Go Down

Topic: Perpetual Hydro energy loop (Read 5 times) previous topic - next topic

GoForSmoke


Quote
Eddie, the pump is *much* less than 100% efficient as is the turbine and the generator. Some, less than 50% efficient. At each step you lose energy so where does the extra come from? Wishful thinking?


Ok, but wouldn't the gears make up for the loss of efficiency? I could get gears to turn the generators who knows how many more times then the turbine
AND  multiple generators??? all with the same pumps, heck even add another turbine ...


Sorry Eddie but efficient as gears are they still lose some of what is used to turn them to friction.
Every thing you add, every extra generator, pump, every physical device loses you a bit more power.

If you want to generate energy then you need to find an energy source, like wind or water flow, and tap that. The more direct and simple you do that, the more power you should get out.

So for example if you want to lift water using wind power it is better to run a pump or bucket chain directly from your windmill than to generate electricity with the windmill and use that to run an electric motor to drive a pump or bucket chain. The generator alone might lose you 40% of the wind power, the electric motor lose 40% of what's left while gears or pulleys from the windmill directly to the pump might lose 10%, less if well done. Even then, either way, the pump takes more power than it puts out.

The closest thing to magic you can get or do is to make something a bit more efficient but no one in all history has made any machine 100% efficient. There is always loss either from friction, partial energy transfer, or both.

I won't bother quoting laws of thermodynamics to you but the above is just a common sense way to say the same. Now it's up to you to see common sense or find it out yourself.

I find it harder to express logic in English than in Code.
Sometimes an example says more than many times as many words.

eddiea6987

Interesting GoForSmoke didnt think about friction and all those goodies.

Quote
If you want a lot of energy what you need is a 2m receiver and about 1km of 1cm wide copper wire. Build a Dyson-Harrop satellite and it will give you 1027Watts of power. Roughly a billion, billion gigawatts.


Is that even possible? has it been tried? I mean if they can throw money to build a Hadron collider , and bail freddie and fannie  then why not throw money on something to help the earth out ..?
I shall seek funding ;)
I could print the Arduino logo on a box of cereal and sell it as "Arduin-O's"

GoForSmoke


http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~fringwal/stoopid.lis

I like this one :

"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible."
   -- Lord Kelvin

"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will be
obtainable."
   -- Albert Einstein, 1932


Does quoting other people's mistaken views tell you how to make something work? They were wrong about -something, ever- so you must be right?



I find it harder to express logic in English than in Code.
Sometimes an example says more than many times as many words.

AWOL

#23
Oct 29, 2011, 05:26 pm Last Edit: Oct 29, 2011, 05:29 pm by AWOL Reason: 1
Another useful search term is 'over unity'

You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't quit the game.

And the Zeroth law: You must play the game.
"Pete, it's a fool looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart." Ulysses Everett McGill.
Do not send technical questions via personal messaging - they will be ignored.

eddiea6987

Quote
They were wrong about -something, ever- so you must be right?


But your doing the same thing..quoting laws  , so i must be wrong?

those peoples views where wrong because of  "laws" they thought to be true, maybe your in the same boat
I could print the Arduino logo on a box of cereal and sell it as "Arduin-O's"

Go Up