant has again been struck with delays and additional costs, now estimated at 12.7 billion euro from the original 3.3 billion euro estimate.

The good news is that renewables have overtaken fossil fuels as the number one power source in the EU for the first time in 2020 (38% vs 37%).
#15211204
Steve_American wrote:
This toy is an example of a perpetual motion machine.
The laws of nature say this is impossible.



How so, exactly, if you don't mind -- ?

What *I'm* seeing is two different dynamics at-work -- [1] the water falling, creating vacuum pressure and suction in the tank, and [2] the water being sucked up, against gravity, into the tank from below.


Steve_American wrote:
The level in the plastic tank was going down while I watched. In order for it to work for a long time the water level must not go visibly down. I saw it going down.



Okay, yes, I see the same thing and I acknowledge it. It did look as though the water supply would quickly be depleted.

I'll chalk this up to *optimization* -- or, rather, the *lack* of optimization -- meaning that perhaps a faster rate of *upflow* is required, for the current rate of downflow. This is where parameters / sizings would have to be adjusted, in relation to each other, for the desired result (like a good recipe, for a parallel).


Steve_American wrote:
I studied materials engineering in college in the late 60s. I'm telling the lurkers this machine is a scam.

Your denial, is asking me to ignore 2 things.
. . 1] The law of conservation of energy that says that you can't extract energy with the generator from the down flow of water and still have enough energy left to raise an exactly equal mass of water back up with the suction. Not to mention other friction (etc.) in the system.



Okay, this *isn't* my field, but I don't think that the generator itself has anything to do with the overall hydro dynamic of the model, because the electricity it produces is *externalized* / consumed away from the model, so what we're looking at as being 'active' / integral is the water downflow and the water upflow.

In terms of downflow vs. upflow, physics says that, yes, the suction / vacuum created *should* be able to exactly bring up the same quantity of water that's leaving the tank, given airtightness, causing the vacuum. I don't see any 'friction' as being significant since we're talking about *water* here, a fluid, which is nearly frictionless by composition.


Steve_American wrote:
. . 2] My own eyes that saw the water level going down as the machine ran for just a few seconds of footage. I'm not going to disbelieve my eyes on your say so.

So, ckaihatsu and lurkers, watch the video for yourselves and see what I saw. Your eyes should convince you after you know what to look for.

ckaihatsu, if you continue to assert the truth of this scam, your credibility on all other subjects will be destroyed, in my eyes at least.
.



Okay, thanks for taking the time to go over this stuff.
#15211216
ckaihatsu wrote:How so, exactly, if you don't mind -- ?

What *I'm* seeing is two different dynamics at-work -- [1] the water falling, creating vacuum pressure and suction in the tank, and [2] the water being sucked up, against gravity, into the tank from below.

Okay, yes, I see the same thing and I acknowledge it. It did look as though the water supply would quickly be depleted.


I'll chalk this up to *optimization* -- or, rather, the *lack* of optimization -- meaning that perhaps a faster rate of *upflow* is required, for the current rate of downflow. This is where parameters / sizings would have to be adjusted, in relation to each other, for the desired result (like a good recipe, for a parallel).


Okay, this *isn't* my field, but I don't think that the generator itself has anything to do with the overall hydro dynamic of the model, because the electricity it produces is *externalized* / consumed away from the model, so what we're looking at as being 'active' / integral is the water downflow and the water upflow.


In terms of downflow vs. upflow, physics says that, yes, the suction / vacuum created *should* be able to exactly bring up the same quantity of water that's leaving the tank, given airtightness, causing the vacuum. I don't see any 'friction' as being significant since we're talking about *water* here, a fluid, which is nearly frictionless by composition.


Okay, thanks for taking the time to go over this stuff.


It isn't really my field either. But, it is general engineering.

Energy is one of the most powerful tools that an engineer has. It must be conserved, period, full stop.

So, one can't ignore any way energy can be lost. Did you see the water splashing out of the pond? Those splashes are energy being wasted.

Water has low friction, but it isn't frictionless. If it was water would flow in a river to the sea much faster. It would keep accelerating as long as there is any slope in the river bed. It would be more like a ball rolling down a long incline plane.

Scientists also use energy as a very powerful tool. They very carefully measure it, and when it doesn't balance, they know to look for where it went. For example, this is why they theorized the neutrino, when some energy was being carried away from a particle collision that they could not account for with the particles and photons they could see.

Watt improved the steam engine when he saw the wasted energy.

From Wiki,
The first steam engines, introduced by Thomas Newcomen in 1731, were of the "atmospheric" design. At the end of the power stroke, the weight of the object being moved by the engine pulled the piston to the top of the cylinder as steam was introduced. Then the cylinder was cooled by a spray of water, which caused the steam to condense, forming a partial vacuum in the cylinder. Atmospheric pressure on the top of the piston pushed it down, lifting the work object. Watt noticed that it required significant amounts of heat to warm the cylinder back up to the point where steam could enter the cylinder without immediately condensing. When the cylinder was warm enough that it became filled with steam the next power stroke could commence.

Watt realised that the heat needed to warm the cylinder could be saved by adding a separate condensing cylinder. After the power cylinder was filled with steam, a valve was opened to the secondary cylinder, allowing the steam to flow into it and be condensed, which drew the steam from the main cylinder causing the power stroke. The condensing cylinder was water cooled to keep the steam condensing. At the end of the power stroke, the valve was closed so the power cylinder could be filled with steam as the piston moved to the top. The result was the same cycle as Newcomen's design, but without any cooling of the power cylinder which was immediately ready for another stroke.


So no, there is no way to fine tune the size of the tubes or to do anything to make that toy work for long. Even if you could remove every erg of energy loss to friction, etc., the generator is still taking energy away. So, the energy can never be balanced. I hope I'm being clear there.
.
#15211225
Igor Antunov wrote:Outside of hydro renewable energy will continue to be a meme because there is nothing renewable about the battery storage needed for solar and wind turbines.

Did you see my thread about storing the energy as high temp heat in containers like a shipping container with graphite forming tubes for hot air and aluminium (al) to be near each other. The hot air melts the al. It takes a lot of heat to melt it. Then at night the heat is extracted as the al freezes back to a solid.
. . .The key thing is to use solar electric energy and a heat pump to extract heat from the air and make the air hotter, a lot hotter. Hot enough to melt al.
. . . You can imagine it as using water at a much lower temp like on Mars. You have 2 coils in a well insulated box. One has water/ice and one has air. The heat flows in the day from the air to melt the ice, then at night the heat flows from the ice as it melts back to heat the cold nigh air. In the daytime the solar energy as electricity is used in a heat pump (the thing in your freezer that makes it cold by 'pumping' heat out of the box) to heat the cold air hot enough to melt the water, then at night the cold normal air is blown through its tubes to heat it as the ice melts. [Note: al contracts as it freezes but water expands as it freezes. This makes it hard to use water for this but al is easier.]

These boxes are already being made in small numbers. This will work. It will let China use its new coal powered power plants for decades by replacing the coal burning with these heat-energy storage boxes to store solar energy for use at night.
.
#15211227
Igor Antunov wrote:Outside of hydro renewable energy will continue to be a meme because there is nothing renewable about the battery storage needed for solar and wind turbines.

There are many things that are considered batteries.
That being said, even traditional batteries are renewable as you can recycle the materials. It does require energy, but the energy is renewable.
Ultimately, the term renewable is indeed a misnomer. The sun will run out of hydrogen to fuse at some point and solar, wind, tidal forces will vanish, in fact the whole planet and everything within it will die. All-stars will eventually disappear and even blackholes will evaporate. Heat death. But on these timescales, who the fuck gives a shit.
#15211231
Steve_American wrote:
It isn't really my field either. But, it is general engineering.

Energy is one of the most powerful tools that an engineer has. It must be conserved, period, full stop.

So, one can't ignore any way energy can be lost. Did you see the water splashing out of the pond? Those splashes are energy being wasted.



Nope, it doesn't work that way -- the water in that system is functioning as a *medium* (of energy transfer, by 'altitude'), so as long as there's *enough* water, minus the splashed-away portion, the system will continue to work in the upwards and downwards directions.


Steve_American wrote:
Water has low friction, but it isn't frictionless. If it was water would flow in a river to the sea much faster. It would keep accelerating as long as there is any slope in the river bed. It would be more like a ball rolling down a long incline plane.



Sure, and there's also air pressure, and viscosity for both, but for the demo model being discussed this kind of friction is *negligible*.


Steve_American wrote:
Scientists also use energy as a very powerful tool. They very carefully measure it, and when it doesn't balance, they know to look for where it went. For example, this is why they theorized the neutrino, when some energy was being carried away from a particle collision that they could not account for with the particles and photons they could see.

Watt improved the steam engine when he saw the wasted energy.

From Wiki,


So no, there is no way to fine tune the size of the tubes or to do anything to make that toy work for long. Even if you could remove every erg of energy loss to friction, etc., the generator is still taking energy away. So, the energy can never be balanced. I hope I'm being clear there.
.



Okay, Steve, at this point you're no longer addressing the *dynamics* of the system -- you're simply being *argumentative*.

I think you need to keep in mind that there's an 'engineering' *goal* here, which is to make a physical system that's *optimized* to a certain kind of functioning as a *desired system*. Similarly we could construct something that captures solar / light energy from the sun, for free, but we'd have to optimize that collection process so that the 'harvest' is suitable to our (social) needs.
#15211232
Steve_American wrote:
Did you see my thread about storing the energy as high temp heat in containers like a shipping container with graphite forming tubes for hot air and aluminium (al) to be near each other. The hot air melts the al. It takes a lot of heat to melt it. Then at night the heat is extracted as the al freezes back to a solid.
. . .The key thing is to use solar electric energy and a heat pump to extract heat from the air and make the air hotter, a lot hotter. Hot enough to melt al.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium ... ir_battery


Steve_American wrote:
. . . You can imagine it as using water at a much lower temp like on Mars. You have 2 coils in a well insulated box. One has water/ice and one has air. The heat flows in the day from the air to melt the ice,



Okay....


Steve_American wrote:
then at night the heat flows from the ice as it melts back to heat the cold nigh air.



You're getting mixed-up here -- during the *day*, *coolness* / cooling is desirable, so using the heat of the day to melt pre-existing ice, for cooling, is appropriate.

But at night -- to extend the process -- we would want *heat* / heating, but where is the *heat* supposed to come from at that point? We have a melted block of ice and no heat to be found.

Maybe -- to *fix* this approach -- there should also be a *molten salt*, or mineral oil *reservoir*, which takes-in the day's heat energy, as well as melting the ice block for daytime cooling. Then, at night, the *heat* from the molten salt / mineral oil could be exchanged-out again, back to the air to warm it.


Steve_American wrote:
In the daytime the solar energy as electricity is used in a heat pump (the thing in your freezer that makes it cold by 'pumping' heat out of the box) to heat the cold air hot enough to melt the water, then at night the cold normal air is blown through its tubes to heat it as the ice melts. [Note: al contracts as it freezes but water expands as it freezes. This makes it hard to use water for this but al is easier.]

These boxes are already being made in small numbers. This will work. It will let China use its new coal powered power plants for decades by replacing the coal burning with these heat-energy storage boxes to store solar energy for use at night.
.



You may want to clarify your approach here -- I don't think the same medium, a block of ice, could be used double-duty, for both cooling *and* heating.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

The pertinent information is in the post, for whic[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

It has already been explained that this type of co[…]

Sure, keep thinking that. Election year is caus[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Again: nope. Putin in Feb 2022 only decided ... […]