Forum Home » Sound Reinforcement » The Basement » OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321822 is a reply to message #321798 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 18:41   |
 |
 John Roberts {JR}
Messages: 6425
Registered: April 2004
Location: MS |
Has No Life |
|
|
| Patrick Tracy wrote on Sun, 11 May 2008 17:45 |
Is it more efficient when braking to dump momentum as heat or to regenerate it as electricity?
|
Rhetorical?
| Quote: |
The reasons that we don't have electric vehicles are political, economic and social, not technical.
|
Electric cars are currently limited by marginal battery "technology", then poor economics. Many people are willing to suffer the poor economics to be green so I don't see any social stigma.
The folks in the trenches are gambling that they are close enough with battery technology and production is ramping up. We'll have electric cars in a few years and I hope they do have the batteries under control.
| Quote: |
Afforded to us by whom? There are other technologies in existence, but many have the potential for decentralized production which may not benefit those who currently control our energy.
|
I'm not sure what this is about? Harvest methane gas from Tom's chili?
| Quote: |
Umm, yeah, but my point is that the grid is there if we decide to find other sources of energy. There's no real reason that the source must be combustion other than the substantial economic momentum for doing it that way. There is energy everywhere and all we really have to do is be creative about extracting it. The grid can even make decentralized generation like home photovoltaic more efficient by allowing those generating excess to supply those with a shortfall.
|
The real merit of grid in combination with decentralized photovoltaic, wind, or whatever, is the ability to use the grid for excess energy storage, essentially running the meter backwards. Utilities actually like this because they can reduce investment to meet peak demand as excess PV energy is mid day when they need it.
Of course it is easier to clean a handful of coal burning plants than 100,000 tailpipes. Nuclear energy is even cleaner.
| Quote: |
Yes, the laws of Newtonian physics are clear, but in the quantum world what you say isn't necessarily so. Even within your constraints there are lots of other ways to use the energy all around us. I'm not talking about cold fusion or anything equally questionable, I'm talking about leveraging our solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, tidal etc. technologies into a practical system of generation. I think it can be done on a technical level but it's the political and economic forces that resist the change.
|
Quantum physics?? The energy economy is very simple and very basic physics. The politicians in Washington seem equally confused and quick to blame everybody else for our current situation.
It's the local NIMBY refusal to base nuclear plants or deal with disposal issues. "I have seen the enemy and it is us" (Pogo).
JR
https://www.resotune.com/
"A bus in a console is spelled with one 's', but you can buss your girlfriend while riding in a bus."
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321824 is a reply to message #321798 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 18:54 |
Charlie Zureki
Messages: 303
Registered: April 2008
Location: Detroit Area |
Has No Life |
|
|
Patrick,
I thought my comments were self explainitory, not to upset or anger anyone... I understand the politics involved in the fuel debate, I was only answering as to the question, why we've used petroleum... Because until recently, it has been a cheap source of energy, and frankly, other than Nuclear, it has been one of the few sources of energy we could put into the practice of using.
I understand solar energy and the products used to capture it.
I am all for using it, and the other sources as well, Nuclear, Wind, etc... But again, Solar has been cost inefficient until recently. And, I understand the concept of one's selling the surplus to the Utility... I corrected someones Math equation from the previous Thread, explaining that their Math was flawed in the Amount of energy their system would produce.
And, finally the Laws of Physics do not change... whether I discuss them or anyone else.... Quote:"I talking about leveraging our Solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, etc...."
All of the above make energy from: Mechanical, Chemical or Thermal.
Yes, things will have to change, but...maybe they're raping us on fuel costs to afford the ability to provide Energy derived from other forms when the Petrol runs out.
Hammer
Be prepared, you'll need it!
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321828 is a reply to message #321824 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 18:58 |
|
"maybe they're raping us on fuel costs to afford the ability to provide Energy derived from other forms when the Petrol runs out."
Yeah, well I have a really nice bridge for sale, interested?
when does Oxford arrive at this train?
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321838 is a reply to message #321746 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 19:32 |
Charlie Zureki
Messages: 303
Registered: April 2008
Location: Detroit Area |
Has No Life |
|
|
Phil,
We could debate Fuels for Fusion or Fission till the cows come home, the only point that I was trying to make was that one of the biggest users of petroleum products is to generate Electricity; Which could be generated by other sources.
Regarding Gasoline Pumps, I worked on a side project for a company that made meters years ago. The meter was a Coriolis meter, which measured mass-flow, it had no internal moving parts like turbine, displacement, piston,etc... and could be used(when calibrated) to measure liquid/ slurry mixture,low density to high, high to low viscosity. Extremely more accurate than even vortex shedders.
That is when I realized that Gasoline Pumps were measuring volume and not mass. Some Tankers (probably all now) were converting their fleet to Mass Flow meters to get more accurate reading when selling to the retailer Retail pumps did not have mass flow meters, pretty certain they still don't.
Volumetric expansions : V= V sub0(1 plus B[delta t])
Do the math and see if there couldn't be a substantial difference.
Cheers
Hammer
Be prepared, you'll need it!
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321840 is a reply to message #321822 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 19:36 |
 Patrick Tracy
Messages: 1195
Registered: February 2006
Location: Boulder, CO |
Has No Life |
|
|
I guess I was reacting to what seemed to be an attitude that "it can't be done." Probably overreacting. I do appreciate my less logical expressions being pointed out.
I would say that there seems to be a viable battery technology that has been left out of most conversations of this sort, flywheels developed by Jack Bitterly and others. They circumvent the whole issue of chemistry as energy storage. They don't need replacing every couple of years. They charge as fast as they discharge making regenerative braking efficient.
Even if that particular technology doesn't pan out there are endless ways of manipulating energy. It's our willingness to accept the status quo that is the biggest obstacle to a better solution than simply burning stuff that's been laying around. I don't accept that the only reasonable energy sourced is fossil fuel.
http://home.earthlink.net/~patrickgtracy
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321842 is a reply to message #321840 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 19:40 |
|
Bravo Patrick
There has been a tendency here to embrace the status quo, Oil Supply Shortages? hey lets dig up more and the extra cost of the dig will come out of the research for alternatives!
But Hey, we could all follow the advice of another poster and "stop those people from using too much oil"
God forbid the possibility that we are "those people"
when does Oxford arrive at this train?
|
|
| |
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321846 is a reply to message #321821 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 19:44 |
|
| E. Lee Dickinson wrote on Sun, 11 May 2008 19:40 |
Yeah, but Phil, he's not talking about compressed hydrogen, he's talking about hydrogen electrolyzed from water. When I spent a semester soldering (without understanding) the voltage monitoring systems for a fuel cell in Virginia Tech's hybrid vehicle team, I often overheard the engineers around me lamenting that "There's more hydrogen in a cup of water than in a cup of compressed hydrogen."
|
But you have to put the energy into electrolyzing water to begin with. This makes the hydrogen in the water nothing more than a battery, and a lousy one. The hydrolysis of water, and subsequent consumption of that hydrogen is most definitely NOT a net positive process.
Petroleum's big plus as an energy source is that it is already here. If we had to directly synthesize petroleum, it would be embroiled in just as much debate as any other technology.
As soon as you exhaust the inherent supplies of any energy source (eg petroleum) you are faced with manufacturing a replacement, and potentially on a global scale.
Hopefully this makes sense...
Phill Graham
Doctoral Candidate
Georgia Tech
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321847 is a reply to message #321838 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 19:46 |
|
John Roberts {JR}
Messages: 6425
Registered: April 2004
Location: MS |
Has No Life |
|
|
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Sun, 11 May 2008 19:32 |
Phil,
We could debate Fuels for Fusion or Fission till the cows come home, the only point that I was trying to make was that one of the biggest users of petroleum products is to generate Electricity; Which could be generated by other sources.
Regarding Gasoline Pumps, I worked on a side project for a company that made meters years ago. The meter was a Coriolis meter, which measured mass-flow, it had no internal moving parts like turbine, displacement, piston,etc... and could be used(when calibrated) to measure liquid/ slurry mixture,low density to high, high to low viscosity. Extremely more accurate than even vortex shedders.
That is when I realized that Gasoline Pumps were measuring volume and not mass. Some Tankers (probably all now) were converting their fleet to Mass Flow meters to get more accurate reading when selling to the retailer Retail pumps did not have mass flow meters, pretty certain they still don't.
Volumetric expansions : V= V sub0(1 plus B[delta t])
Do the math and see if there couldn't be a substantial difference.
Cheers
Hammer
|
Some states insist on delivery normalized for temperature. As I mentioned the difference in modest 1% per 15' and storage temp doesn't swing all that much.
-----
In fact the biggest use of petroleum is for transportation. Electrical generation is mainly coal, with nuclear, hydro, and some new generation is coming on line to burn LNG (My brother is a consultant and involved with a new LNG plant in south west somewhere).
Electric cars for modest commutes charged by the grid, will reduce our marginal oil demand, but we're years away from that being significant. Less years than before though.
JR
https://www.resotune.com/
"A bus in a console is spelled with one 's', but you can buss your girlfriend while riding in a bus."
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321849 is a reply to message #321824 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 19:47 |
Patrick Tracy
Messages: 1195
Registered: February 2006
Location: Boulder, CO |
Has No Life |
|
|
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Sun, 11 May 2008 17:54 |
Patrick,
I thought my comments were self explainitory, not to upset or anger anyone... I understand the politics involved in the fuel debate, I was only answering as to the question, why we've used petroleum... Because until recently, it has been a cheap source of energy, and frankly, other than Nuclear, it has been one of the few sources of energy we could put into the practice of using.
I understand solar energy and the products used to capture it.
I am all for using it, and the other sources as well, Nuclear, Wind, etc... But again, Solar has been cost inefficient until recently. And, I understand the concept of one's selling the surplus to the Utility... I corrected someones Math equation from the previous Thread, explaining that their Math was flawed in the Amount of energy their system would produce.
And, finally the Laws of Physics do not change... whether I discuss them or anyone else.... Quote:"I talking about leveraging our Solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, etc...."
All of the above make energy from: Mechanical, Chemical or Thermal.
Yes, things will have to change, but...maybe they're raping us on fuel costs to afford the ability to provide Energy derived from other forms when the Petrol runs out.
Hammer
|
I'm not angry or upset, at least not at you. I was reacting to what appeared as an apologist viewpoint for fossil fuel usage. I probably misinterpreted you intent.
The laws of physics may possibly be static but our understanding of them is not, mine in particular. I was just concerned that those laws would be used as an excuse not to explore other means of getting energy. It's the social, political and economic obstacles that I feel are more challenging than the technical ones. I think they're raping us on fuel costs simply because they can and because the opportunity may be limited.
http://home.earthlink.net/~patrickgtracy
|
|
| | |
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321856 is a reply to message #321838 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 19:54 |
|
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Sun, 11 May 2008 20:32 |
Phil,
We could debate Fuels for Fusion or Fission till the cows come home, the only point that I was trying to make was that one of the biggest users of petroleum products is to generate Electricity; Which could be generated by other sources.
|
I totally missed that point, my apologies. I merely keyed in on Helium-3, which, frankly, is lousy technology in a field stuffed with lousy technology. Your point is of course completely valid and correct. The reality is that the production of electricity from oil has been on the decline for decades.
I suggest that you check out "Nuclear Renaissance: Technologies and Policies for the Future of Nuclear Power" by W. J. Nuttall from your local library, and read the first few chapters, as they give a very concise overview of the economics of the changing face of worldwide electrical power generation, segregated by fuel type. It is very enlightening, and gives a picture of the reality of where our electricity will come from for the forseeable future (i.e. purely driven by economics).
| Quote: |
That is when I realized that Gasoline Pumps were measuring volume and not mass. Some Tankers (probably all now) were converting their fleet to Mass Flow meters to get more accurate reading when selling to the retailer Retail pumps did not have mass flow meters, pretty certain they still don't.
Volumetric expansions : V= V sub0(1 plus B[delta t])
Do the math and see if there couldn't be a substantial difference.
Cheers
Hammer
|
Sure their could be a substantial difference, but nothing a thermocouple or RTD, and some very simple circuitry couldn't account for. It is a stable, linear, correction after all!
I have worked with mass flow controllers for nearly a decade now, and am familiar with their operation and benefits over volumetric systems.
Phill Graham
Doctoral Candidate
Georgia Tech
|
|
| |
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321864 is a reply to message #321861 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 20:05 |
|
| John Roberts {JR} wrote on Sun, 11 May 2008 20:59 |
| Phillip Graham wrote on Sun, 11 May 2008 19:44 |
Petroleum's big plus as an energy source is that it is already here. If we had to directly synthesize petroleum, it would be embroiled in just as much debate as any other technology.
As soon as you exhaust the inherent supplies of any energy source (eg petroleum) you are faced with manufacturing a replacement, and potentially on a global scale.
Hopefully this makes sense...
|
If it made sense to most people we wouldn't have threads like this.
|
Point taken. I suppose since I have interest in working in this area it is just as well that people are misinformed, will give me something to do 
| Quote: |
FWIW Petroleum will stop getting burned for energy long before we run out, when plastic becomes more valuable than the energy source du jour.
|
Plastic and airplanes, two technologies enabled by oil (especially air travel!). The energy density of any alternative doesn't cut it. Of course the economic question there is what will the incredible increase in cost of air travel from fuel do to the industry, which should be a factor long before the ultimate oil supply runs out. Zeppelins anyone?
| Quote: |
I am optimistic we will come up with more effective ways to harness all the kinetic energy around us, not to mention that significant heat/light source some 93 million miles away, which BTW was the original source of energy in all that fossil fuel we're just now harvesting.
|
As I have said before, the fact that we do not directly obtain all of our energy from nuclear sources (including the Sun) makes us the exception, rather than the rule, in the Universe.
Phill Graham
Doctoral Candidate
Georgia Tech
|
|
|
| Re: OK off Topic but this is useful to us all and i will share [message #321867 is a reply to message #321856 ] |
Sun, 11 May 2008 20:18 |
Charlie Zureki
Messages: 303
Registered: April 2008
Location: Detroit Area |
Has No Life |
|
|
While I realize I misspoke regarding petroleum as a fuel for generating Electricity. I was referring to it's sister industry of Coal. Sorry and Thank You, for pointing that out.
While I understand the methods for generating Electricity in the Past and Present, has been driven by the Economy, I believe in the Future it will be driven by Desperation.
Observation: Throughout History mankind has been driven to develop new technologies and products because of desperation, in as much for the reason of greed.
Pump manufacturers were really keen on the Idea of using Mass Flow Meters, but, then later claimed they couldn't because of higher manufacturing costs that could not be passed on to the Stations.
(the amount of regulations regarding Gasoline Pumps were astronomical at the time.)
The Individual States still send a guy with an "old technology" prover to check customers complaints. 
It's possible things have changed, but, I wouldn't bet on it.
P.S. The density of a fluid will vary from Temperature and Pressure.
Thanks,
Hammer
Be prepared, you'll need it!
|
|
|
| Pages (11): [ 3 ] |
  |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 22 15:17:36 CDT 2008
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01964 seconds |
Forum Home
Login
Forum Search
Register
FAQ
