saving the world

[superman82]

Hello, hi, bonjour etc. to all!

 

I only reckon that I may how come up with a way to produce energy with no combustion fuel which makes its pollution FREE!!

 

I know what your thinking...what planets is this guy on etc. cause it already exists right??

i.e solar power, wind turbines, tidal, hydro and wave.

 

the thing is with the above they have flaws ....

 

solar:- dont work well on cloudy days and cant produce enough juice.

 

wind:- noisy ugly things that only work in certain places, ruins tv reception and only produce the goods when windy of course

 

tidal:- extremely expensive and only works in certain places but does produce loadsa power

 

hydro:- ok but limited to certain places plus can have a dramatic effect on the local wildlife. also costs s*@%loads to build.

 

wave:- quality idea but suitable sites needed and only works when waves are available.

 

So what am I bangin on about then is I guess the next question rite?

I've thought of a way to make a power plant which is hydro based but does not require any river or sea. In fact its stationary water that will be moved by itself and forever keep moving by itself therefore never needing to refuel and doesnt depend on anything but itself!!

 

I'm posted this thread to ask if anyone could help me do some calculations please???

 

I would like to know:

 

1- How much energy does a general power station produce in a month? (whether its nuclear or fossil fuel based dont matter just average will do)

 

2- How much water pressure is required to turn a/some turbine(s) in a/some generator(s) to produce that much power in a month?

 

As corny as this sounds but knowing this info is potentially the begining of another path to saving the world! There I said it! but just imagine zero pollution or minimal heat produced from power stations - the impact it could have on the greenhouse effect and electric cars are round the corner in all (GM Hy-wire) so there'd be no guilt of driving them.

 

The only two main worries I got are:-

1-The idea I got is SO flippin simple that its more than likely been thought of I reckon. The only thing is I've spent alota time looking around for my design of powerplant and I can't find anywhere which makes me wonder.....??? Could someone have thought of it but found that it was too expensive to make, too impractical or simply it was just scientifically/mathematically impossible to do or something?? either way I am respectfully reluctant to divulge the design at this moment in time

 

2-Funding the damn project if its worthwile (one step at a time though eh)

 

I'm not really a science nut, I did study A level physics though but didnt get far in it. I did it years ago and am very rusty at physics calculations. My A level teacher was a right bitch and wernt very helpful so if something come about this then I would so be loving it!!

 

Anyway if your still awake after reading all that waffle and can assist in this great cause then please do

 

kind regards SM82

[Mr Skeptic]

It won't work. Like they say, "There's no such thing as a free lunch." Though in physics they say it differently, "Energy cannot be created or destroyed" and "Energy always degrades into a less useful form."

 

If you tell us how you think your idea will work, we can tell you why it won't. Or you could build and test it yourself if you don't believe us.

[Bignose]

I

If you tell us how you think your idea will work, we can tell you why it won't. Or you could build and test it yourself if you don't believe us.

 

This is the key sentence right here. You should be able to build a model and show that it works -- you will throw physics completely on it's head, however, since everything we know today tells you and us that it is impossible. That's why you won't receive any funding until you can prove it works. A bathtub scale model shouldn't be too expensive to build and try and prove to yourself that you can't get energy out of nothing.

 

Or, you can draw a diagram and show us, and we can probably show you why you won't get free energy out of the system. But, most people claiming miraculous results won't post diagrams of their ideas because they think someone will steal them, so I don't actually expect you to, either. That's why you're going to have to build a model and going to have to submit it to a great deal of thorough, objective testing. Best of luck, I hope that you'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath.

[superman82]

no worries at all guys. I do intend to make a model, can very easily make one and will do as so as I got the finances.

 

in the meantime though what would be the answer to the 2 questions asked earlier please?? It'll keep me going in the meantime ta!

[ydoaPs]

Sorry, I can't help you with the questions. I don't know the commercial numbers and ours are classified.

[thedarkshade]

In fact its stationary water that will be moved by itself and forever keep moving by itself therefore never needing to refuel and doesnt depend on anything but itself!!

False hope! Nothing can keep on moving forever without the necessity to refuel or "give" energy to it. Skeptic is right! Energy cannot be created or destroyed. And one thing that is crucial (and probably you forgot it) is that energy flows! No matter how much energy is given, there will always be need for more, because it flows, it does not recycle! For example: "Sun must have given a HUGE amount of energy to earth from its very first creation. But if we turn off sun, life would just disappear for lack of solar energy that plants need for photosynthesis"

It's like that!

[ydoaPs]

In fact its stationary water that will be moved by itself and forever keep moving by itself therefore never needing to refuel and doesnt depend on anything but itself!!

Could you explain this? I'm not sure how you think this would work.

[thedarkshade]

Could you explain this? I'm not sure how you think this would work.

It wouldn't work at all, especially in real fluids. Because when molecules hit each other there is always some loss of energy, and this way sooner or later that water would stop moving. I'm also curious to know what he was thinking of when he proposed that!

[superman82]

ok ladies & gents I must admit that I av explained myself poorly so here we go again...

 

I totally agree that "Energy cannot be created or destroyed" this is very a basic law of physics right? So lets say the energys already there in the form of gravity just like how a hydro dam works and due to the way I'v thought of a design gravity will constantly be present therefore continuous energy production.....but...

 

where "thedarkshade" has pointed out "Because when molecules hit each other there is always some loss of energy, and this way sooner or later that water would stop moving." This would probably be the downfall of my idea

[insane_alien]

gravity is constantly present either way still no continuous energy production.

[thedarkshade]

gravity is constantly present either way still no continuous energy production.

Yeah, just like that!

Every particle in the universe attracts another particle with a force measured by: [math]F=G\frac{m1\times m2}{r^2}[/math] Newton's universal law of gravity. There always is gravity (of course as long as there's matter) just you said!

[Royston]

Yeah, just like that!

Every particle in the universe attracts another particle with a force measured...

 

What ? The point is you need to put energy in to benefit from gravitational energy. Gravity is a headache where particle physics is concerned.

[thedarkshade]

Gravity is a headache where particle physics is concerned.

I think the kind of disagreement (gravity vs particle physics) you mentioned is way beyond what's being spoken in this thread!

[timo]

Off-topic:

[...] most people claiming miraculous results won't post diagrams of their ideas because they think someone will steal them, [...]

Which, cosindering the idea supposedly solves some of the biggest problems the human race currently has, imho is a completely ridiculous/inacceptable attitude.

 

On-topic:

Can't be too hard googling for some numbers. Very first google hit for the nuclear power plant near from where I live gave a power output of ~1200 MW (per reactor) and a pressure of ~50 bar at the steam turbine.

[Royston]

I think the kind of disagreement (gravity vs particle physics) you mentioned is way beyond what's being spoken in this thread!

 

That wasn't my point...you can't use gravity as an energy source without putting energy in...i.e it's pointless. Also, using Newtonian mechanics on particles doesn't work, hence my comment.

[thedarkshade]

ok Snail, let's clarify this.

 

Superman82 wrote:

So lets say the energys already there in the form of gravity ...

 

then insane_alien corrected him:

gravity is constantly present either way still no continuous energy production.

 

And then I just agreed with insane_alien, that there is always gravity!

[Mr Skeptic]

To extract energy from a force, you need to move a certain distance in the direction of the force. To go back to where you started, you need to move against the force, which requires you to expend energy. If you end up where you started, you cannot have gotten any energy out, and probably lost some due to friction.

 

If you build your device, perhaps you will understand how useful the laws of physics that tell us it wouldn't work are.

 

Also, you can't patent a perpetual motion machine because the patent office believes in the laws of physics. Since you can't patent it anyhow, and neither can we, and it won't work anyhow, you lose nothing in telling us how you think it will work.

[insane_alien]

i was reffering to this part specifically

 

I'v thought of a design gravity will constantly be present therefore continuous energy production

[Royston]

And then I just agreed with insane_alien, that there is always gravity!

 

Yes, but last time I checked we're discussing energy sources. So it's pointless to say 'there's always gravity'

 

To extract energy from a force, you need to move a certain distance in the direction of the force. To go back to where you started, you need to move against the force, which requires you to expend energy. If you end up where you started, you cannot have gotten any energy out, and probably lost some due to friction.

 

Exactly, pretty basic stuff.

[insane_alien]

Snail, superman was saying he had though of a design where gravity is always present(as if this was a major departure from normality). i was saying this happens in every process. this is how gravity came into it.

 

i think he has took this illusion a little to seriously to be honest,

 

[Royston]

Snail, superman was saying he had though of a design where gravity is always present(as if this was a major departure from normality). i was saying this happens in every process. this is how gravity came into it.

 

Right, I guess Superman is unfamiliar that you need to stick G into all manner of equations.

 

I'm finding it quite hard to keep a straight face when giving 'Superman' math advice.

[thedarkshade]

Right, I guess Superman is unfamiliar that you need to stick G into all manner of equations.

Now that is exactly why I posted [math]F=G\frac{m1\times m2}{r^2}[/math]

[Royston]

Now that is exactly why I posted [math]F=G\frac{m1\times m2}{r^2}[/math]

 

Strawman

 

You mentioned that equation had influence on particles...wrong, the thread is about renewable energy, quit trying to defend a faulty post.

[superman82]

lol. Very funny insane allien but as mentioned as before I wont know about this design until have made a small scale prototype. I am fairly confident that it'll work cause I can picture it like being able to predict how a swing moves for example. So I'll get back to you all and if it does work out then I have no intention of keeping this idea to myself. The whole reason when all this brainstorming come about was when I was in a third world country and I had alotta time on my hands. The countries power supply was and still is pants so I got thinking and now I just simply wanna see if it can put my thoughts into action and not keep them to myself.

 

So as soon as I make my model and get the results whatever they are I will indeed update you all.

 

thank you so far for your help and will chat soon!!

[insane_alien]

i predict it will not work, at all. it requires perpetual motion(that you can extract energ from) which is impossible. the energy comes from nowhere. this is impossible.