| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Greysky" |
| Date: |
25 Jul 2004 02:14:08 PM |
| Object: |
Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
25 Jul 2004 07:05:57 PM |
|
|
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
And here I've been believing for years the cap on an elevator shaft was
used as a place to hang all the cables, motors, and such.
Yet another enviro nimrod with a scheme to save the world based on a
total lack of education.
I suppose you know the pressure differential for a 1000 foot altitude
difference is only about 1/2 psi?
I suppose you know there would NEVER be any air flow due to pressure
differences because the pressure difference comes from the weight of the
air?
--
Jim Pennino
Remove -spam-sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 12:39:10 AM |
|
|
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce1ht5$rtn$1@mail.specsol.com...
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar
panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type
screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily
generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would
depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they
are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be
traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
And here I've been believing for years the cap on an elevator shaft was
used as a place to hang all the cables, motors, and such.
It is also used as such, yes. But your don't need double doors for
gearworks...
Yet another enviro nimrod with a scheme to save the world based on a
total lack of education.
I am a Nimrod because I want to save a few bucks on my electric bill? Tsk
tsk...
I suppose you know the pressure differential for a 1000 foot altitude
difference is only about 1/2 psi?
Static pressure. Whats the diference between the bottom and top of a hollow
pipw onen at both ends when the wind velocity at gground level is 0 mph, nad
the eind velocity at the top of the pipe is 100 mph? Of course, you do not
need a pipe a thousand feet long. That would be overkill.
I suppose you know there would NEVER be any air flow due to pressure
differences because the pressure difference comes from the weight of the
air?
For static pressure, yes. But the air at different altitudes is never
static, and there would be significant pressure differentials. Windmills
only work when hoizontal air flow is occuring. Vertical air flow would be a
24 hour a day thing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 01:18:31 AM |
|
|
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
For static pressure, yes. But the air at different altitudes is never
static, and there would be significant pressure differentials. Windmills
only work when hoizontal air flow is occuring. Vertical air flow would be a
24 hour a day thing.
1/2 psi per thousand feet.
There would be no vertical airflow.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove -spam-sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 03:09:01 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
For static pressure, yes. But the air at different altitudes is never
static, and there would be significant pressure differentials. Windmills
only work when hoizontal air flow is occuring. Vertical air flow would be a
24 hour a day thing.
1/2 psi per thousand feet.
There would be no vertical airflow.
Don't forget his magic word... S T A T I C, static man!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 03:08:08 AM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
Yet another enviro nimrod with a scheme to save the world based on a
total lack of education.
I am a Nimrod because I want to save a few bucks on my electric bill? Tsk
tsk...
No, read it again, you're a nimrod because you have a scheme to save the world
based on a total lack of education..
Go ahead, it's right there.. read really slowly..
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 03:06:56 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
I suppose you know there would NEVER be any air flow due to pressure
differences because the pressure difference comes from the weight of the
air?
Don't try and stop him with physics type facts, he'll just dodge around them..
hurricane force winds.. snicker..
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
25 Jul 2004 03:00:32 PM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar panels,
are somewhat inefficient.
That is Enviro-whiner speak for "only work until govermment
subsidies stop," like the suddenly vanished E*L*E*C*T*R*I*C car.
Uncle Al saw the commercials. He had to plead with his electric
mixer and desk lamp to stay home afterward. Right.
A friend works at San Onofre nuclear power plant. She had an
E*L*E*C*T*R*I*C car pool. Why not? Free juice at the plant and
a mild climate so you don't need a heater (that runs off your
radiator coolant in case you didn't know, git). It lasted six
months. The batteries were eaten by deep discharge and sizzle
recharge; the battery tray was eaten by the batteries. None of
this surprised anybody, except maybe Enviro-whiners. How could
Gaia do this to them? Test of faith! Test of bunko.
A better method is to install a worm type screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day.
Idiot. THERMODYNAMICS. You don't know your ***** from a
turbine (ouch!). Rotor and stator, jackass. Did your mommmy get
you a Native American wind thingie to hang above your crib?
The length of your stack would depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
Idiot. Tell us about the transition between laminar and
turbulent flow.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
29 Jul 2004 11:01:28 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics, Uncle Al
<UncleAl0@hate.spam.net>
wrote
on Sun, 25 Jul 2004 15:00:32 -0500
<41041160.755EBD65@hate.spam.net>:
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar panels,
are somewhat inefficient.
That is Enviro-whiner speak for "only work until govermment
subsidies stop," like the suddenly vanished E*L*E*C*T*R*I*C car.
Uncle Al saw the commercials. He had to plead with his electric
mixer and desk lamp to stay home afterward. Right.
A friend works at San Onofre nuclear power plant. She had an
E*L*E*C*T*R*I*C car pool. Why not? Free juice at the plant and
a mild climate so you don't need a heater (that runs off your
radiator coolant in case you didn't know, git). It lasted six
months. The batteries were eaten by deep discharge and sizzle
recharge; the battery tray was eaten by the batteries. None of
this surprised anybody, except maybe Enviro-whiners. How could
Gaia do this to them? Test of faith! Test of bunko.
Indeed. Were it possible without prohibitive cost we'd have
the following, IMO anyway:
[1] Everyone would have solar panels. Now, I know these
have problems and we'll have to solve them -- and these
would not bear the brunt of the power problem anyway,
but would primarily be used to power electronic devices
such as the home control system, and maybe recharge
the chemical batteries used in portable devices such as
the iPod -- assuming said batteries are not merely
refueled by methyl alcohol or glucose. The main power
grid would be largely dismantled, once a replacement
program is seriously underway.
[2] Compressors, etc. would not be powered by electric
means, but by natural gas or maybe oil. Heat pumps
would still be used, if they make economic sense,
with this addendum. (AIUI natural gas or diesel
compressors are in fact used in larger commercial
settings. Not sure regarding the ammonia refrigerant.)
[3] ROI (accurately computed) would be impressed on
*everything*. [1] in particular would be a tradeoff
between electric generation versus the fabrication
costs (which, among other things, involves glass
melting). However, electricity is inherently
inefficient, as usually generated: it's a Carnot
problem with one side being 273K or thereabouts at the
lowest point, and the other side being maybe 473K at
the very very most. (I'd have to look regarding the
pressure-point of high-pressure turbines.) Computed
efficiency is therefore at most a whoppingly bad 58%
or so, and that's optimistic. Even if one replaces
the turbine with a diesel engine, the efficiency
isn't increased much, although it depends on the burn
temperature. If one wants 95% efficiency one would
have to have the hot side as hot as the Sun's surface!
(That is possible, with clever mirroring, AIUI --
unfortunately there's no clear method on how to contain
the heat, as everything melts well before 5800 C.
And then there's issues with cloudy weather.)
[4] Cars would not change all that much. The problems with
hydrogen are many: brittle lines, explosive
pressures, loss of fuel forever in a disaster.
Gasoline is heavier than air in vapor form, and,
while polluting, will at least not be lost -- though
we'll have to figure out how to sop it up (presumably
by reclaiming it from the sand used on occasion to
clean up after tipped-over cars, trucks, and such,
in a pinch). But hydrogen once gone is gone --
out of the atmosphere, in fact. Glucosyrup cars are
possible sometime in the far future but I for one see
some minor problems -- crystallization of the fuel
source being the most obvious. The devil we know
is the easiest to work with, although synthesizing
the gasoline will be interesting.
[5] Atomic fuel is helpful but we will still lose ~ 43% of
the energy; the double-exchanger won't help, either.
[6] I'd be interested in whether digging down into near
bedrock and laying pipes would work well or not, as
a heat sink. The problem is: if everyone does it,
where will the heat go? The environmentalists would
have a fit -- but it might work for some locales,
especially near a cold river or perhaps the ocean.
[7] Light-piping may help to make buildings more
environmentally friendly, as opposed to using
artificial light. The problem, of course, is a
variant of the square-cube law: there's only so much
surface for the sunlight, even if one doesn't provide
windows for those lucky enough to have corner and/or
wall offices. The outside may also look a little
peculiar; the most straightforward design will look
a bit like tubes under glass.
[8] Trash areas would be capped when full, and the methane
extracted, for a time. At least, such is my understanding
of things such as Shoreline Ampitheatre in the SF Bay Area.
There's probably a few more I can think of but that should do
for the moment. Of course, there are far more that may be
available.
[dumb smokestack idea snipped]
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
25 Jul 2004 04:35:12 PM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
At the plant where I work, there is a tall stack for the coal fires
furnaces. But its lift is rather pathetic. Years ago, when a bag
house was added to the flue, to collect the coal ash before it went up
the stack, they had to add 3 each, 300 horsepower blowers (of which 2
are usually in use at a time) just to make up for the filter pressure
drop. The lift generated by the stacks is trivial in comparison. It
is just about what is needed to keep the carbon dioxide rich exhaust
from sinking to the bottom of the stack.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 12:46:13 AM |
|
|
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:41042790.BAF66126@rica.net...
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar
panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type
screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily
generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would
depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they
are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be
traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
At the plant where I work, there is a tall stack for the coal fires
furnaces. But its lift is rather pathetic. Years ago, when a bag
house was added to the flue, to collect the coal ash before it went up
the stack, they had to add 3 each, 300 horsepower blowers (of which 2
are usually in use at a time) just to make up for the filter pressure
drop. The lift generated by the stacks is trivial in comparison. It
is just about what is needed to keep the carbon dioxide rich exhaust
from sinking to the bottom of the stack.
--
But the bottom of your smoke stack is enclosed, isn't it? Just imagine a
tubular structure open to the atmosphere at both ends. Air will flow freely
and you are not exhausting any type of by-product into the atmosphere.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 01:15:32 AM |
|
|
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
But the bottom of your smoke stack is enclosed, isn't it? Just imagine a
tubular structure open to the atmosphere at both ends. Air will flow freely
and you are not exhausting any type of by-product into the atmosphere.
No, there will be no more air flow within the stack than there is outside
it.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove -spam-sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 10:51:45 AM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
"John Popelish" <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message
news:41042790.BAF66126@rica.net...
At the plant where I work, there is a tall stack for the coal fires
furnaces. But its lift is rather pathetic. Years ago, when a bag
house was added to the flue, to collect the coal ash before it went up
the stack, they had to add 3 each, 300 horsepower blowers (of which 2
are usually in use at a time) just to make up for the filter pressure
drop. The lift generated by the stacks is trivial in comparison. It
is just about what is needed to keep the carbon dioxide rich exhaust
from sinking to the bottom of the stack.
--
But the bottom of your smoke stack is enclosed, isn't it? Just imagine a
tubular structure open to the atmosphere at both ends. Air will flow freely
and you are not exhausting any type of by-product into the atmosphere.
No. The bottom of the stack is connected to furnaces and through
their intakes, to the atmosphere. It is a flow through system.
--
John Popelish
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Synnott" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
25 Jul 2004 07:36:21 PM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
Erm, of course, all smokestacks are hollow. No such thing as an exhaust
filter system, nope.
Rob.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 12:41:58 AM |
|
|
"Robert Synnott" <synnottr@tcd.ie> wrote in message
news:ghYMc.5524$Z14.6766@news.indigo.ie...
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar
panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type
screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily
generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would
depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they
are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be
traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
Erm, of course, all smokestacks are hollow. No such thing as an exhaust
filter system, nope.
Rob.
What I am proposing is simply a hollow vertical pipe perhaps a hundred or so
feet high. There is no pollution, but you would probably need a series of
internal dampers to keep the interior wind velocity down to a reasonable
level.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 01:21:48 AM |
|
|
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"Robert Synnott" <synnottr@tcd.ie> wrote in message
news:ghYMc.5524$Z14.6766@news.indigo.ie...
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar
panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type
screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily
generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would
depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers - they
are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be
traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
Erm, of course, all smokestacks are hollow. No such thing as an exhaust
filter system, nope.
Rob.
What I am proposing is simply a hollow vertical pipe perhaps a hundred or so
feet high. There is no pollution, but you would probably need a series of
internal dampers to keep the interior wind velocity down to a reasonable
level.
Quite easy to do since there will be no interior wind.
Go get 20 feet of plastic pipe, it should cost you about $5, stick it
straight up in the air.
Do you detect ANY airflow?
--
Jim Pennino
Remove -spam-sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 02:30:52 AM |
|
|
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce27ts$1j8$4@mail.specsol.com...
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"Robert Synnott" <synnottr@tcd.ie> wrote in message
news:ghYMc.5524$Z14.6766@news.indigo.ie...
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar
panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type
screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in
pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily
generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would
depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is
the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers -
they
are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be
traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
Erm, of course, all smokestacks are hollow. No such thing as an
exhaust
filter system, nope.
Rob.
What I am proposing is simply a hollow vertical pipe perhaps a hundred
or so
feet high. There is no pollution, but you would probably need a series
of
internal dampers to keep the interior wind velocity down to a reasonable
level.
Quite easy to do since there will be no interior wind.
Go get 20 feet of plastic pipe, it should cost you about $5, stick it
straight up in the air.
Do you detect ANY airflow?
As a matter of fact, if I use a common soda straw, and use a blow dryer as
an air source for one end, and put the other end near some cigarette smoke,
the smoke does get sucked into the straw... so what am I missing here? Too
many physicists say this is a no - go, but the elevator man I visited at the
Empire state bldg 5 years ago, says something completely different. True he
was an old duffer, but experience does count for something.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 10:34:04 AM |
|
|
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce27ts$1j8$4@mail.specsol.com...
Go get 20 feet of plastic pipe, it should cost you about $5, stick it
straight up in the air.
Do you detect ANY airflow?
As a matter of fact, if I use a common soda straw, and use a blow dryer as
an air source for one end, and put the other end near some cigarette smoke,
the smoke does get sucked into the straw... so what am I missing here? Too
many physicists say this is a no - go, but the elevator man I visited at the
Empire state bldg 5 years ago, says something completely different. True he
was an old duffer, but experience does count for something.
Sigh, that's only because there is an artificial, tangential air flow across
one end of the straw; this doesn't happen in nature.
Here for your education is what nature really does:
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are negative above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
ONT 2613 2709+25 2906+17 2806+09 3312-06 3227-17 313634 303443 302953
Ontario CA [ONT]
WJF 2614+26 2713+17 2718+09 3113-06 3129-18 304034 303843 303553
Lancaster CA [WJF]
Since I know you don't know how to decode this, I'll do it for you.
The biggest wind differential below 12,000 feet is at Ontario between
3000 feet and 6000 feet.
At 3000 feet the wind is 260 deg at 13 knots and at 6000 feet, 270 deg
at 9 knots, or a whopping 4 knot difference for a 3000 foot difference
in altitude. The surface wind at Ontario is 12 knots. That's a 1 knot
difference between the surface and 3000 feet.
As for the NY area,
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are negative above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
JFK 0711 9900+13 2515+08 2417+04 2525-07 2533-18 253832 254243 264954
New York NY [JFK]
ACY 0709 9900+14 2210+10 2212+05 2418-07 2524-17 253532 253742 263953
Atlantic City NJ [ACY]
That's 11 knots at 3000 feet, 0 knots at 6000 feet for JFK. Surface winds
at JFK are 12 knots. Again a 1 knot difference between the surface and
3000 feet.
The technical explanation for what the "old duffer" told you is called
"pulling the kid's crank".
It should be obvious there is a lot more energy to be had from a 12 knot
surface wind and a wind generator then there is from a 3000 foot tower and
a 1 knot differential, especially when you concider the fact that the 1
knot differential will result in far less than 1 knot in your tube as you
can easily prove with your soda straw and hair dryer.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove -spam-sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 11:10:04 PM |
|
|
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce389c$9lb$1@mail.specsol.com...
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce27ts$1j8$4@mail.specsol.com...
Go get 20 feet of plastic pipe, it should cost you about $5, stick it
straight up in the air.
Do you detect ANY airflow?
As a matter of fact, if I use a common soda straw, and use a blow dryer
as
an air source for one end, and put the other end near some cigarette
smoke,
the smoke does get sucked into the straw... so what am I missing here?
Too
many physicists say this is a no - go, but the elevator man I visited at
the
Empire state bldg 5 years ago, says something completely different. True
he
was an old duffer, but experience does count for something.
Sigh, that's only because there is an artificial, tangential air flow
across
one end of the straw; this doesn't happen in nature.
Here for your education is what nature really does:
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are negative
above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
ONT 2613 2709+25 2906+17 2806+09 3312-06 3227-17 313634 303443 302953
Ontario CA [ONT]
WJF 2614+26 2713+17 2718+09 3113-06 3129-18 304034 303843 303553
Lancaster CA [WJF]
Since I know you don't know how to decode this, I'll do it for you.
The biggest wind differential below 12,000 feet is at Ontario between
3000 feet and 6000 feet.
At 3000 feet the wind is 260 deg at 13 knots and at 6000 feet, 270 deg
at 9 knots, or a whopping 4 knot difference for a 3000 foot difference
in altitude. The surface wind at Ontario is 12 knots. That's a 1 knot
difference between the surface and 3000 feet.
As for the NY area,
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are negative
above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
JFK 0711 9900+13 2515+08 2417+04 2525-07 2533-18 253832 254243 264954
New York NY [JFK]
ACY 0709 9900+14 2210+10 2212+05 2418-07 2524-17 253532 253742 263953
Atlantic City NJ [ACY]
That's 11 knots at 3000 feet, 0 knots at 6000 feet for JFK. Surface winds
at JFK are 12 knots. Again a 1 knot difference between the surface and
3000 feet.
The technical explanation for what the "old duffer" told you is called
"pulling the kid's crank".
It should be obvious there is a lot more energy to be had from a 12 knot
surface wind and a wind generator then there is from a 3000 foot tower and
a 1 knot differential, especially when you concider the fact that the 1
knot differential will result in far less than 1 knot in your tube as you
can easily prove with your soda straw and hair dryer.
Ah...oh well. Gone is my vision of lining the coastal areas of the world
with 150 ft tall towers. Guess I'll just have to stick to deep ocean tidal
flow for extractable energy. No -wait! What about a horizontal pipe with one
opening at the North pole, and the other opening in Brazil! (That really
*was* a joke... :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
27 Jul 2004 08:58:58 AM |
|
|
"Greysky" <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:<wAkNc.97514$483.12308@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>...
[having been pummled into submission by publicly available data]
Ah...oh well. Gone is my vision of lining the coastal areas of the world
with 150 ft tall towers.
Any chance you could do your own homework next time you get an idea?
I mean, like checking what the actual data says rather than just
getting on here and mouthing off about how stupid everybody is for
not seeing how great you are.
Socks
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
27 Jul 2004 11:01:57 PM |
|
|
<puppet_sock@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7976c46.0407270558.34cd2fc7@posting.google.com...
"Greysky" <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:<wAkNc.97514$483.12308@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>...
[having been pummled into submission by publicly available data]
Ah...oh well. Gone is my vision of lining the coastal areas of the world
with 150 ft tall towers.
Any chance you could do your own homework next time you get an idea?
I mean, like checking what the actual data says rather than just
getting on here and mouthing off about how stupid everybody is for
not seeing how great you are.
Socks
No.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
27 Jul 2004 09:38:16 AM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce389c$9lb$1@mail.specsol.com...
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce27ts$1j8$4@mail.specsol.com...
Go get 20 feet of plastic pipe, it should cost you about $5, stick it
straight up in the air.
Do you detect ANY airflow?
As a matter of fact, if I use a common soda straw, and use a blow dryer
as
an air source for one end, and put the other end near some cigarette
smoke,
the smoke does get sucked into the straw... so what am I missing here?
Too
many physicists say this is a no - go, but the elevator man I visited at
the
Empire state bldg 5 years ago, says something completely different. True
he
was an old duffer, but experience does count for something.
Sigh, that's only because there is an artificial, tangential air flow
across
one end of the straw; this doesn't happen in nature.
Here for your education is what nature really does:
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are negative
above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
ONT 2613 2709+25 2906+17 2806+09 3312-06 3227-17 313634 303443 302953
Ontario CA [ONT]
WJF 2614+26 2713+17 2718+09 3113-06 3129-18 304034 303843 303553
Lancaster CA [WJF]
Since I know you don't know how to decode this, I'll do it for you.
The biggest wind differential below 12,000 feet is at Ontario between
3000 feet and 6000 feet.
At 3000 feet the wind is 260 deg at 13 knots and at 6000 feet, 270 deg
at 9 knots, or a whopping 4 knot difference for a 3000 foot difference
in altitude. The surface wind at Ontario is 12 knots. That's a 1 knot
difference between the surface and 3000 feet.
As for the NY area,
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are negative
above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
JFK 0711 9900+13 2515+08 2417+04 2525-07 2533-18 253832 254243 264954
New York NY [JFK]
ACY 0709 9900+14 2210+10 2212+05 2418-07 2524-17 253532 253742 263953
Atlantic City NJ [ACY]
That's 11 knots at 3000 feet, 0 knots at 6000 feet for JFK. Surface winds
at JFK are 12 knots. Again a 1 knot difference between the surface and
3000 feet.
The technical explanation for what the "old duffer" told you is called
"pulling the kid's crank".
It should be obvious there is a lot more energy to be had from a 12 knot
surface wind and a wind generator then there is from a 3000 foot tower and
a 1 knot differential, especially when you concider the fact that the 1
knot differential will result in far less than 1 knot in your tube as you
can easily prove with your soda straw and hair dryer.
Ah...oh well. Gone is my vision of lining the coastal areas of the world
with 150 ft tall towers. Guess I'll just have to stick to deep ocean tidal
flow for extractable energy. No -wait! What about a horizontal pipe with one
opening at the North pole, and the other opening in Brazil! (That really
*was* a joke... :)
Spewing boring idiot.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
27 Jul 2004 11:26:58 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:410668D8.3A5097B9@hate.spam.net...
Greysky wrote:
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce389c$9lb$1@mail.specsol.com...
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce27ts$1j8$4@mail.specsol.com...
Go get 20 feet of plastic pipe, it should cost you about $5, stick
it
straight up in the air.
Do you detect ANY airflow?
As a matter of fact, if I use a common soda straw, and use a blow
dryer
as
an air source for one end, and put the other end near some cigarette
smoke,
the smoke does get sucked into the straw... so what am I missing
here?
Too
many physicists say this is a no - go, but the elevator man I
visited at
the
Empire state bldg 5 years ago, says something completely different.
True
he
was an old duffer, but experience does count for something.
Sigh, that's only because there is an artificial, tangential air flow
across
one end of the straw; this doesn't happen in nature.
Here for your education is what nature really does:
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm
PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use
from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are
negative
above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
ONT 2613 2709+25 2906+17 2806+09 3312-06 3227-17 313634 303443 302953
Ontario CA [ONT]
WJF 2614+26 2713+17 2718+09 3113-06 3129-18 304034 303843 303553
Lancaster CA [WJF]
Since I know you don't know how to decode this, I'll do it for you.
The biggest wind differential below 12,000 feet is at Ontario between
3000 feet and 6000 feet.
At 3000 feet the wind is 260 deg at 13 knots and at 6000 feet, 270 deg
at 9 knots, or a whopping 4 knot difference for a 3000 foot difference
in altitude. The surface wind at Ontario is 12 knots. That's a 1 knot
difference between the surface and 3000 feet.
As for the NY area,
Winds aloft forecast based on observations taken on the 25th at 4:00pm
PST
(0000Z). Forecast valid on the 26th at 4:00pm PST (0000Z), for use
from
10:00am PST (1800Z) to 9:00pm PST (0500Z). Temperatures are
negative
above
24,000 feet.
FT 3000 6000 9000 12000 18000 24000 30000 34000 39000
JFK 0711 9900+13 2515+08 2417+04 2525-07 2533-18 253832 254243 264954
New York NY [JFK]
ACY 0709 9900+14 2210+10 2212+05 2418-07 2524-17 253532 253742 263953
Atlantic City NJ [ACY]
That's 11 knots at 3000 feet, 0 knots at 6000 feet for JFK. Surface
winds
at JFK are 12 knots. Again a 1 knot difference between the surface and
3000 feet.
The technical explanation for what the "old duffer" told you is called
"pulling the kid's crank".
It should be obvious there is a lot more energy to be had from a 12
knot
surface wind and a wind generator then there is from a 3000 foot tower
and
a 1 knot differential, especially when you concider the fact that the
1
knot differential will result in far less than 1 knot in your tube as
you
can easily prove with your soda straw and hair dryer.
Ah...oh well. Gone is my vision of lining the coastal areas of the world
with 150 ft tall towers. Guess I'll just have to stick to deep ocean
tidal
flow for extractable energy. No -wait! What about a horizontal pipe with
one
opening at the North pole, and the other opening in Brazil! (That really
*was* a joke... :)
Spewing boring idiot.
Diamond making process didn't work, huh, Unc? Maybe if you devoted even half
of the mental ergs you expend making useless, febrile comments on subjects
unrelated to making you a demigod amongst your groupies, you might actually
be able to do more than just talk about crystalline carbon...?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 03:12:20 AM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
As a matter of fact, if I use a common soda straw, and use a blow dryer as
an air source for one end, and put the other end near some cigarette smoke,
the smoke does get sucked into the straw... so what am I missing here? Too
many physicists say this is a no - go, but the elevator man I visited at the
Empire state bldg 5 years ago, says something completely different. True he
was an old duffer, but experience does count for something.
I guess if you can still make an appointment with the elevator man, since
obviously with what he knows about cheap power from hurricane force winds, he
must be CEO of his own power generation company by now, with hundreds of 500
foot 5' diameter smoke stacks pumping out MWs of power, you might want to ask
him for a job.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 06:08:19 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 07:30:52 GMT, "Greysky"
<greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<jimp@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:ce27ts$1j8$4@mail.specsol.com...
Greysky <greyskynospam@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"Robert Synnott" <synnottr@tcd.ie> wrote in message
news:ghYMc.5524$Z14.6766@news.indigo.ie...
Greysky wrote:
Creating electricity via 'green' methods, like windmills, and solar
panels,
are somewhat inefficient. A better method is to install a worm type
screw
along the length of a tall smokestack. The draft resulting in
pressure
differences between the top and the bottom of the stack will easily
generate
high velocity winds 24 hours a day. The length of your stack would
depend on
how windy your location is. This should work continuously - this is
the
main reason they put 'caps' over elevator shafts in skyscrapers -
they
are
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be
traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
Erm, of course, all smokestacks are hollow. No such thing as an
exhaust
filter system, nope.
Rob.
What I am proposing is simply a hollow vertical pipe perhaps a hundred
or so
feet high. There is no pollution, but you would probably need a series
of
internal dampers to keep the interior wind velocity down to a reasonable
level.
Quite easy to do since there will be no interior wind.
Go get 20 feet of plastic pipe, it should cost you about $5, stick it
straight up in the air.
Do you detect ANY airflow?
As a matter of fact, if I use a common soda straw, and use a blow dryer as
an air source for one end, and put the other end near some cigarette smoke,
the smoke does get sucked into the straw... so what am I missing here? Too
many physicists say this is a no - go, but the elevator man I visited at the
Empire state bldg 5 years ago, says something completely different. True he
was an old duffer, but experience does count for something.
You are missing the venturi effect. Liquid stuff flowing past an
opening will create suction.
Sure, you might be able to generate power using the venturi effect on
big buildings but why not just skip the middleman and use the wind
directly?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 03:09:51 AM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
What I am proposing is simply a hollow vertical pipe perhaps a hundred or so
feet high. There is no pollution, but you would probably need a series of
internal dampers to keep the interior wind velocity down to a reasonable
level.
yeah, snicker.. for all those hurricane force winds...
...you ever been in a hurricane, greysky?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
25 Jul 2004 06:14:48 PM |
|
|
Greysky wrote:
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
...hurricane force winds? snicker..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greysky" |
|
| Title: Re: Free Electricity via "Chimney power" |
26 Jul 2004 12:32:28 AM |
|
|
"MorituriMax" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:I9XMc.26918$pR5.350@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Greysky wrote:
actually airlocks, and without them hurricane force winds would be
traveling
throughout the length of the building and rapidly shake it apart.
..hurricane force winds? snicker..
Yep. Just ask any Super in charge of a NY Skyscraper. Pressure differences
are not only due to the static difference between a 100 foot altitude you
know. If there is a wind blowing faster at the top of the pipe than at the
bottom you also have the Bernoulli effect. Even a moderate wind velocity
difference of a 10 - 20 miles per hour could generate wind velocities in
excess of 100 mph in properly designed wind pipes. Put a turbine in that and
your big problem will be to slow your turbine down. For places like New York
or Chicago, not the mention SF, buildings could be made to generate their
own electricity. That would be a very attractive come on from a real-estate
point of view.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
