[[email protected]]

sci.electronics.design? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

And sci.physics and sci.energy.

 

[John Larkin]

And sci.physics and sci.energy.

Gosh, I bet you get more wingnuts than we do!

John

 

[BradGuth]

Where will these be installed? Got links?

Do you and I smell a rusemaster (aka MIB, spook or mole) that's hard
at work, or what?
- Brad Guth -

 

[[email protected]]

PROBLEM WITH BATTERIES

COST

Let's talk about the cost of batteries. Lithium-ion batteries, which
is the 'gas tank' in the Tesla, store the equivalaent of 2 gallons of
gasoline in terms of energy, and last about 2 years. The problem is,
those batteries cost $25,000 - and they've gotta be replaced whether
you use the batteries or not.

The main problem with batteries, is just simply people
who don't know how to drive, or know anything about aerodynamics,
Since electric starters where only even invented, orignally,
for people who just can't function without automatic transmissions.

Which is one of the main reasons, we even invented laser batteries
and solar cells for the idiots.

 

[BradGuth]

BradGuth [email protected] posted to sci.electronics.design:









Brad your problem is obvious:

Apparently it's so obviously that you and other rusemasters of your
kind don't have a clue.
- Brad Guth -

 

[BradGuth]

Those systems are kilowatt level or less. Imagine a local grid
supported by 3,300 MW of conventional power plants. Add a 1 kW solar
panel to it. The person designing the solar panel and attaching it to
the power grid, doesn't really have much to consider

Now, lets assume this is a place like Pennsylvania where due to
weather you can't get more than about 4% of your energy from sunlight
if its tied to the grid. That means that about 40% of your power will
be coming from sunlight on the sunniest days. (we're not assuming
storage, just direct intertie which is highly efficient) The intertie
designer has a lot more to consider in maintaining grid stability -
especially if his peaking plants take minutes or more to respond, and
only account for less than 40% of your power. And this is only one
diseconomy of scale. There are others.


Sure, if all you were doing is installing the same intertie a million
times to 1 kW generators, but at some point you start actually
producing enough to affect more than your power meter. At some point
you start actually changing the load of the entire grid to such an
extent that you have to account for changing lighting conditions
throughout the day due to weather and time of day. Since these
conditions can change in seconds and affect huge amounts of power
generation, they have to be accounted for in the intertie system - and
paid for as intertie costs.

My approach is to focus on cost and make hydrogen the ultimate
intertie, and as long as I sell heating value at less cost than it
costs to buy it from carbon sources, I've beat the carbon sources at
their own game, I'm making a profit, and I'm well situated to dominate
the market, not merely make tiny inroads to it.



That might hold water if I hadn't spent something like $400,000
studying direct intertie and had a team spend months looking at it and
pulling their hari out. Efficiency was only ONE of MANY criterion - a
more important one being profitability, and market dominance. When
you start looking at doing everything with solar, you quickly come
upon some diseconomies of scale that you need to address. Then once
you've addressed them, you then choose, what's the quickest, least
risky, path to dominance. And the answer is, hydrogen.

There are other paths - in fact there is a path I call Genesis
planet. You put an array of solar collectors in the sunnieset areas,
and you build HVDC lines to connect them all to load centers - cities,
towns and so forth. Each person has a demand curve for energy that
they go through each day, and that is modulated throughout the year
with season. This is a function of time, longitude and latitude.
So, you can take population distribution and plug in this demand
function with time for that population and get demand for the planet
consuming power as an average US citizen say. Then, you take all the
insolation data, combine that with your panel costs, land costs (which
goes down the further you get from population centers! haha), and
transmission costs - and you can calculate an optimal array of
networked panels and intertie that exactly meets the needs of the
planet. Excepting to meet the needs without any brownouts, you need
to have oversupply at certain times. What do you do with the
oversupply? Short it out, or shut it down. You can make fertilizer
with it. You can make hydrogen with it.

Then the question becomes, what do you do with the hydrogen? Remember
this is Genesis planet, everything is solar - tied to panels. Even
the cars tied to the solar grid - like slot cars, or electric trains,
or trams or magnetic coupling.

So, even Genesis planet isn't as efficient as the physics suggest,
because when you install the panels and grid and switches onto the
real Earth with the real population here - you end up shorting out
about 30% of your produciton. Which doesn't effect cost that much,but
is sure as hell is a lot of waste! Then, if you look at actual losses
in long distance HVDC lines - the idea of using hydrogen as the medium
(the famous (in our offices) solar proton and solar electron debate!
haha)

So, yeah, we looked at a lot of things - very seriously - and hired
the best and brightest to do it. The detailed results are
proprietary. But our game plan is clear.

Especially when you go beyond just the distribution of people and
sunlight and start to factor in the availability of other energy
systems, the possiblity of growth, and so forth - and you find that
there is a least risky, least costly path - which unfortunately
relegates home panels to second or third teir status in the developed
economies, and first or second tier status in developing countries,
depending on where they are. But in terms of market dominance,
developing countries isn't where the money is, or where the energy is
used. Its needed, but not used.

So, the game plan is clear. Dominate the hydrocarbon fuel production
with solar assisted hydrogenation of low rank low value fuels. With
those profits create an integrated oil company from a collection of
remarketers and appropriately located coal mines. Then use the
hydrogen distribution system that supports this operation to fuel
stationary power plants, taking stranded fuel in trade. Then, use the
hydrogen distirubtion system along with your retailing operation to
sell hydrogen directly to mobile users.

Meanwhile, with 60 GW a year production,rising to 1,400 GW per year in
a few decades, 2 GW per year rising to 160 GW per year of solar panels
will be sold for remote applications, mostly in developing regions.
Also, an increasing number of panels at central locations will be
shipping electrons instead of protons into a national and then
international HVDC power grid - supplying up to 20% of all our energy
needs in the best case - in the most developed nations.and another 4%
of our energy in these same places will be in homes offices and
factories that are off grid altogether.




- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What's your problem this time, Willie.Moo?

Can't you even sell or in any way share hardly any part of your clean
energy alternatives to these incest mutated MIB of various Yid like
spooks, moles and infomercial spewing rusemasters? (gee whiz Willie,
what a surprise, as apparently it's not possible)

Unlike most others, I happen to think your numbers are only a wee bit
off here and there, but otherwise for the most part quite doable.

Willie.Moo / The Electric Car
http://groups.google.com/group/sci....e5?lnk=gst&q=4,400+ft&rnum=1#4e7620eecc8539e5

Can you share as to the when and where any of this nifty R&D or
prototype effort is taking place? or is it all Willie vapor
technology?

By any chance, did you get your vapor project funding from Nigeria?
- Brad Guth -

 

[Eeyore]

What's your problem this time, Willie.Moo?

Even Willie's not good enough for you now ?

I thought you said you were big time buddies.

Graham

 

[[email protected]]

And sci.physics and sci.energy.

[/QUOTE]

Gosh, I bet you get more wingnuts than we do!

John

An understatement at best.

 

[[email protected]]

I am not selling equipment. I sell on forward contracts commodities.
The people who buy the commodities don't care about where they get
them. They just need them by a certain date. But they pay me today
for a discounted price. And they accept the execution risk. Which is
equivalent to discovery risk in developing resources. There are of
course no market risk since these are commodities.

With this money I build own and operate facilities that use solar
hydrogen to make gasoline from coal by direct hydrogenation,
facilities that make fresh water and salt crystals from sea water
using solar heat in a multi-stage flash evaporator, and facilities
that upgrade residual oil to gasoline using hydrogen in a direct
hydrogenation process.

I facilities underway in Indonesia, Australia and UAE.

I do not use bank financing or equity financing in any of this. And I
retain 100% ownership of the technology and facilities, and a large
portion of the output going forward.

I will leverage that position in the future to expand my supply chain,
build my own facilities where I own 100% of the output, and acquire
retailing outlets to create the world's first integrated solar based
oil company.

 

[John Larkin]

Do you and I smell a rusemaster (aka MIB, spook or mole) that's hard
at work, or what?

OK, I take that to mean "no links."

Why am I not surprised?

John

 

[JosephKK]

[email protected] [email protected] posted to
sci.electronics.design:

[email protected] [email protected] posted to
sci.electronics.design:

[email protected] [email protected] posted to
sci.electronics.design:

39:36 -0700, bill wrote:
[about LOX, H2O2, etc.]
...
I don't know if such a thing would really work, or
what its
effects on an engine would be, but its a kinda cool
idea. I might make tinkering with it a winter project.

You'll never get back the energy it took to liquefy the
O2.

Nothing is going to ignite until it is gas; that's what the
intake and compression strokes are for.

Filling a TDC cylinder with liquid fuel and liquid O2, I bet
they'd ignite real good, if the LOX doesn't freeze the fuel;
you might need a lot of energy to make a spark through it,
however.

Liquids don't ignite.



If you are so very sure about, that i suggest that you try
mixing unsymmetrical di-methyl hydrazine (UDMH) and red fuming
nitric acid
(RFNA) (glacial). Take very serious precautions and read the
relevant MSDS before making the attempt.

Do you understand the difference between combustion and a
chemical reaction?

I thought not.

How about you lookup hypergolic reactions? TWIT! You were given
sufficient to learn better for yourself, but no you just attack.

Please list any land vehicles whose internal combustion engines run
on hypergolic reactions.

I do not know of any. But there are plenty of space vehicles that use
this combination, precisely because it is a hypergolic pair. The one
step upline issue was can liquids burn? These do.

 

[JosephKK]

BradGuth [email protected] posted to sci.electronics.design:

Apparently it's so obviously that you and other rusemasters of your
kind don't have a clue.
- Brad Guth -

If you do not like the reception you get here do not post here.
Nobody here is forcing you to post here.

 

[John Larkin]

Hey, I once reinvented the astable multivibrator! ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

I invented the dual-slope adc, some years before Fairchild patented
it. And the token-ring LAN, too.

John

 

[John Larkin]

I am not selling equipment. I sell on forward contracts commodities.
The people who buy the commodities don't care about where they get
them. They just need them by a certain date. But they pay me today
for a discounted price. And they accept the execution risk. Which is
equivalent to discovery risk in developing resources. There are of
course no market risk since these are commodities.

With this money I build own and operate facilities that use solar
hydrogen to make gasoline from coal by direct hydrogenation,
facilities that make fresh water and salt crystals from sea water
using solar heat in a multi-stage flash evaporator, and facilities
that upgrade residual oil to gasoline using hydrogen in a direct
hydrogenation process.

Show us some links to some such facilities. Nothing like that could be
done off the public record.

John

 

[The Ghost In The Machine]

In sci.physics, Eeyore
<[email protected]>
wrote

Let me see.

Wind turbine blades flex.

Photocells break if flexed.

The new organic ones should not have this problem, though
I'm not sure about their efficiency. There's of course
the little issue of how one transfers the current from
the moving blades to the stator.

Stupid, stupid idea.

I've seen better ones, but at least it's theoretically
doable; one might even consider putting small batteries
on the blades and allowing them to blink at night to warn
approaching aircraft, or something. Granted, that's
probably not all that practical either.

Graham

 

[The Ghost In The Machine]

In sci.physics, BradGuth
<[email protected]>
wrote

A renewable energy farm of such tower derived clean energy may be as
few as one. Then there's offshore installations. Go figure.

One tower of 100 m radius would create 4 MW. Hardly enough
for powering the entire state of California, though one
might build a neighborhood around it (it would presumably
power about 1000 homes or so surrounding it, on a good
day).

Assuming it worked, of course, as specified.

We could all use a little extra shade. Global warming, you know.

Shaded land can't grow crops as well.

Obviously you have no honest intentions of polishing or otherwise
constructively contributing squat, much less pitching on our behalf.

I am not the one making the proposal. You are.

Of course neither would the likes of your friend GW Bush, but I'd bet
Hitler would, especially if it meant winning a war, such as our war
against global warming and otherwise salvaging our badly failing
environment.

GW Bush is many things, but "friend" he is not.

In that case, we'll just run our cars, SUVs, trucks and most
everything else under the sun that's orbiting your flat Earth on nasty
old coal and mostly N2, just the way "The Ghost In The Machine", ENRON
and the ExxonMobil swarm of denial and naysayers like it.

N2? You are a confused puppy. The most likely fuel source
would be converted coal -- and that has many problems.
But it would work for awhile, coupled with ambient oxygen (O2).

 

[The Ghost In The Machine]

In sci.physics, John Larkin
<[email protected]>
wrote

It's remarkable how little you do understand.

It's easy to imagine things when you are unencumbered by numbers.

And what's this "Yid" obsession about? That makes as little sense as
the rest of your ravings.

Is it not obvious? Yids [*], of course, are preventing us
from building and then harvesting hydrogen peroxide from
these towers. It's all their fault.

It might be the yarmulkes, but it could be the dreidels.
Something about square spinning tops and wearing certain
headgear might hypnotize prospective investors into making
a beeline to the nearest oil well or coal mine instead of
doing the proper thing and building these towers.

Personally, I think hypnodisks and simple
chemistry/economics would be more effective, but what do
I know? I'm Yiddish, of course -- BradGuth has said so.
Mind you, I don't even have a yarmulke (though I do
have a baseball cap or two), and the closest thing I
have to a dreidel is a six-sided die, which I've lost
somewhere in this place of mine, along with the rest of
my Platonic-figured (aka Dungeons & Dragons) dice. Of
course, that shouldn't matter to a true bigot anyway...

As for "spare energy"....I agree with Eeyore; we'll use
the surplus for various things, if there ever is one.
I'm not all that hopeful at this point, and in any event
supply and demand will balance things out -- electricity
will never be "too cheap to meter", as once claimed for
fission power.

John

[*] Wikipedia suggests that the term is slightly perjorative as usually
pronounced. The proper pronounciation, if any, is more along the lines
of "yeed".

 

[The Ghost In The Machine]

In sci.physics, BradGuth
<[email protected]>
wrote

[about LOX, H2O2, etc.]
...

I don't know if such a thing would really work, or what its
effects on an engine would be, but its a kinda cool idea. I might
make tinkering with it a winter project.

You'll never get back the energy it took to liquefy the O2.

Nothing is going to ignite until it is gas; that's what the intake
and compression strokes are for.

Filling a TDC cylinder with liquid fuel and liquid O2, I bet they'd
ignite real good, if the LOX doesn't freeze the fuel; you might need
a lot of energy to make a spark through it, however.

Use at least 100 bar injection, if not 1000 bar.

Using h2o2 + fossil whatever will likely ignite itself, as should LO2--

O2 and fossil whatever.

- Brad Guth -

It might very well do so, at that. Of course, depending on the
circumstances one might get a rocket or a bang, neither of which
is very desirable from a controllability standpoint...and you've
yet to answer the question regarding where one gets the hydrogen
peroxide from, precisely.

Besides, the general idea is *not* to use fossil fuels
whatsoever, if I understood you correctly. H2O2,
presumably, would simply replace them, distributed in gas
stations much like gasoline is today.

(Yeah, right.)

 

[The Ghost In The Machine]

In sci.physics, Eeyore
<[email protected]>
wrote

It turns out they're using good old natural gas.

Graham

OK, dumb question...where does the carbon go? Best I can
do is some sort of process where one might burn it off
(CO2), use a catalyst to mix natural gas and oxygen and
generate hydrogen and CO2 (which is about the same thing),
or an anaerobic process that generates oils, something
along the lines of

8CH4 = C8H18 + 7H2

only far more specific and doable.

Color me curious. I like the idea generally -- though am
also wondering if natural gas can ever replace coal for
the purposes of power generation; I doubt there's enough.

 

[Robert Adsett]

Do the Mennonites mutilate their children as well?

Brad does seem to be proof they are no more immune to anti-semitism than
any other christian denominations.

Robert