Sisyphus Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 if you have a 2 mile tube, thats a lot of petrol to lift just to get a drop. With a chain pump, you are also lifting it the same height. However, the way they actually do it, they don't have to lift it. They just replace it with water.
infinitesolid3 Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 With a chain pump, you are also lifting it the same height. However, the way they actually do it, they don't have to lift it. They just replace it with water. Replace what with water?
SH3RL0CK Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 if you have a 2 mile tube, thats a lot of petrol to lift just to get a drop. Think how fast the engine is running at. The potential energy is the same between the two systems. You have X number of barrels of oil to lift Y meters. If you think this is a lot of petrol to lift just to get a drop, then keep in mind it is no different than with your bucket idea. Except that you bucket idea is much less efficient. And much slower. And more likely to have mechanical breakdowns. And needs a bigger hole. And needs a bigger "cap" to prevent gushers. And cannot work offshore. And requires more material to fill the hole back in when the well is depleted. And so on... But still, I'm sure you have answers for all the above concerns and will win the nobel prize. Why waste your time on this forum (where someone might steal this idea), get out and make this happen!
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 Replace what with water? Many oil wells simply pump water down into the ground, forcing the oil out of the cavity and into a pipe to the surface.
infinitesolid3 Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 What i know is, the weight is divided in to buckets, so the length can be further, getting more energy in to this world.
insane_alien Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 infinitesolid3, the only and I mean ONLY time where your method would be more efficient that current methods is if we wanted a single bucketful at a time. I think we can all agree that this is not the case. just because you divide the weight up into buckets does not change the total weight.
infinitesolid3 Posted July 20, 2009 Posted July 20, 2009 im also known as gafferuk, bristol, england.
infinitesolid2 Posted July 21, 2009 Posted July 21, 2009 We may have a bit of a problem here if we do this out at sea. The space left by removing oil may get replaced with water at some point, this water may seep through the rocks until it reaches lava, which will then heat up, producing steam, which could produce global warming. In the end we need solar.
insane_alien Posted July 21, 2009 Posted July 21, 2009 but it doesn't reach lava, we know this from experience. i think you need to get a grip on reality
infinitesolid2 Posted July 21, 2009 Posted July 21, 2009 May not be true though, the steam may only go as far as the oil and be cooled down. Guess we can't take it all. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedbut it doesn't reach lava, we know this from experience. i think you need to get a grip on reality Reality? where are you?
swansont Posted July 21, 2009 Posted July 21, 2009 If people stop trying to find my password then i can log in as infinitesolid. so in future please only listen to me as infinitesolid. not any other. Thank you though people for not pretending to be me as infinitesolid3,4,5,6,7,8,9 I don't think this is happening. Your infinitesolid2 account is the most active (and last one accessed), so the others have now been taken offline. Do not open another new account. You also need to pay attention to points made about your posts. Your bewilderment and assertions are … unusual.
infinitesolid2 Posted July 21, 2009 Posted July 21, 2009 no, it kept on saying you have used up so many attempts, and have to wait 15 mins.
infinitesolid2 Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 (edited) we need to generate electricity using the sea. White on one side, black on the other. We need to monitor sea temeratures. Solar, sea dynamo generators, no patient!! Edited July 24, 2009 by infinitesolid2 Consecutive posts merged.
Fuzzwood Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 You know that is already happening in the form of using the tides as a means to drive generators?
infinitesolid2 Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 (edited) Just to let people know my design is copyright 2009. I have contacted oil industries by email in uk & usa but yet to receive a reply. Gafferuk, Bristol. Edited August 15, 2009 by infinitesolid2
insane_alien Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 (edited) i don't think you can copyright something that has already existed for millenia. anyway what you need for an invention is a patent, not copyright. Edited August 15, 2009 by insane_alien
infinitesolid2 Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 (edited) When walt disney "designed" donald duck, anyone who made a physical model would be done for copyright. My "Design" can be patanted any time under british law. "Millenia"? theres no existance of an engine/chain/buckets lifting oil/petrol/diesel/nitro/plastics anywhere in the world. So my copyright of my design holds true. Patant any time. Edited August 15, 2009 by infinitesolid2
insane_alien Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 there is a very good reason why it is not being used. it's crap. also, for something to be patentented it needs a certain degree of innovation. you can't just apply existing technology to a new application with zero modifications and get a patent on it. it would be classed as 'obvious' making it ineligble for a patent. the device is unpatentable.
infinitesolid2 Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 (edited) Loook mate, my design is new. never been used in real world. It will work. Else, were run out of oil/diesel/petrol/platics in little (20-50?) years to come. What else is there? Bio-fuel? How much land is needed to make a gallon of fart-fuel? Multiply that by 10,000,000 cars. Thats for 15 mins of driving? How about the other hours? We were screwed. Edited August 15, 2009 by infinitesolid2
insane_alien Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 so how is this going to extend the producing time of oil wells eh? it's no where near as good as current designs. really its crap. utter crap. there are maybe one or two cases where a chain pump is actually the most appropriate design but oil wells are not one of them. far too much stuff to go wrong and too high a chance of it going wrong in an inaccessible place resulting in the need for a second well to be drilled. seriously we have told you all the places it sucks and you are just going 'lalalalalala its good its good its good and origional' without giving ANY evidence.
infinitesolid2 Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 (edited) It's a bit like dyson vacume cleaner. Take a cyclone design, change it a little and you have a fence spryer!! Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedso how is this going to extend the producing time of oil wells eh? it's no where near as good as current designs. really its crap. utter crap. there are maybe one or two cases where a chain pump is actually the most appropriate design but oil wells are not one of them. far too much stuff to go wrong and too high a chance of it going wrong in an inaccessible place resulting in the need for a second well to be drilled. seriously we have told you all the places it sucks and you are just going 'lalalalalala its good its good its good and origional' without giving ANY evidence. Then you mut be stupid thinking it wont work. Ill draw a better design for you. Edited August 15, 2009 by infinitesolid2 Consecutive posts merged.
insane_alien Posted August 15, 2009 Posted August 15, 2009 oh i'm not saying it won't work. i'm just saying it'll be crap compared to current methods like i have been all along.
Recommended Posts