Re: [Vo]:CNN video of Vertigro algae factory
Jones Beene wrote: [Regarding the CNN video of Vertigro algae factory] ``... Actually, it never hurts to see many different perspectives of a very important topic (potentially) from a variety of news sources. I would suggest adding these comments (features) to optimize such a system, at least when it is realized on a larger scale (several acres): 1) A diesel gen-set to burn a small proportion of the harvest. Also a windmill. The on-site power provides the pumping for the water and the energy necessary to extract the lipids from the protein. If some extra electricity is generated- it is for peak power and will bring in top dollar ...'' Hi All, Is it possible that the windmill could generate substantial electrical power with a spider turbine pumping the water (analogous to a pond aerator) by breaking hydrogen bonds? See the info enclosed below. A spider turbine is shown on page 32 of Infinite Energy, Vol. 78. Jack Smith http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue77/manhattan.html Infinite Energy, ISSUE 77, Jan/Feb 2008 and ISSUE 78, Mar/Apr 2008, by Peter Graneau ``Upgraded Hydroelectric Water Turbines Furthermore, it came as a surprise to find that the gravitational energy of water driving hydroelectric generators is so much smaller, per unit volume of the liquid, than the potential energy stored in the weak hydrogen bonds of the same volume of water. The gravitational head of a hydroelectric plant is the height of the top of the dam above the inlet of the turbine at the bottom of the dam. In existing plants this is usually less than 1,000 m. One liter of water has a mass of one kilogram. Then with a head of 1,000 m, the water stores 9,810 J of gravitational energy or approximately 10 kJ/kg. Compared to this, the hydrogen bond energy stored in one kilogram of liquid water is likely to be of the same order as the latent heat, or 2,360 kJ/kg, which is more than 200 times as large as the gravitational energy. If only a very small fraction of the hydrogen bonds passing through the turbine is ruptured to set their bond energy free, it could easily double the energy available in the turbine to drive the electricity generator. This stunning result demands a major investigation of what is actually happening in existing hydroelectric plants. Here is what we know now. Three quantities have to be measured to determine the efficiency of a hydroelectric installation. First, the gravitational input energy is a function of the height of the dam above the turbine and the mass flow (kg/s) through the turbine. Normal means of optical surveying will deal with the gravitational energy per kilogram of water. The mass flow can presumably be measured with flow meters in the inlet pipe (penstock) of the turbine. The gravitational energy input is the product of the mass flow and the head of water. Secondly, existing instrumentation of the power plant tells us reliably what the electrical energy output is. Thirdly, to calculate the overall efficiency it has to be known how much kinetic energy is carried away by the effluent of the water turbine. This latter quantity is very difficult to determine because every drop of water leaving the turbine may travel in a different direction with a different velocity! So how have the published efficiency figures been justified? The chances are that in some of the efficiency determinations the energy discharged in the form of water kinetic energy has simply been ignored. If this is true, then the 85-95% efficiencies are an underestimate. It is not impossible there exist cases where the allowance for discharged energy may drive the efficiency figure over 100%. This would not be acceptable because it violates energy conservation, unless an unknown energy source comes into play in the rotating turbine. How could something as important as hydrogen bond energy liberation in water turbines have been overlooked? The blame lies with the chemistry textbook writers and teachers. After the discovery of hydrogen bonds by the famous American chemist Gilbert Lewis in 1923, the chemistry establishment simply failed to explore the effects which hydrogen bond energy has on chemistry experiments and how it may be related to the latent heat of water. This historical omission, in 2007, gives us the opportunity to introduce a ldquo;newrdquo; source of energy. Recognizing the inevitability of hydrogen bond rupture in water turbines, every effort should be made to exploit this discovery for electricity generation. The first task is to investigate how turbo-generators can be modified to double their electrical energy output for the same gravitational energy input. Should a concerted RD effort be successful in attaining this objective, it becomes feasible, worldwide, to increase electricity generation by about 10% without any major civil engineering work and any changes in the means of water collection and storage. This would outstrip the benefits that can be gained by future
Re: [Vo]:CNN video of Vertigro algae factory
Jack, Without challenging the major premise (Graneau's hydrogen bond-breaking hypothesis) of the article which you referenced, it contains one serious logical error which needs to be mentioned. http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue77/manhattan.html Here is the error: On examination of the published efficiencies of hydroelectric turbines it was found that for large turbines this is quoted to be as high as 85-95% percent. It is far superior to the efficiency achieved with steam turbines of fossil fuel driven power stations. There exists a possibility that hydrogen bond energy contributes to the measured efficiencies and already generates some of our electricity. If this happens unintentionally, the effect can probably be enhanced by engineering design. END of quote OK- the serious error (Graneau should be ashamed) is in comparing mechanical efficiency of hydroelectric turbines (which is the 85-95% number cited) with the Carnot efficiency of steam turbines. Yes, the net efficiency of steam/ fossil fuel is usually in the range of 40-45% but this is a function of Carnot limitations and that is totally different and *irrelevant comparison* which neither proves not disproves the Graneau hypothesis. In fact, the mechanical efficiency of the turbines in fossil fuel plants is the same or higher ! Plus, and to make things even worse, there could exist the same kind of bond-breaking with steam ! These steam turbines can be, and often are, actually higher in mechanical efficiency (not lower as claimed) because the pressure differential is higher. This is true even if the net efficiency, which include the Carnot heat-spread inefficiency, is far less. IOW the hydroelectric Dam is NOT a heat engine, as it depends on gravity, not heat differential, so why on earth would you compare the two? However, as mentioned, the major premise of Graneau wrt hydrogen bond-breaking could still be correct (personally I believe that it has some smaller bit of validity)... BUT it is absolutely NOT for the reason cited in this paragraph (the cross-comparison of steam with hydro) which is totally fallacious. Lapses like these are the kind of fuzzy thinking which really detract from what could be a (lesser) degree of true insight; but in the minds of mainstream scientists will be poisoned quickly, as they will pick up on error and then feel justified in belittling the larger hypothesis, as a result. Jones
Re: [Vo]:CNN video of Vertigro algae factory
Howdy Jones, The ole Pelton bucket did have a few surprises to offer using the jet features Richard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelton_wheel
[Vo]:CNN video of Vertigro algae factory
See: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/international/2008/04/13/obrien.us.po nd.scum.cnn
Re: [Vo]:CNN video of Vertigro algae factory
The video link I tried to send is the same one OrionWorks successfully sent. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:CNN video of Vertigro algae factory
It is also nearly the same video from last week which initiated 'The ultimate in renewable energy' thread ... Did anyone find any extra information in there this time around? Drinkability comes to mind ;-) ... ...kinda reminds me of that awful stuff sold in health food bars - the wheat grass cocktail Actually, it never hurts to see many different perspectives of a very important topic (potentially) from a variety of news sources. I would suggest adding these comments (features) to optimize such a system, at least when it is realized on a larger scale (several acres): 1) A diesel gen-set to burn a small proportion of the harvest. Also a windmill. The on-site power provides the pumping for the water and the energy necessary to extract the lipids from the protein. If some extra electricity is generated- it is for peak power and will bring in top dollar. 2) The 50% of the biomass which is non-lipid makes a superior food, and allows desert land to supply some of the food which goes missing when corn is grown for ethanol. Actually every acre of aquaculture can substitute for hundreds of acres of corn, if those numbers of Kertz are accurate. I want them to be accurate (100,000 gallons per acre of oil and 700,000 pound of algae protein) but I fear that they are inflated. 3) The diesel exhaust can be ported back into the greenhouse. That would mean that maintenance personnel would need to carry oxygen tanks. No big deal except the obvious irony, even humor, of 'frog-men' operating in a greenhouse. 4) The plastic bags of Kertz are probably NOT needed. A better solution would be to drip the liquid over vertical netting of woven fiberglass fabric, which lets the algae breathe easier. The open weave fabric could be wiped of algae with a 'squeegee' type of arrangement on one roller in a continuous loop. Jones --- Jed Rothwell wrote: The video link I tried to send is the same one OrionWorks successfully sent. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:CNN video of Vertigro algae factory
Jones wrote: I want them to be accurate (100,000 gallons per acre of oil and 700,000 pound of algae protein) but I fear that they are inflated. I had no idea algae were nitrogen fixating organisms, which they would have to be to produce so much protein. I thought the bulk of the non-lipid material would be cellulosic. What I'm getting at is that if the algae fixes nitrogen from the air, it would make an excellent fertilizer for other crops. Or is this already well-known? M. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
