My version of the solution to the world's energy problem.

[arkain101]

I wanted to start a topic on a idea and design that I am letting go completely free, just for the greater good, heh :hihi:

You may have noticed these posts scattered in other topics. I put it all together to get a better opinion base. I'd apreciate anyone to run some numbers and some comparisons.

 

The first post is on a mobile, and multi-energy generating system.

 

The second post is on a human related energy mother net.

 

 

First post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Red lines=electric power lines.

Green Circles=generators

Dark blue=water

light blue=air

Grey shaft=drive shafts.

 

Most of the weight is to be set on the towers. The towers need to be fixed to the ground as much as possible so when the deck lifts, it does not float away.

There is,

- Tide lift power generation

- Tide flow power generation (notice the more efficient flow capturing propeller. Designed for less drag and more surface area to develope more torque and may be able to have adjustable angle of attack to maximuize water flow speed efficiency.

-Wave power generation (notice the system is designed to capture wave energy as it slams into the side of the floating deck. The wave is concentrated to the float. There is more power to the wave, and more lift to the wave. These can be surounding the deck.

- Tide drop power generation.

- water flow in and out of deck power generation (via same efficient turbine)

- air flow in and out of deck power generation (turbine)

- Windmill (not shown) on top of towers power generation.

(the concept can be modified several ways to match the best system. I thought of an idea for the deck to become portable. Instead of heavy pillars holding it to the ground it uses pillars to stand on but uses cables attatched to the sea floor to (via quick drilling lock bolt) hold itself in place. This way the deck can move location to location for best efficiency and easy repair near land. How it transports its electric power Is optional. Power lines on floaters behind the ship Keeping the cable high above the water so things can pass under. Power lines underwater. Or even wild ideas such as it generates power, then uses all that power to pump water through a series of hoses to land. At land a station takes all that pumped water and converts it to electric power for the grid. This way may lose alot of energy, but I suppose it would reduce dangers and expenses.

 

In a mobile and transportable design, the ship will power itself along through the water by its under water propellars. It gathers energy to move from free sources.

The waves that impact the boat/deck all around it give it electrical power to propell itself along.

The wind that blows through its windmills sail it along and generate power, depending on wind direction and destination direction.

It can store massive amounts of power simply by waiting for the tide to drop and engaging tide drop mode. As the deck drops it can store power in some form of batteries or hydrogen generation for engines. Then when ready it can disengage and float away.

The deck can be posistioned anywhere in the ocean it can contact the ground. The tide lifts and lowers in all places of the ocean. It can be placed in ocean currents, and windy locations. Or in the path of hurricanes. The deck itself is made of a series of pods. Each pod is a section of deck with a tower placed in the center of the deck square. These deck squares can operate on themselves. in the same way the entire system can. They can attatch themselves and detatch themselves from the mother system. I have even considered them attatched themselves in such a way that they would be connected by swivel systems so the entire deck itself could act as a wave floater in certian situations. Situations where the deck is not planted to the ocean floor with the pillars. The individual pod system reduces sinking chances, total system outage failures, and eases mechincal repairs and system growth and modification.

 

 

More,

you know the effect that occurs when you take a glass and put it under water letting all the air escape, then, turn it upside down and as you try to pull it out of the water there is a suction effect that holds it down.

 

We start with this as the main heart of the system. We begin building a number of units or pods that are floating decks with sealing doors both on the top and the bottom of the box. In this deck we place a group of telescopic towers which are placed vertical in desinated holes in the deck.

 

Here is the simple operation. We take these pods out to the ocean and attatchem to eachother. Here is the start of the cycle for the main power generating system. We start the cycle off with NO water in the deck and the tide is down. As the tide comes up the bouyancee of this box causes it to float and as the tide goes up, it turns massive generators with great pressure. Now when the tide is full and slack, doors open and we let the box fill with water. Now when the tide goes out we have a GIGANTUON weight force pulling down as we use the suction effect and the weight of the water to turn generators with a very high gear ratio, so the generators might be humming at 10,000rpm while the box slowly tugs down 1inch every 10mins. Now then the tide is all the way down, the doors open and let the gravity pump all the water out. Again its all air now and when the tide comes around again.. cycle returns. Its a 1stroke system, and would have so much energy that it would be hard to attatch enough generaters to make use of it.

 

In the concept I came up with here. Lets say we have a 50foot by 50foot deck and a set of towers around the pad and all along the inside aswell to give it structural strength. It would look like a grid of towers standing on the ocean floor with a large pad that is able float up and down on these towers. Lets make the pad 10 feet tall.

here we have 2500 x10= 25,000cubic feet (1 cubic feet = 28.3168466 liters) 28x25,000= 700,000 litres 1kg=1litre = 688tons of water not including the suction effect that will turn generators for as long as the tide is in motion.

thats alot of energy. 7,000,000newtons x 5m tide = 35,000,000 KJ's of energy, then add in the estimation of about 1.5 x's the force with suction, 52million kj's.

Pretty rough estimates but thats just a small one.

I came up with this concept awhile back.. but today I spent a moment on it and pictured how to make it work as I planned.

I see it working flawlessly.

 

And with this design it is capable of making power at all times. Maybe not as much but still power.

WHen the deck is at the bootom on its rest plates on the several towers. it is still full of water. Tide is slack, deck is stopped. One would think the power generation is over with. But As we drain the water we drain it through a turbine. and the gravity pulls the water out and makes a energy. Also, we put a air turbine like ones used in air pressure tide power. So when the water rushes out, air rushes in, causing the air flow and water flow to make power as the deck sits still. Once shes full of air.. All the doors close up. Tide comes up and it floats up making power. Now when it reaches its rest at high slack tide. It opends the doors again. The weight of the deck (which would be immense) sinks under gravity. The water that is forced in goes through the turbine again, and the air the is forced out through the top turns a turbine aswell. once it is fully packed with water, the multiple towers lock the deck from sinking any further. The Top floor openings are sealed up. Now we either at this point seal the bottom passages so its one big sealed water tank or, we leave it open (if this suction effect that I dont understand that well actually has a stronger effect than the weight of the water alone). Now as the tide goes down this millions of pounds of water is suspended by the towers held in the deck. the locks are released as the tide gets near the bottom of the deck. Gears attatched to the towers and deck or hydraulics take over and turn generators. The generators need to be powerful or numreous enough to stop the deck from moving, the motoin of the deck is maintained through the electrical drag of the hundreds of generators. Tide starts to slack out again. We release the water and make a little bit of power again.

See with this system the entire available mass is put to nearlly 100% use. Where as turbines only cut through the mass and let almost all of it slip by while it captures what it can making it far less productive.

I dont know how big these could be built but. Over here on the west coast I have seen nearly 20 foot tides in ciratain areas. You build one to have the production of a couple hoover dam's and your in some serious business.

 

And remember that tides are not just moving up and down water, they are flowing water filling basins. So while this water flows past this structure it can like wise be captured by dam like turbines.

 

In fact have you ever take a spoon and put the back side of it under a tap. You might expect the spoon to get pushed away. But it creates the same lift effect as an air plane and the spoon will become glued to the moving water. The bottom shape of this deck could be made in such a way to Glue it to the flowing water aswell, forcing it to be sucked down with the dropping water levels. Add all that together, you might aswell cover the deck in solar panels. or windmills, since some parts of the ocean are cursed with constant high winds. Then we could really make use of those huricanes that are usually a pain.

 

Then all of this power should be directed to a Momentum station. That is what most electric stations do anyway. They use large capacitors to prevent fluctioation in the electric flow. But if you were to hook this all up to a massive spinning wheel on the ground, that one was to make very friction free. Then have it spinning very quickly, if you could balance such an object. Then it would smooth out the electric flow and (and of course use up some of it) but keep it going when the station is under low power..

Not to sure about the big momentum wheel but.. it was a quick though.

 

So you see this concept is always generating power for a tidal based power system.

[arkain101]

Second post.

We Have The Ability To Power The Planet.

 

 

You first probably ask the question, how is this so? Power is developed through harnessing powers of the earth. Science proves that it is mathimatcally impossible to have a 100% efficient power devloping machine and engine. This is correct but somewhere along the line we forgot to add to the equation...... Logic.

 

When we talk about harrnessing the natural powers on earth we first think of wind, water, sunlight, and other naturally occuring forces. For some reason we forget to realize we, the human civiliaztion, is probably the greatest source of force on the earth.

 

Now you see what I am getting at when I say we have the ability to power our planet. It is impossible to put a stop to the world to make a drastic change in the ways we do things. The hidden clue key word in there is "stop". Human life is an ever-moving force.

 

Now let me get to the point. We use cars dailey in massive numbers. Each time you use the brakes, or slow down or go down a hill energy is lost. The technology is there to put electrical generators on each and every car that function as your brakes. When you choose to slow down your vehicle you enable this generator which creates power. Power gets directed to a series of capacitors, batteries, or some form of power storing device. Be even if it is not electrical. By law you are required to "hook up" to the massive power grid around the country. The generated power by the millions of cars is put to use. I think you understand where I am going with this. Trains which transport resources around the country have imaculate amounts of moving energy. The force of one train slowing down could develope a very large amount of power. Everywhere you look the opportunity is there to create energy for us to use. Workout machines at home, could be implemented to generate power for your own home.

 

The mag lev train is a perfect use for this concept. If a tunnel were constructed from one side of the country to the other. Not a fully undergound nor a fully surface tunnel either. using most of the ground you remove to be part of the material required to construct the top half. With this system constructed and put into use, a vacumized mag lev train system could be the main means of travel. At very high speeds this train could travel inside a vacumized tunnel system. Each time trains use the "brakes" to slow down, which would be no more than electic generators, that energry created would be used to power the other trains waiting to go. The electric circuit would require a very efficient resistance. From what I understand you could used submerged super cooled liquid gasses to surround most of the electrical circuit to lower the resistance to an amazing low amount. The heat energy absorbtion of this super cooled gas would be able to assist in the creation of this cooled gas. I could be incorrect here for I am not very knowledgable with super cooled gases but as a gas warms by abosorbing heat energery around it it expands and increases in pressure, pressure than can be put to use. As safety would be a concirn the train system would most likely have a speed limit implemented to the system. With friction free travel amazing speeds could be attained, although not fully harnessed by the trains, it could be harnessed by a sub side tunnel that transports packages, mail, and emergency supplies at increadible!!! speeds. One side of the country to the other in an hour. This may seem a little far fetched, but the possiblity is without a doubt there and the result of this amazing new system would and could evolve beyond expectations.

 

I look around at elevators, that carry people down tall buildings all around the world. People get inside these elevators and add to the weight. The power devloped electrical generators connected to the elevators could assist in powering the other one to go up. Garbage is a huge problem in this country, and the incredible amount of weight of it is a never ending force. If this garbage was delivered to a location where it would have to be lowered to a location 1000 feet below the gravity acting upon this tons and tons of waste could be used to power a generator before it is set to rest. We power water all around the world, and as we power it to locations we often power it to high buildings. This water after being used has to make a trip back to the waste area. Along this trip the water, you guessed it, could be used to develope power. When looking at an individual system of one buildings effect it really doesnt add up. But If we use our knowledge to harness our human energy just think of the amazing realizations

[Errin OH]

Man I hate to be the bearer of bad news. :hihi:

 

First your calculation is a little off. While you would indeed have 688 ton (actually a tad more) you could only convert that to 35,000,000 J, not KJ (about 10KW). Ug (pot eng in J) = Weight(KG)*9.8(gravity fall rate)*Height(M). Not a lot for something twice the size of my house. Even if you held it at the top (not generating) of the tidal cycle and released a full container at low tide you only get 71,000,000 J (19KW).

 

Second you have a structure that can float and sink. Ok I get that part but just how are you going to produce any usable energy when the floating and sinking are very short distances over very long periods of time. Starting empty at low tide, you will float the unit to a point where it can fill to the top. Even in a 15m tide (rare, more likely 5) a ten foot structure would only travel about 35 feet in about 6 hours. Not exactly a major producer at 1.3kwh. Might be enough to power the Navigational aids that would be required on it I guess.

 

Last "x1.5". Just where do you get this. If I read it right you are generating in tandem. I don't see it. In any case it will be one or the other. I don't see tandem generation in the vessel (air and water) the combined generation wouldn't exceed either one on its own. There is only so much potential in the system. Pushing air through a generator would impede the water inlet (back pressure) and nullify the gains. Same with the wave generator, the lifting of the float would transfer to the vessel via the generator in the form of lift and nullify the tower generators.

[arkain101]

First your calculation is a little off. While you would indeed have 688 ton (actually a tad more) you could only convert that to 35,000,000 J, not KJ (about 10KW). Ug (pot eng in J) = Weight(KG)*9.8(gravity fall rate)*Height(M). Not a lot for something twice the size of my house. Even if you held it at the top (not generating) of the tidal cycle and released a full container at low tide you only get 71,000,000 J (19KW).

 

Second you have a structure that can float and sink. Ok I get that part but just how are you going to produce any usable energy when the floating and sinking are very short distances over very long periods of time. Starting empty at low tide, you will float the unit to a point where it can fill to the top. Even in a 15m tide (rare, more likely 5) a ten foot structure would only travel about 35 feet in about 6 hours. Not exactly a major producer at 1.3kwh. Might be enough to power the Navigational aids that would be required on it I guess.

 

Very far from bad news :hihi:

 

Rough estimates. I know they werent correct. I asked others to run the numbers for me. Kj's was a typo, I am sorry about that. The size of the pod, or unit was a hypothetical example. Its find if you want to attack the example, but the example is not the idea.

 

Its like if I built a lawn mower engine that ran on some kind of new fuel. That is the example. You can laugh at its horse power and performance all you want, but when it gets turned into a V-12 dragster engine, I think the idea gets the last laugh.

 

The dimensions are not the idea. thats my point with that. ;)

 

but just how are you going to produce any usable energy when the floating and sinking are very short distances over very long periods of time.

Well, lets use an analogy. If I set up a bicycle to have an Extremely high gear ratio. So much so that one full 360 degree rotation adds up to 100m and I put a powerful force behind it, I am going to travel 100m every rotatio of those pedals. All I need to do is stand on the pedal with my human body weight and eventually (if over come the friction) I will move without expending any energ more than it takes to stand, but I will have traveled 100m after doing this on each leg.

 

So if we take the weight of a small lake. Hold it up in the air without expending any energy, and hook it up to my bike, Its not, is it going to make energy.. its how friggen fast am I gonna go? and how dang far am I gonna travel!

 

I agree High gear ratio systems are not the most efficient. None of my inventions have been a one step process. You nee to test and refine a hundred times untill you've found the best possible way. It could be set-up using hydrolic pressure instead of gears. Hydrolics are amazing things. You can send a high pressure liquid through a pinhole and it will transfer enough energy to stop your car from 60-0 in 3 seconds. Likewise, you can take that hydrolic pressure, and send it through a small hose to have long lasting fluids, then direct that pressure into quasi turbine of sorts with a large diameter.

 

This is how a hydro electric damn works. ALthough they need ALOT of water and alot of hieght to generate that pressure in the water to make energy. here we have the pressure at all times in psi's as high as you would like to go. You send this pressure in smaller volumes to similar systems and get the same results.

 

And this i most likely the best transfer of slow movement with extreme force. (that I can present at the moment anyway).

 

Also this pod you are refering to is one. The idea is to have attatchable/detatchable pods that are self mobile. The power station can expand and expand, covering acres (not just feet) of water. It begins to add up to tremendous numbers. It can be placed in different locations aswell. So when the tide is high in this zone, it will be lower in the next, and one could get a peak energy on one while the other low and vice versa, no worries there.

 

Here are some numbers for hydro elcectric capacity systems.

 

Canada, 341,312 GWh (66,954 MW installed)

USA, 319,484 GWh (79,511 MW installed)

Brazil, 285,603 GWh (57,517 MW installed)

China, 204,300 GWh (65,000 MW installed)

 

I am not up to snuff on this terms as of now, but I'd like to run the numbers to see what size of water collection is needed to match these capacities of hydro electric dams. Keep in mind how much dams cost, how long they take to build, how much land they can flood. They are great but an alternative would be great.

 

Same with the wave generator, the lifting of the float would transfer to the vessel via the generator in the form of lift and nullify the tower generators.

 

The deck and the towers are relatively fixed and do not move when considered in a locked down posistion. Waves will not moved the deck in this way. Theres simply to high of a resistence for it to flop around. So this is why the wave floats work. If you are refering to when it is using wave power to move itself, then yet again. depending on the design. One could even have a wave focusing passage underneeth the deck. A troff that takes a 10m wide wave and focus's it into a narrow 2m passage where the is floats that make use of the high wave peak and energy. For less weight and less float mechanisms.

 

 

I apreciate the constructive critism, but how can one be so quick to jump to an assumption and throw an idea away when they havent even considered options. It is not the design, it is the concept, concepts like the lawn mower engine that turned into a 4000hp drag engine. These things take brainstorming, but the world will never change without the determination to give it your best shot.

 

I consider this system because of the Direct force use. Theres no water flow business. Its a force that can be captured all the way through its usable stroke. Not very many other free energy systems do this.

[arkain101]

I see what you are saying about the nulifying effects such as , water out-air in. Wave lift - deck drop. Yes its very likely there could be a cancle out. They wave generators could be used only on lift and travel and not drop. Its not bad news, it would be said to give up on ideas of this sort just because wave float attatment doesnt work. It can be scratched.

 

There is the heart of the system, Massive weight + gravity + distance. Then there is branch generators. If one wants to make windmills in the ocean, it will save cost to attatch it to this then it will to create a whole new production on its own. Its about unite. All things power generating to try and work in tandum, and work together, near together. It makes more sense to localize a power station, then it does to scatter things all over the place, unless you have all the employees to travel all over and do the maintaincance. More time = more cost.. etc.

[Lsos]

All your ideas are good, but unfortunately there is a lot standing in the way. I thought about tidal power also, or harnessing all the energy that humans waste...but I guess we're not yet in enough trouble to go through with these costly methods.

 

For example, I ran some simple calculations. Lets use the largest battleship ever built: the Yamato. A 10m tide comes in. Now, if we managed to extract ALL of the energy from this ship that has been raised 10m...it amounts to only about a 1/3ton of coal. Keep in mind that a coal power plant can burn 100tons of coal an hour. Keep in mind there's like 600 coal power plants in the US. To replace just what one generates in a day you'd have to build what...like 7000 tidal power-plants the size of the biggest battleship ever built? I'm sure as hell not going to put my money in that project.

 

The methods you mention make sense...but once you get down to thinking about them they are just too extreme for right now. I mean, you're talking about salvaging every ounce of braking energy of a car, or even putting a generator on a treadmill, or hell, piezoelectric crystals in my running shoes....and yet as we speak, oil rigs are flaring off ridiculous amounts of natural gas, just because it's not worth keeping it. I'm sure we've all seen pictures. Basically, your ideas are extreme to put into practice, and we're just not at that stage yet. Hopefully we never will be...

[TheBigDog]

I like this idea Arkain! I cannot begin to do the math around it, but it is a really cool idea. There are some other areas where you could utilize this. Look at the Panama Canal. As the locks are filled and emptied you could harness the energy this way. I think you need to look at it in a Divinci kind of fashion and figure out how it would work passivly and just churn out energy as it rises and falls in the water. Doors would open and close automatically, etc. Have you looked into building a scale model?

 

Bill

[arkain101]

For example, I ran some simple calculations. Lets use the largest battleship ever built: the Yamato. A 10m tide comes in. Now, if we managed to extract ALL of the energy from this ship that has been raised 10m...it amounts to only about a 1/3ton of coal. Keep in mind that a coal power plant can burn 100tons of coal an hour. Keep in mind there's like 600 coal power plants in the US. To replace just what one generates in a day you'd have to build what...like 7000 tidal power-plants the size of the biggest battleship ever built? I'm sure as hell not going to put my money in that project.

 

I am curious what numbers you ran with battle ship idea. First off the ship is very heavy. Alot of floating lift energy is already put to waste by its overly heavy design. Remove the weight, bit more energy right? Okay now, I take you calculated the weight of the ship and multiplied it by the gravity force to figure out its lifting force, then worked it into distance? Well a floating object like a boat does not exert very much floating force when sitting alone. However when you push it down and displace more water the force increases incredibly. So this battle ship could actually lift in the range of 10x your numbers, and with reduced weight, even more.

Next, the system does not develope as much power in a lifting tide than it does in the dropping tide. The dropping tide is where amazing power is made. It is all capable to pick up millions of kg's of water which is a much stronger force than the floating capability.

 

Last. I developed a new way for an efficient high gear ratio system. Gear ratios designs lose alot of energy. I developed a design and prototype that can create a higher "gear like" ratio, without lose any force or power!

 

This would be applied on the tide pods. In the tower is a piston filled with some type of hydraulics. The movement of the deck pumps this piston. The piston pumps fluid through very high pressure lines. The lines are low volume but carry the same pressure that is in the massive piston storage. The lines lead to a specialized turbine. Just like a Hydroelectric damn uses water falling from a high source to develope 'pressure' and force, the lines can do this in a small volume.

 

Take for example the brake lines on your car. They are no more but 3mm in diameter on the inside. Yet they can transfer massive pressure from a large storage and stop a car from 60-0 in 3 seconds.

 

So we design it in a way like a series of hydro dams with much smaller volume of fluid. This way we can get 10,000 turns of a generator for every cm of movement the deck makes.

 

Lsos,

 

I dont mind your feedback one bit! However, with your attitude what could get done. You have ran over an idea and chucked it so quick and missed so many details. Like I said before, I think you would of laughed at the first gas engine as it could barely move a bike.. Well look what happens when you design it RIGHT. You end up with 40hp in a 125cc engine!

 

I like this idea Arkain! I cannot begin to do the math around it, but it is a really cool idea. There are some other areas where you could utilize this. Look at the Panama Canal. As the locks are filled and emptied you could harness the energy this way. I think you need to look at it in a Divinci kind of fashion and figure out how it would work passivly and just churn out energy as it rises and falls in the water. Doors would open and close automatically, etc. Have you looked into building a scale model?

 

I have built prototype sections. What do you mean by a scale model? like a smaller version I hope? lol, cause I cant imagine building one of these pods in my back yard haha.

 

I have not built a scale (smaller, i guess thats what it means) model, No.

 

One of the sections I did build however was the pressurized fluid ratio enhancer. I built a small turbine, and rigged up my pressure washer to it. As it pumped the water through these tiny turbine closed fans it spun it around with more force than I could do to stop it at a really high speed. Yet it only used a pin hole of water.

 

This alone is quite an idea in itself, but as I later found is the KEY to this entire system working. It can manipulate distance, thanks to good old fluid physics! Liquids dont compress, gotta love it.

[arkain101]

I ran some numbers with a 1000:1 Motion step up ratio(I think? or 100:1), via fluid dynamics / hydraulics.

 

The results are astounding on downstroke.

 

1000ft by 1000ft of water contained in 10ft tall series of units/pods. (this is how much water is being held).

 

Volume=Lengthxwidthxheight

Volume= 1000x1000x10=10,000,000 cubic feet.

 

1cubic ft= 28litires. 10,000,000x28=2.8x10^8 litres of water.

 

1litre of water = 1kg = 2.8x10^8 kg water.

 

1kg = 10newtons of force. 2.8x10^8kg x 10 = 2.8x10^9 newtons of force.

 

Energy= Force(Newtons) x Distance (meters).

 

Tide = 10m (for a good tide area).

 

Energy=2.8x10^9x10=2.8x10^10 joules = 28,000,000,000 joules 28 billion joules of energy.

 

Tide is 6 hours.

 

Watts is equal to Joules/second.

 

6 hours x 60 = 360 mins x 60 = 21600seconds of movement.

 

2.8x10^10/21,600 = 1,296,296 watts of power / 1000 = 1296KW of power.

 

Now we factor in the gear ratio step up, or hydrolic ratio of the force tied into the motion put into the generators. lets make it around 1cm of tide = 100m of motion on the generators.

 

10m tide = 10x100 = 1000cm. x 100= 100,000m of motion to the generators for a 10m tide.

 

We go back to the inital force, 2.8x10^9 newtons of force.

 

E=FxD = 2.8x10^9 x 100,000m = 2.8x10^14 joules

 

If we consider the force to be contained through hydrolic means.

 

2.8x10^14/21,600seconds = 1.29x10^10 watts of power

 

1GW = 1billion wats.

 

1.29x10^10/ 1x10^9 (1billion) = 12.9GW x 60 x 60 = 46,666 GW/H.

 

 

Quote:

Countries with the most hydro-electric capacity

Canada, 341,312 GWh (66,954 MW installed)

USA, 319,484 GWh (79,511 MW installed)

Brazil, 285,603 GWh (57,517 MW installed)

China, 204,300 GWh (65,000 MW installed)

Russia, 173,500 GWh (44,700 MW installed)

Norway, 121,824 GWh (27,528 MW installed)

Japan, 84,500 GWh (27,229 MW installed)

India, 82,237 GWh (22,083 MW installed)

France, 77,500 GWh (25,335 MW installed)

 

 

 

Well a 1000ft by 1000ft by 10ft high system on the down stroke of tide motion makes 46,000Gigawatts/Hour. (GWh)

 

"USA, 319,484 GWh (79,511 MW installed) "

devided by the tide downstroke 46,666GWh

= 6.8

which is about 1/7th the energy of tidal power in the USA or 14%.

 

I'd honeslty like someone to check the math!

[Errin OH]

The math is not the error.

 

1000ft by 1000ft of water contained in 10ft tall series of units/pods. (this is how much water is being held).

 

Volume=Lengthxwidthxheight

Volume= 1000x1000x10=10,000,000 cubic feet.

 

1cubic ft= 28litires. 10,000,000x28=2.8x10^8 litres of water.

 

1litre of water = 1kg = 2.8x10^8 kg water.

 

Ok – 280,000,000 KG of weight

 

1kg = 10newtons of force. 2.8x10^8kg x 10 = 2.8x10^9 newtons of force.

 

I am with ya…

 

Energy= Force(Newtons) x Distance (meters).

 

Isn’t that Work = Force x Distance

see-id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/mechanics/energy/work/work.html

 

Are we not dealing with fall? Ug = (Mass x GF x Distance) see-id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/mechanics/energy/gravitationalPotentialEnergy/gravitationalPotentialEnergy.html

 

Tide = 10m (for a good tide area).

 

Energy=2.8x10^9x10=2.8x10^10 joules = 28,000,000,000 joules 28 billion joules of energy.

 

That would be for moving a fixed weight ten meters. Are we not calculating the energy produced by a falling object.

 

Tide is 6 hours.

 

Watts is equal to Joules/second.

 

6 hours x 60 = 360 mins x 60 = 21600seconds of movement.

 

2.8x10^10/21,600 = 1,296,296 watts of power / 1000 = 1296KW of power.

 

That would be the energy “needed” per second over a 6 hour period to move 280,000,000 KG 10m.

 

Now we factor in the gear ratio step up, or hydrolic ratio of the force tied into the motion put into the generators. lets make it around 1cm of tide = 100m of motion on the generators.

 

10m tide = 10x100 = 1000cm. x 100= 100,000m of motion to the generators for a 10m tide.

 

We go back to the inital force, 2.8x10^9 newtons of force.

 

E=FxD = 2.8x10^9 x 100,000m = 2.8x10^14 joules

 

If we consider the force to be contained through hydrolic means.

 

2.8x10^14/21,600seconds = 1.29x10^10 watts of power

 

1GW = 1billion wats.

 

1.29x10^10/ 1x10^9 (1billion) = 12.9GW x 60 x 60 = 46,666 GW/H.

 

I think you are trying to say gearing will increase the amount of energy produced. Not so. You can increase the rate it is generated. But the amount of time generating will fall in proportion to the increase (produce 10w for 10 hours or 100w for 1 hour)

 

For the example;

As we know simply catching (storing) the force does not produce energy. Energy is produced as the captured force is released (work). While indeed the example will capture 280,000,000 KG of weight (at high tide), it will not apply that weight for the entire duration of the work cycle. As we release it, Height will increase/decrease and the weight will decrease/remain constant, respectively.

 

Using dead weight fall

1cm fall in a 1000 x 1000 container only has about 25WH Max potential. Remember the other 99% of the container is under water and neutral. If you held it there for 2 hours (tide to drop below container) and release the entire weight at once, the potential would be in the weight “and” fall distance. The gear ratio would only affect how long it took to reach the bottom and the amount of energy produced per unit of time. If held until low tide, the max potential would be in the 5 MW range (280,000,000 KG*9.8Ms*7M = 19208000000 J = 5.3 MW). I used 7 for height as the tide is 10m, container is 10’ (3m). That would be the energy produced if we released the entire mass all at once using the max gravitational forces (weight and distance). With a gravitational fall rate of 9.8Ms, that 5 MW would last about 0.71 seconds. Gearing would lower the “energy generated” number and raise the “time duration” number. Let’s say we put in a 10,000:1 ratio. Your time would increase to about 2 hrs, but the “per” hour production would fall to roughly 500 WH. Why? Remember, the gearing will reduce the force applied at the generator to 1/10,000 of the force at the weight.

 

 

Using water release (hydro electric)

A 1000 x 1000 x 10 (10,000,000c’) would have zero potential at high tide (stored). As the tide falls you produce energy by releasing the captured water (work). Again, if held until low tide, the max potential would be in the 5 MW range (280,000,000 KG*9.8Ms*7M = 19208000000 J = 5.3 MW). Just as before, I used 7 for height as the tide is 10m, and that would be the energy produced if we released the entire mass all at once. Now let’s say you want to follow the tide cycle. At high tide, you’ll have a full container, with a 10m tide and 6 hour cycle, you would need a drop of about .5m an hour in your container (10’ (3m)/6 hours). This would be the release rate. Your energy is in the fall distance (container level to tide level) and weight of remaining water above the tide level. Height will increase with time as you approach low tide and weight will decrease as the container drains. I used an average difference of 4 based on a max difference per “hour” with a .5m per hour drain rate.

 

Using the formula for gravitational pull and hourly differences in height,

 

1000x1000x.5 = 500,000 c’

500,000 x 28 = 14,000,000 L

14,000,000 L = 14,000,000 KG

14,000,000 KG x 9.8 Ms x 4 M = 548800000 J

548800000 J = 152.4 KWH (average over 6 hours)

 

Again this is based on a max potential per hour. In reality you would start at 0 and end at 0 peaking around 300 KW based on max weight / distance of fall ratio (container level to tide level).

[arkain101]

Energy= Force(Newtons) x Distance (meters).

 

Isn’t that Work = Force x Distance

see-id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/mechanics/energy/work/work.html

 

Are we not dealing with fall? Ug = (Mass x GF x Distance) see-id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/mechanics/energy/gravitationalPotentialEnergy/gravitationalPotentialEnergy.html

 

Work is right yes. But work is written in Joules which is also energy, the ability to do work. That is what I was calculating it for. The energy available from X force of Z distance.

 

We are not dealing with a mass falling. We are dealing with a slow immense force capable of pushing 10 meters related to tidal power.

 

Tide is 6 hours.

 

Watts is equal to Joules/second.

 

6 hours x 60 = 360 mins x 60 = 21600seconds of movement.

 

2.8x10^10/21,600 = 1,296,296 watts of power / 1000 = 1296KW of power.

 

That would be the energy “needed” per second over a 6 hour period to move 280,000,000 KG 10m.

 

It is a slow constant force. As though to hold up 280,000,000kg of water and set it on a hydraulic ram about 4m in diameter. The force pushes a piston into hydraulic fluid. Which is then pushed through a small high pressure line with a diameter of about 10cm. That is then directed into a turbine designed to spin with force according to fluid pressure (no blow by). The fluid will spray out in immense speed and force and spin a turbine, just like a turbine in a hydroelectric dam. Yet the pressure comes from the held up water. Making a force of 2.8x10^9 newtons. Then the turbine spins a generator with power and speed and what we do is create a illusionary high gear ratio system. When in fact what is happening is we are limiting volume flow, for longer use of this pressure.

 

The device falls so slow that it supplies the same force over a 6 hour tide period.

 

I think you are trying to say gearing will increase the amount of energy produced. Not so. You can increase the rate it is generated. But the amount of time generating will fall in proportion to the increase (produce 10w for 10 hours or 100w for 1 hour)

 

The gearing was a previous idea. The system uses limited hydraulic flow. It creates a system like that of a water fall of mercury. One would not need much mercury to create a powerful force of fallaing mercury. It is like this because the pressure is there like a heavy water fall for 6 hours.

 

Basically we do this in summery.

 

We have a force (mass > newtons from gravity)

 

then we have a distance this force will be moved as the tide drops. (10m example)

 

Then we have a pressure made from this force in a hyrdaulic ram. The pressure is realesed like a thin waterfall under the pressures in the peaks of 50,000psi. Many magnitudes higher than any hydrodam. We direct this pressure in lesser volume to increase the available rotations of generators over slow small movements of the tide.

 

Theoretically one could make this device contain the volume of

8.96x10^9 Newtons of force (8,600,000,000) for the length of a tide. Using a structure that covers 4000ft by 4000ft by 20 feet high.

 

Heck lets see what kind of work that is. 1cm of piston movement moves 100m of hydraulic fluid through a line (aka pushes smaller piston down a tube 100m).

I dont understand hydraulics perfectly but if this right. For kicks lets see. Liquids transfer a pressure equally. So through a tube you from a large source is the same pressure. (right?)

 

Work=8.96x10^9* (10Mtide=1000cm -> 1cm@100m -> 1000cm@100m=100,000m)= 8.96x10^9N*100,000M= 8.96x10^14J of work done. (896,000,000,000,000)

896 trillion joules.

@

1,493,333 GWh + windmill + water current flow + wave power (yes just dont rig it it the float deck) + upfloat tide + water drain + water fill + heat transfer power = One insane modifiable amount of energy.

[sebbysteiny]

Correct me if I'm wrong, since I haven't studied the finer details too thoroughly. However, your invention seems to violate conservation of energy.

 

Using the accepted figures, 2.8x10^8 kg water get lifted a distance of 10m by the tide.

 

Therefore, the total energy harnessed by the invention by the tide is 2.8x10^8 kg water x g x 10m = 2.75 x 10^10 J. In six hours, this can produce a maximum of 1.27 x 10^6 J/h = 1.27 MJ/h.

 

This value is much less than the GW/h standard put forward. It also represents the maximum theoretical energy that can be released from the system with a perfect machine.

 

In other words, nature has only given you 2.75 x 10^10 J to be used in 6 hours. Claiming to be able to get any more than this from the water violates conservation of energy and is therefore impossible regardless of the ingenuity of the device. If what I say is true, it is highly unlikely that such a machine will get much investment.

[arkain101]

What you calculate is true.

 

The larger numbers are based off of a special kind of manipulation. If this hyraulic idea and system works as I hope and think it may, what it does is it manipulates the distance in which the deck moves. The hopefully ingenious idea is to use a force and manipulate its work, not by distance but by volume of workable material. The workable material is hydraulics. In this way the decks motion and distance it travels is not important. What is, is the pressure and force it applies to a volume.

 

In other words it creates an extreme pressure "water fall" that lasts as long as there is liquid to be pushed by the power of gravity. You see it harnesses gravity like one can harness the wind. Instead, its goal is to manipulate the length of time one can use this force.

 

The physics of hydraulics may or may not allow this to work as planned. This is the hydraulic system is what the design is dependent on.

[sebbysteiny]

Okay okay, you have thought of a good system of hydrolics.

 

My quiery is not about your system.

 

My quiery is about the INPUT energy. The tide has only given you the energy to lift x kg of water a hight of y m. Thus, it has provided an energy input of xy J.

 

It doesn't matter what system you have, you can never get more than xy J out of the system. This is simple conservation of energy. If you think you can get more energy than that out, then where does it come from? I hope your not thinking of some devine force.

 

Unless you can think of where this extra energy comes from, then sadly it is a question of why it doesn't work, not if. Perhaps it has something to do with hydrolics not being a way of increasing the distance in which a force opperates, but mearly an energy efficient way of transferring energy from one place to another and for giving different forces. If the hydrolics are 100km long, but it only moves a piston 1m at a force of 1N, it only produces 1J of energy.

[arkain101]

I agree I couldnt see it producing more energy than force x distance origin myself.

 

Though I am in the process of building a few scale models to test its abilites.

[arkain101]

As expected, conservation of energy principle stands.

 

Using the hydraluic ratio change conserves energy. If you take a large volume and make a smaller volume cover more distance force is lost, just like gears.

 

So even though using hydraulics would be the most efficient way to up the "gear" ratio so to speak, it will still produce the same energy.

 

Although, even though mathamatically the work does not change, reality wise, generators produce energy more efficiently at faster rotation.

 

I still think the design is something worth looking into. When you compare cost and production with other wave and tide devices this particular design combination is better.

Instead of making several different devices all over the place it all works in one unit. It is mobile and etc.

 

 

So I guess I could add something educational here after learning a bit more about hydraulics with a simple seringe experiement.

 

Pressure is defined by units of force in a given area. Such as, pounds per square inch. In a smaller volume you can create more pounds per square inch. Thus a smaller volume seringe will develope more pushing force than a large seringe when they are connect via a hose. Although the smaller seringe has more pounds per square inch, its volume is less and does not move the larger seringe as much of a distance. The energy is conserved.

So when we push in the larger volume cylender it can create more movement on the smaller volume side, but will produce less pounds per square inch from the force (ie, your hand pushing on it) acting on it, and thus reducing the force.

 

The interesing thing about fluids is that this style of changing gear ratio as it were, is very efficient if designed right. One could create some amazing high ratio change.T he devlopement of a pressure sealed turbine for fluid ratios would then be a much more efficient and versitile means for motion change. Although fluids may cause 'drag' as high speeds, the engineering setup would need to be built right in order to harness fluids interesting capabilites.

 

for example in cars you could replace the entire drive line with turbine plates side by side connected direct to the wheels. To shift a gear you would only need to flick a valve open to engage the next size smaller diameter turbine and instantly "gear ratio" will increase.

[sebbysteiny]

I have some further thoughts for you.

 

Physics

I haven't looked into this in too much detail, but accepting conservation of energy points, all the points that were originally made are true.

 

Having thought about it, the only way to get a decent amount of power it to think REALLY big about finding a way to contain VERY large amounts of water.

 

One way to use this is to use a bay. This, I believe, is what most tidal power does. A bay is a natural container that will fill up and thus store all the energy, and you can get LOADS of water in an entire bay. It is also cheap (other than the land costs) and has none of the problems associated with the second option.

 

The second is to create a container that can be supported in open (shallow or deep) seas. This would be a hazard to all shipping, so it's location must be carefully chosen. One would also have to consider the effects on marine life if you were to put a large container covering the sea surface thus blocking out the light. It would need to be maintained to prevent corrosian as well as things that might grow on it. This may be difficult as the sea is highly corrosive and many anti corrosion and barnicle pastes polute the environment.

 

But you must think REALLY big. You shouldn't restrict yourself to 2 pillers, but to AT LEAST 4 so that you can scoop the entire surface. Maybe you could even use about 30 pillars so that you get a container that could cover perhaps a square mile or 10. These pillers would naturally need to be very strong, and the floor of the containers will need to be even stronger.

 

Alternatively, you could use the water collected in a smaller container to fill a resevoir on land by using gravity and efficient pumps to transport the water. True you might lose alot of water in the transportation, but if the resevoir is sufficiently big, it might still produce lots of electricity.

 

Patents

 

You should also be aware of Patent law in UK and Europe (another subject I know something about). If you are planning on making any money from your invention, you will need a patent. However, you cannot get a patent if you have 'disclosed' the invention 'to the public'. Unfortunately, this includes EVERYTHING in these posts.

 

Even if you change your invention slightly, the difference needs to be 'not obvious' to an expert in energy / engineering who has read these posts.

 

Perhaps you could try selling confidentiality. Only a small number of us know about this invention from this website, and most of us think it is rubbish so we probably will not tell anybody. Although a determined company will probably be able to find this site (ie to challenge a patent), they will only do so if they know what to look for so you could still sell the idea to someone if they sign a confidentiality undertaking that if they don't invest, they will not use the idea. However, they may be worried that as soon as they use it, others could find it. Nevertheless, it's better than nothing and it will give the Company a head start in the market (assuming your invention is any good).

 

P.S, none of the following is actually legal advice that u should rely on and if you wish to use it, you should get a qualified solicitor to check over the options (so you can't sue me now if what I say is wrong, ha ha).