Re: Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?
From: Mike (niche_at_iinet.net.au)
Date: 11/01/04
- Next message: Bill Ward: "Re: Using nuclear power to make renewables and a hydrogen economy cost"
- Previous message: Kimmo Klemola: "Re: Wow, does this sound appropriate to this newsgroup..."
- In reply to: Saint-Hilaire: "Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?"
- Next in thread: Franz Heymann: "Re: Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?"
- Reply: Franz Heymann: "Re: Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:09:16 +0800
Main point,
to use the heat you have to sink it, Carnot has things to say about
that. It can end up taking more work to remove the heat then
you get from the pressure. Or contrive the system for the highest
temperature differential,
Hey - how about this, compress the exhaust from an ICE and send
it in tanks to the CO2 recylcers
;-)
Rgds
Mike
http://niche.iinet.net.au
Saint-Hilaire wrote:
> Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?
>
> Bonjour,
>
> I am not sure I did express myself sufficiently
> on efficiency in a recent post about the
> "Quasiturbine and the Air Car"...
> (see copy of the post below).
>
> What about a system extracting some net energy
> from ambient air temperature ?
> Not obvious of course, but possible ?
>
> Compressing air produces both heat and pressure.
> Let assume a gas is cooled just after compression
> and the heat is usefully used
> (for example with a Quasiturbine Stirling at :
> http://quasiturbine.promci.qc.ca/QTStirling.html)
> Then later, make use the ambient air or lake water
> temperature to warm-up an isothermal expansion
> of that same compressed gaz
> (using a Quasiturbine air motor ?
> http://quasiturbine.promci.qc.ca/QTPneumatique.html),
> which will restitute close to the total amount of energy
> given initially by the compressor
> (this need to be carefully check (?)-
> there will be some losses of course).
> If so, this mechanical energy could be used
> to compress more gas, produce more heat
> to be removed... and so on.
> In such a system, the heat initially removed from the gas
> just after compression is "free energy" ?
>
> If the free heat removed is finally
> absorbed by a stable chemical process,
> this system may produce on large scale a net
> atmosphere cooling to reverse the
> "réchauffement de la planète"
> (because the free energy has been
> in fact taken out of our atmosphere).
>
> From the humain usable energy point of view,
> such a system provides an over unity efficiency !
> I let you speculate on the actual
> (>1) efficiency value of such a system.
> Means and methodes to acheive that efficiency
> is already patented within the Quasiturbine technology...
>
> Curieux de lire vos commentaires !
> Meilleures salutations, Gilles
> www.quasiturbine.com
>
> The recent post about the
> "Quasiturbine and the Air Car" :
>
> "Saint-Hilaire" <saint-hilaire@promci.qc.ca> wrote in message
> news:1099052098.JlXmyIshfUalOuPSDW3FBw@teranews...
>
> Bonjour,
>
> 1)
> Compressing a gas produces both pressure and heat.
> Excellent reversibility can be achieve
> if one keeps both the pressure and the heat stored together.
> However, heat can be removed from the gas by cooling it
> (a necessity if multi-stage higher pressure is desired,
> and sometime heat can be usefully dispatch),
> and heat can be given back later, sometime from
> a free heat sink (ambient) during relaxation,
> to still produce a fairly good reversibility.
> For short term uses, it may be beneficial to store
> both the pressure (moderate) and the associated heat.
>
> 2)
> Storing both the pressure (moderate) with its associated heat
> could be appropriate for example in the case
> of mining pneumatic locomotive or city subway,
> where the pneumatic wagon could be refill every few hours,
> not to say partly refill from the braking energy recovery.
> Pneumatic remove the high voltage subway hazard,
> and allow better conditioning the air purity by releasing dry air,
> which is most suitable to reduce subway moisture.
> Depending of the voluntary heat lost
> on the ground processing pressure plant,
> subway gas relaxation could further cool down the ambient air,
> a great advantage on summer !
>
> 3)
> When a gas at room temperature expands,
> it produces energy in two forms : pressure work and cooling,
> which energies add up to quite an excellent reversibility.
> Most people ignore or discard the powerful
> adiabatic cooling, but it could be of direct interest,
> like in conditioning the subway air.
> What is nice about expanding compressed gas
> is that the cooling adiabatic energy can be converted
> into mechanical work providing some heat can be given
> to the gas during relaxation (almost magic conversion !).
> If this heat can come from a free ambient heat sink,
> then the isothermal expansion acts locally
> as a sort of mechanical energy amplifier,
> while total energy is conserved considering earlier compression.
> If added heat is coming from the system (boiler...)
> then, isothermal expansion is a good way to
> increase the specific power density of the machine,
> but does not provide a net additional energy output !
>
> 4)
> But keeping the heat (higher temperature)
> in an air tank reduces it energy capacity ?
> This would insure a good reversibility all the time,
> but of course the isothermal mechanical amplification
> will not be as easy (impossible with ambient heat),
> which would in fact reduce the local mechanical work
> done by the same reservoir capacity.
> If higher level heat is still apply to the gas relaxation,
> then the same mechanical work could be extracted
> (but with some residual heat lost at exhaust).
>
> 5)
> The energy density comparison are distorted unfairly (by ignorance)
> by those who keep stating that gasoline contains 9000 w-h/liter.
> The truth is that to get such an amount of energy
> from a full car tank of gasoline,
> one need to have about 2 tons of oxygen !
> Lets assume you carry onboard the needed oxygen,
> then your real power density (in weight and volume)
> will fall to what they call ridicule low level...
> Not only do we steal the petrol product from our underground reserve,
> but our vehicle further steal the air underway from our atmosphere.
> Should we oppose petrol unfair results
> to the alternative energy solutions !
> This is of course not a fair way to describe the true reality...
> Similarly, we should stop referring to IC engine peak 30 % efficiency
> which is far from average in use engine efficiency,
> where most vehicle hardly reach 9 % efficiency form fuel to wheel
> (which is in the range of many interesting alternatives).
>
> 6)
> Energy alternatives are apparently loosing against
> unfair petroleum pumping and free atmospheric air oxidation,
> so is the planet loosing.
> It is always easier for someone to make a good living
> out of stolen money, than out of it honest earning,
> until such a time that he imprisons himself...
> This is what we are all doing by using underground petroleum.
>
> Please, keep-up innovating for the future, if not for the present...
>
> Meilleures salutations, Gilles
> www.quasiturbine.com
- Next message: Bill Ward: "Re: Using nuclear power to make renewables and a hydrogen economy cost"
- Previous message: Kimmo Klemola: "Re: Wow, does this sound appropriate to this newsgroup..."
- In reply to: Saint-Hilaire: "Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?"
- Next in thread: Franz Heymann: "Re: Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?"
- Reply: Franz Heymann: "Re: Quasiturbine - Over unity air motor ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
