| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"habshi" |
| Date: |
20 Sep 2005 09:40:21 AM |
| Object: |
How to stop hurricane damage |
Why not dig a big dry hole in New Orleans - say 1 sq km area and 200ft deep ,or even deeper
if need be , you could store floating materials in it . A 1 sq km area hole could hold 20ft flood
waters from a 10sq km area and prevent billions in damages . It would cost maybe a few millions to
dig . In the next hurrican which may not happen for fifty years , even if the leevies are breached
the hole could store upto 20 ft of flood water .
.
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
23 Sep 2005 04:47:21 PM |
|
|
Hurricanes form when the surface temps rise by a mere 2-3
degrees . Why can we build massive otec machines in the gulf of mexico
to extract this humoungous amount of energy - many times what the
world uses each year is present in just one hurricane and cool the
surface waters down , and use the electricity generated ?
5.2 x 1019 Joules/day or
6.0 x 1014 Watts.
This is equivalent to 200 times(about 20 times total energy
consumption) the world-wide electrical generating capacity - an
incredible amount of energy produced!
excerpt
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/tcfaqD.html
Subject: D7) How much energy does a hurricane release?
Hurricanes can be thought of, to a first approximation, as a heat
engine; obtaining its heat input from the warm, humid air over the
tropical ocean, and releasing this heat through the condensation of
water vapor into water droplets in deep thunderstorms of the eyewall
and rainbands, then giving off a cold exhaust in the upper levels of
the troposphere (~12 km/8 mi up).
One can look at the energetics of a hurricane in two ways:
the total amount of energy released by the condensation of water
droplets or ...
the amount of kinetic energy generated to maintain the strong swirling
winds of the hurricane (Emanuel 1999).
It turns out that the vast majority of the heat released in the
condensation process is used to cause rising motions in the
thunderstorms and only a small portion drives the storm's horizontal
winds.
Method 1) - Total energy released through cloud/rain formation:
An average hurricane produces 1.5 cm/day (0.6 inches/day) of rain
inside a circle of radius 665 km (360 n.mi) (Gray 1981). (More rain
falls in the inner portion of hurricane around the eyewall, less in
the outer rainbands.) Converting this to a volume of rain gives 2.1 x
1016 cm3/day. A cubic cm of rain weighs 1 gm. Using the latent heat of
condensation, this amount of rain produced gives
5.2 x 1019 Joules/day or
6.0 x 1014 Watts.
This is equivalent to 200 times the world-wide electrical generating
capacity - an incredible amount of energy produced!
Method 2) - Total kinetic energy (wind energy) generated:
For a mature hurricane, the amount of kinetic energy generated is
equal to that being dissipated due to friction. The dissipation rate
per unit area is air density times the drag coefficient times the
windspeed cubed (See Emanuel 1999 for details). One could either
integrate a typical wind profile over a range of radii from the
hurricane's center to the outer radius encompassing the storm, or
assume an average windspeed for the inner core of the hurricane. Doing
the latter and using 40 m/s (90 mph) winds on a scale of radius 60 km
(40 n.mi.), one gets a wind dissipation rate (wind generation rate) of
1.3 x 1017 Joules/day or
1.5 x 1012Watts.
This is equivalent to about half the world-wide electrical generating
capacity - also an amazing amount of energy being produced!
Either method is an enormous amount energy being generated by
hurricanes. However, one can see that the amount of energy released in
a hurricane (by creating clouds/rain) that actually goes to
maintaining the hurricane's spiraling winds is a huge ratio of 400 to
1.
Back to Tropical Cyclones Winds Page |
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
23 Sep 2005 05:58:28 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Nothing.
Babbling imbecile troll.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
24 Sep 2005 04:31:53 AM |
|
|
Instead of millions of cars most having just one or two people
, all that is needed is to take people say 50 miles more inland , and
most could even walk that at 4mph. Then have underground tunnels
there with provisions so that they can be safe for the ten hours that
the hurricane lasts
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
24 Sep 2005 11:27:53 AM |
|
|
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Instead of millions of cars most having just one or two people
, all that is needed is to take people say 50 miles more inland , and
most could even walk that at 4mph. Then have underground tunnels
there with provisions so that they can be safe for the ten hours that
the hurricane lasts
Ignorant idiot, a couple of people and everything valuable they can
stuff in the car.
If you are in the area of rainfall, underground is the worst possible
place to be.
If you are out of the area of rainfall, it doesn't matter where you
are.
You are such a babbling, trolling moron.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
25 Sep 2005 05:54:45 AM |
|
|
Rather than producing electricity it might be cheaper to heat
air and pipe that to deeper levels and grow plants etc. suppying light
as well from the surface .
excerpt
.. It can produce electricity without giving off any carbon dioxide,
and do it for a long period (indefinitely), being a derivative of
solar energy.
2. Some versions of the technology can produce desalinated water for
irrigation or domestic use.
3. It tends to cool the surface of the sea in its vicinity. In some
areas, such as the Caribbean, this might mitigate the strength of
Hurricanes, which gain their power from the warm surface water.
4. There can be an increase of fish production in fish farms and in
the open ocean.
5. It can provide useful employment in areas bordering on tropical
seas.
The principle of OTEC is that there is a temperature difference
between water at the bottom of the sea and the water at the top. This
temperature difference can be used to operate a Heat Engine.
The cold water derives from the slow circulation of the oceans. Cold
water at the polar regions sinks to the bottom and flows towards the
equator. The surface warm water flow in the Atlantic is from the
Caribbean area towards western Europe.
At an OTEC site cold water is raised from the lower levels of the sea
and used for the cooler side of a heat engine. The hotter side is
supplied by the surface water.
The products of a heat engine are:
1. Energy. This will usually be used to produce electricity. In
tropical areas the output will be fairly constant and will continue
night and day. That is, unlike direct solar converters it does not
slow down at night. This means that, like a nuclear power station,
OTEC can be used as base load.
2. Cooler water at the ocean surface. This does not mean there is less
heat stored in the water. The effect is to produce a thicker layer of
warm water at a cooler temperature.
3. Nutrient rich water (because the bottom water has more nutrients
than the surface). This can be used to promote water plant growth and
fish.
Finance
Can these plants pay for themselves? The sources of income are:
1. Sale of energy.
2. Carbon credits (paid for energy that does not emit warming gases).
Two islands in the Caribbean are part of the European Union as French
Overseas Territories and could therefore receive Carbon Credits from
the EU system.
3. Payment for fishery improvements
4. Sale of fresh water
5. Insurance payments from potential hurricane victims.
People who have said these plants can't pay their way usually ignore
every source of income except the first.
OCEES
Seawifs
Like other forms of renewable energy, OTEC won't play well if that
government considers only the immediate bottom line. Large OTEC plants
could become cost-competitive if oil doubles from its current $18 or
so a barrel, says Vega. Oil prices don't include what Vega and others
call "externalities," such as money spent coping with the polluting
effects of burning hydrocarbons or military defense of oil fields.
Factoring in oil defense alone would make oil's "true" cost $100 a
barrel, says energy guru Amory Lovins. (Among the closed- cycle test
plant's funders is the Department of Defense's Advanced Research
Projects Agency, which considers the development of new fuel sources
to be of importance to the nation's defense.)
Hawaii
A report of some activity.
"The potential of OTEC is great," says Joseph Huang, a senior
scientist for the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration and an
expert on the process. "The oceans are the biggest solar collector on
Earth, and there's enough energy in them to supply a thousand times
the world's needs. If you want to depend on nature, the oceans are the
only energy source big enough to tap."
US Government
The US Government has stopped Federal Research into OTEC, presumably
because of the antipathy of the second Bush regime to thinking about
alternative energy or Climate Change in general, which they persist in
denying is influenced by human activities.
However, the State of Hawaii has continued research.
OTEC to combat hurricanes
Discussion
hosted by Ed Minchau at September 11, 2004 02:56 PM
I believe I have a highly practical suggestion that, if implemented on
a large enough scale, might be successful in eliminating or partially
effective in controlling hurricanes, if carried out to a sufficient
degree.
Basically, it involves a way to cool the ocean surface, by extracting
the thermal energy in the surface waters, utilising floating heat pump
engines, that will convert the thermal energy into electricity. I'm
referring the OTEC, or Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion research that
was started years ago, and has successfully developed working engines
that actually produce a net positive output of energy on an ongoing
basis. There are numerous OTEC web sites covering this concept.
OTEC requires a temperature difference of about 36 deg F (20 deg C).
This temperature difference exists between the surface and deep
seawater year round throughout the tropical regions of the world. To
produce electricity, we either use a working fluid with a low boiling
point (e.g. ammonia) or warm surface seawater, and turn it to vapor by
heating it up with warm seawater (ammonia) or de-pressurizing it (warm
seawater). The pressure of the expanding vapor turns a turbine and
produces electricity! When using warm seawater (Open Cycle OTEC)
vapor, we can also produce fresh distilled water when it is condensed
back into a liquid. A closed cycle system can indirectly produce
freshwater, since its deep seawater discharge is still cold because it
only warms up about 8 deg F (4 deg C) in the condenser heat exchanger.
When this cold seawater flows through a separate atmospheric heat
exchanger, it condenses fresh water from the always humid tropical
air.
If enough of these OTEC engines were to be built and placed in the
tropical waters where hurricanes are spawned, they could certainly
reduce temperature of surface water sufficiently to greatly moderate
the generation of hurricanes.
Research needed
1. Engineering problems
What is the most effective Thermal Conversion system? Some of this has
probably been done already, but I expect the perfect design has not
yet been achieved, considering the small amount of money given to
research up to now.
2. Climate effects
Models of the expected effects of releasing cooler water into a sea
with currently high temperature surface water.
a) Where should the cooler water be released to avoid reducing the
efficiency of the OTEC plant? For example, if the water is released
near the warm water intake will that reduce power output?
b) How many plants are needed to affect the surface temperature of
seas such as the Caribbean where Hurricanes receive their power?
c) What would be the effect on heat transport of warm ocean currents
carrying Caribbean heat to western Europe?
d) How close can OTEC plants be to each other. For example, the Puerto
Rican, Cuban and Haitian coasts may be good sites. How many can these
north coasts support without cooling the local sea surface too much?
OTEC plants can only be expected to receive financial return from
Hurricane prevention if the models show the effect likely to be real.
3. Economic effects.
These include: value of increased fish production, value of fresh
water, employment.
The electricity produced has a value. Should it be used to supply the
local grid or should it be used to produce hydrogen for export power?
How much is likely to be available?
Reliable local power sources could be the basis of development in
Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Yucatan is also a possible site.
http://www.angelfire.com/mac/egmatthews/geotherapy/otec.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
25 Sep 2005 09:34:57 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Nothing.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
20 Sep 2005 06:25:50 PM |
|
|
Rita is heading for Houston and may finsih off another city.
However if we had 1 sq km lakes dug out , hundreds of them and kept
dry , than all the rains falling from the hurricanes would be stored
in the lakes , to be emptied for irrigation later in the non hurricane
season , and they could be built on higher ground inland above the
water table ,because most of the rain from the hurricane falls quite a
way inland .
This simple suggestion can save America hundreds of billions
of dollars each year , more than enough to build 5000 miles of si lane
underground rail networks each year . Over to you Jim to see if you
can spot any faults
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
20 Sep 2005 08:07:55 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Rita is heading for Houston and may finsih off another city.
However if we had 1 sq km lakes dug out , hundreds of them and kept
dry , than all the rains falling from the hurricanes would be stored
in the lakes , to be emptied for irrigation later in the non hurricane
How do you train a hurricane to just dump it's load in your hole?
season , and they could be built on higher ground inland above the
water table ,because most of the rain from the hurricane falls quite a
way inland .
Rain falling inland is not a problem for coastal cities.
This simple suggestion can save America hundreds of billions
of dollars each year , more than enough to build 5000 miles of si lane
underground rail networks each year . Over to you Jim to see if you
can spot any faults
You mean other than you are a babbling imbecile?
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
| User: "harmony" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
21 Sep 2005 12:42:03 PM |
|
|
<jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote in message
news:dgqbpb$cvp$1@mail.specsol.com...
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Rita is heading for Houston and may finsih off another city.
However if we had 1 sq km lakes dug out , hundreds of them and kept
dry , than all the rains falling from the hurricanes would be stored
in the lakes , to be emptied for irrigation later in the non hurricane
How do you train a hurricane to just dump it's load in your hole?
habshi's next project is to design lake on the wheel.
season , and they could be built on higher ground inland above the
water table ,because most of the rain from the hurricane falls quite a
way inland .
Rain falling inland is not a problem for coastal cities.
This simple suggestion can save America hundreds of billions
of dollars each year , more than enough to build 5000 miles of si lane
underground rail networks each year . Over to you Jim to see if you
can spot any faults
You mean other than you are a babbling imbecile?
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John A." |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
20 Sep 2005 08:19:40 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 01:07:55 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Rita is heading for Houston and may finsih off another city.
However if we had 1 sq km lakes dug out , hundreds of them and kept
dry , than all the rains falling from the hurricanes would be stored
in the lakes , to be emptied for irrigation later in the non hurricane
How do you train a hurricane to just dump it's load in your hole?
season , and they could be built on higher ground inland above the
water table ,because most of the rain from the hurricane falls quite a
way inland .
Rain falling inland is not a problem for coastal cities.
This simple suggestion can save America hundreds of billions
of dollars each year , more than enough to build 5000 miles of si lane
underground rail networks each year . Over to you Jim to see if you
can spot any faults
You mean other than you are a babbling imbecile?
Learn from Holland, That is nothing new for them
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
20 Sep 2005 09:04:40 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics John A. <Me@you.com> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 01:07:55 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Rita is heading for Houston and may finsih off another city.
However if we had 1 sq km lakes dug out , hundreds of them and kept
dry , than all the rains falling from the hurricanes would be stored
in the lakes , to be emptied for irrigation later in the non hurricane
How do you train a hurricane to just dump it's load in your hole?
season , and they could be built on higher ground inland above the
water table ,because most of the rain from the hurricane falls quite a
way inland .
Rain falling inland is not a problem for coastal cities.
This simple suggestion can save America hundreds of billions
of dollars each year , more than enough to build 5000 miles of si lane
underground rail networks each year . Over to you Jim to see if you
can spot any faults
You mean other than you are a babbling imbecile?
Learn from Holland, That is nothing new for them
New Orleans tried decades ago to improve the levees, etc. but was shut
down in great part by the NEPA.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
20 Sep 2005 11:01:02 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 01:07:55 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Rita is heading for Houston and may finsih off another city.
However if we had 1 sq km lakes dug out , hundreds of them and kept
dry , than all the rains falling from the hurricanes would be stored
in the lakes , to be emptied for irrigation later in the non hurricane
How do you train a hurricane to just dump it's load in your hole?
haa haa this is funny (lmao) Be respectful, when a high tech Indian
guru is givign free advise.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maximust" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
20 Sep 2005 06:56:13 PM |
|
|
habshi wrote:
Rita is heading for Houston and may finsih off another city.
However if we had 1 sq km lakes dug out , hundreds of them and kept
dry , than all the rains falling from the hurricanes would be stored
in the lakes , to be emptied for irrigation later in the non hurricane
season , and they could be built on higher ground inland above the
water table ,because most of the rain from the hurricane falls quite a
way inland .
We could use those lakes to grow algae for biodiesel and kiss imported petroleum
goodbye forever!
This simple suggestion can save America hundreds of billions
of dollars each year , more than enough to build 5000 miles of si lane
underground rail networks each year . Over to you Jim to see if you
can spot any faults
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
24 Sep 2005 04:29:51 AM |
|
|
Should the barges and boats and ships not be heading out to
the sea , towards the hurricane ? Its the storm surge that does the
damage , the boats can probably handle the winds as you hardly ever
hear of ships damaged at sea by hurricanes
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
24 Sep 2005 11:23:49 AM |
|
|
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
Should the barges and boats and ships not be heading out to
the sea , towards the hurricane ? Its the storm surge that does the
damage , the boats can probably handle the winds as you hardly ever
hear of ships damaged at sea by hurricanes
Because most ships get away from hurricanes now that we have plenty
of warning, you ignorant moron.
Before there was such warning systems, ships sunk on a regular basis.
You are an imbecile.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brad Guth" |
|
| Title: Re: How to stop hurricane damage |
24 Sep 2005 08:58:04 PM |
|
|
Modern ships that have been properly engineered and maintained (thus we
must exclude most of the American designed and operated ships) should
have managed quite nicely at sea, though quite a ride.
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, thus "in war there are no rules" - In fact, war has been
the very reason of having to deal with the likes of others that haven't
been playing by whatever rules, such as GW Bush.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 05:54:52 AM |
|
|
excerpts
U.S. oil production peaked in 1970 at 8 million barrels per day and
fell to less than 3 million barrels per day in 2004.
How much energy does the ocean store, you ask? It is estimated that
each day, the oceans absorb enough heat from the sun to equal the
thermal energy contained in 250 billion barrels of oil. The world
currently consumes more than 3 billion barrels of oil per day.
Can the ocean provide all the types of energy we require? Well let's
see. First and foremost we need electricity. This can be provided by a
number of approaches, e.g. offshore wind, wave power, current and
tidal power, thermal energy conversion and even salinity gradients.
Next we need fuel to power our transportation industry. Hydrogen and
ethanol appear to be preferred fuels at the moment. Yes, we can get
hydrogen and ethanol from some of the same machines that produce
electricity in the ocean.
It appears that Europe is getting the message. North Sea oil fields
are diminishing quickly, which has given rise to studies on how these
countries will be able to provide themselves with energy in the
future. In Europe, an estimated 150,000 square kilometers of ocean
would provide an area for offshore wind farms that would provide
enough power to satisfy all of Europe's electricity demands. It is
estimated that 0.1% of the energy in ocean waves could be capable of
supplying the entire world's energy requirements five fold. The UK and
Australia already lead the world in Ocean Energy technology
implemented utilizing wave and current devices.
There are many ways to look at our growing need for electricity. Take
just the United States for example. According to the 2004 World Energy
Report from the International Energy Agency (IEA), at an annual use of
3,659,990,000 MWhrs in 2002 the U.S. wins hands down for total energy
needs of all the developed countries.
Now, just for fun, how many wind, wave, current plants would it take
to provide 10 percent of the United States' power requirements? First
we must make an assumption on how much electricity the plant will
produce. To do this I will take the Cape Wind offshore wind farm and
extrapolate a number. This wind farm is a 420 MW (peak installed
capacity) project that will produce about 1.5 million MWhrs per year.
If we use this number, which takes into account the wind patterns over
a year, we should be conservative in our calculations.
The top 12 users of electricity represent more than 70% of the total
worldwide usage. Total MWhrs for those nations in 2002 was roughly
10,000,640,000 MWhrs, according to the IEA. The world total for the
same year was 14,283,530,000 MWhrs.
For less than 10,000 worldwide ocean energy power plants of only 500
MW, you could have a world powered by clean renewable energy and
reverse global warming. I'm not selfish. We should consider all
renewables in this equation, at least the ones that do not use fossil
fuels in their process (e.g. the predominant hydrogen generation
techniques use fossil fuel). If one decided that ocean energy would
provide 10 percent of the world's electricity, then that would equate
to 952 ocean energy farms. The U.S., alone would require only 244
power plants -- now it starts to make a great deal of sense! The U.S.
has some 10,759 miles of coastline, that would equate to one power
plant/farm per 44 linear miles along the coastline.
The Cape Wind installation is 130 wind turbines, which will produce
420 MW of electricity or 3.2 MW each. The wind farm will occupy 24 sq.
miles producing 62,500 MWhrs per sq. mile.
Back to the 244 ocean energy farms off the U.S. coastline. We would
only require 5,856 sq. miles (an area 77 miles by 77 miles) to achieve
our 10% goal. This does not take into consideration deepwater
installations such as wave, Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) and
current, and larger installations, which would increase the spacing of
energy sources.
The U.S. was a tough one because of the amount of electricity we use.
However, with fossil fuel availability diminishing, ocean energy will
be required to supplement our growing need for energy.
Now, let's look at an island nation like Jamaica. Jamaica used
5,850,000 MWhrs of electricity in 2002. That would have required 4 of
our 500 MW ocean energy plants to power the entire island. It is
feasible that just two OTEC plants could provide 100% of this
requirement and provide millions of gallons of fresh water daily as a
byproduct-what a bonus for islands!
The facts about the use of energy from the ocean are indisputable and
with the large concentration of populations along coastal areas, ocean
energy can be found nearby.
Energy without any harmful emissions or global warming effects, and in
some cases such as OTEC, has the added benefit of freshwater as a
byproduct. A 10 MW OTEC plant could produce about 3 million gallons of
freshwater per day -- a real bonus for islands or developing
countries.
The technology for putting equipment in the ocean was developed years
ago and has been demonstrated repeatedly in oilfield applications. If
we (the world's engineers, designers and manufacturers) can build an
offshore oil rig such as BP's 75,000-ton, semi-submersible offshore
production, drilling and quarters platform-Thunder Horse-and bring it
across the ocean from Korea on a giant vessel, then moor it with a
16-point semi-taut chain-wire-chain system in 6,040 feet of water-I
think we can safely say we can build and install offshore ocean energy
plants of any kind, size, shape or water depth.
As I continue to explore the use of ocean power technologies, I find
it amazing that no matter where we go along the coasts of the
continental U.S. and Hawaii, just about every area is suitable for at
least one type of ocean energy technology. (pull quote)
There is no one choice-wind, wave, current, tide, OTEC, etc. Each
technology will need to be used to meet the U.S. energy needs. There
is no one location. All areas will have to be exploited.
Now my least favorite... "Is renewable ocean energy a national
priority?" Sadly no. But it once was!
From about 1977 to 1983, there was a movement towards harvesting Ocean
Energy that is unmatched today. In 1980 and 1981 the U.S. Department
of Energy's appropriation for Ocean Energy Systems alone was over $30
million, but the money disappeared over time as budget cuts forced its
eventual demise, and the demise of the agencies responsible for
overseeing the technology.
Ocean Energy's time is here. The government, and yes, even the oil &
gas companies must take the lead in moving the technologies forward,
not favoring any one renewable energy type over another. Remember the
train companies - if they had realized they were in the transportation
business they would probably be flying jets. Trick question-What
business are the oil & gas companies in? Maybe the numbers I used in
this article are arguable, and I can imagine that some will want to
argue. But that's not the point. No one has yet to show me that Ocean
Energy is unfeasible. Energy independence is just around the
corner...or should I say "just offshore".
About the Author
Dan White is the founder of Technology Systems Corporation
The world's first ocean thermal energy conversion facility has
been commissioned off the west coast of India. The 1 MW plant is
housed on a 65 m barge anchored off the port of Tuticorin, and uses a
‘reverse’ refrigeration cycle that relies on the temperature
differential of deep sea water at 7°C and surface water at 28 °C. The
project was developed by the National Institute of Ocean Technology
and Dempo Shipbuilding. Once stabilised, the process is
self-sustaining and continues in an infinite loop, say officials, and
the demonstration plant will collect data on all aspects of design and
operation. The deep-sea water is collected through a pipeline that is
1.2 km long and the OTEC barge has one of the deepest single point
mooring systems in the world.
OTEC has important benefits other than power production.
[edit]
Air conditioning
Air conditioning can be a byproduct. Spent cold seawater from an OTEC
plant can chill fresh water in a heat exchanger or flow directly into
a cooling system. Simple systems of this type have air conditioned
buildings at the Natural Energy Laboratory for several years.
[edit]
Chilled-soil agriculture
OTEC technology also supports chilled-soil agriculture. When cold
seawater flows through underground pipes, it chills the surrounding
soil. The temperature difference between plant roots in the cool soil
and plant leaves in the warm air allows many plants that evolved in
temperate climates to be grown in the subtropics. The Natural Energy
Laboratory maintains a demonstration garden near its OTEC plant with
more than 100 different fruits and vegetables, many of which would not
normally survive in Hawaii.
[edit]
Aquaculture
Aquaculture is perhaps the most well-known byproduct of OTEC.
Cold-water delicacies, such as salmon and lobster, thrive in the
nutrient-rich, deep, seawater from the OTEC process. Microalgae such
as Spirulina, a health food supplement, also can be cultivated in the
deep-ocean water.
[edit]
Desalination
Desalination, the production of fresh water from seawater, is another
advantage of open or hybrid-cycle OTEC plants. Theoretically, an OTEC
plant that generates 2-MW of net electricity could produce about 4,300
cubic meters (14,118.3 cubic feet) of desalinated water each day. This
is equivalent to 4.3 million litres or 105,612.2 (U.S.) gallons.
[edit]
Mineral extraction
OTEC may one day provide a means to mine ocean water for 57 trace
elements. Most economic analyses have suggested that mining the ocean
for dissolved substances would be unprofitable because so much energy
is required to pump the large volume of water needed and because of
the expense involved in separating the minerals from seawater. But
with OTEC plants already pumping the water, the only remaining
economic challenge is to reduce the cost of the extraction process.
[edit]
Analysis of OTEC systems
OTEC systems can be classified as two types based on the thermodynamic
cycle (1) Closed cycle and (2) Open cycle.
[edit]
Variation of ocean temperature with depth
The total insolation received by the oceans = (5.457 × 1018 MJ/year) ×
0.7 = 1.9 × 1018 MJ/year. (taking an average clearness index of 0.5)
Only some 15% of this energy is absorbed. But this 15% is still huge
enough.
We can use Lambert's law to quantify the solar energy absorption by
water,
Where, y is the depth of water, I is intensity and µ is the absorption
coefficient. Solving the above differential equation,
I(y) = I0exp( - µy)
The absorption coefficicent µ may range from 0.05 m-1 for very clear
fresh water to 0.5 m-1 for very salty water.
Since the intensity falls exponentially with depth y, the absorption
is concentrated at the top layers. Typically in the tropics the
surface temperature values are in excess of 25°C, while 1 km below the
temperature is about 10°C. Contrary to the usual cooking pot situation
of heat supplied from the bottom surface, the warmer (and hence
lighter) waters at the top means that there are no thermal convection
currents. Due to the very low temperature gradients, heat transfer by
conduction is too low to cause any significant change to the scenario
either. So with neither of the major mechanisms of heat transfer
operating, the top layers remain hot and the lower layers remain cold.
Thus its is like an essentially infinite heat source and an
essentially infinite heat sink between a separation of ~1000mts that
has been set up naturally for us to run heat engines. This temperature
difference varies with latitude and season, with the maximum at the
tropical, subtropical and equatorial waters. Hence in general tropics
are the best choice for setting up OTEC systems.
[edit]
The open/Claude cycle
In this scheme, warm surface water at around 27°C is admitted into an
evaporator in which the pressure is maintained at a value slightly
below the saturation pressure.
Water entering the evaporator is therefore superheated.
h1 = hf
Where hf is enthalpy of liquid water at the inlet temperature, T1.
This temporarily superheated water undergoes volume boiling as opposed
to pool boiling in conventional boilers where the heating surface is
in contact. Thus the water partially flashes to steam with a two phase
equilibrium prevailing. Suppose that the pressure inside the
evaporator is maintained at the saturation pressure of water at T2.
This process being iso-enthalpic,
h2 = h1 = hf + x2hfg
Here, x2 is the fraction of water by mass that has vaporized. The warm
water mass flow rate per unit turbine mass flow rate is 1/x2.
The low pressure in the evaporator is maintained by a vacuum pump that
also removes the dissolved non condensable gases from the evaporator.
The evaporator now contains a mixture of water and steam of very low
quality. The steam is separated from the water as saturated vapour.
The remaining water is saturated and is discharged back to the ocean
in the open cycle. The steam we have extracted in the process is a
very low pressure, very high specific volume working fluid. It expands
in a special low pressure turbine.
h3 = hg
Here, hg corresponds to T2. For an ideal adiabatic reversible turbine,
s5,s = s3 = sf + x5,ssfg
The above equation corresponds to the temperature at the exhaust of
the turbine, T5. x5,s is the mass fraction of vapour at point 5.
The enthalpy at T5 is,
h5,s = hf + x5,shfg
This enthalpy is lower. The adiabatic reversible turbine work =
h3-h5,s.
Actual turbine work wT = (h3-h5,s) × polytropic efficiency
The condenser temperature and pressure are lower. Since the turbine
exhaust will be discharged back into the ocean anyway, a direct
contact condenser is used. Thus the exhaust is mixed with cold water
from the deep cold water pipe which results in a near saturated water.
That water is now discharged back to the ocean.
h6=hf, at T5. T7 is the temperature of the exhaust mixed with cold sea
water, as the vapour content now is negligible,
There are the temperature differences between stages. One between warm
surface water and working steam, one between exhaust steam and cooling
water and one between cooling water reaching the condenser and deep
water. These represent external irreversibilities that reduce the
overall temperature difference.
The cold water flow rate per unit turbine mass flow rate,
Turbine mass flow rate,
Warm water mass flow rate,
Cold water mass flow rate
[edit]
The closed/Anderson cycle
In this cycle, QH is the heat transferred in the evaporator from the
warm sea water to the working fluid. The working fluid exits from the
evaporator as a gas near its dew point.
...
IntroductionThe Seawater Greenhouse is a unique concept which combines
natural processes, simple construction techniques and mathematical
computer modelling to provide a low-cost solution to one of the
world's greatest needs – fresh water. The Seawater Greenhouse is a new
development that offers sustainable solution to the problem of
providing water for agriculture in arid, coastal regions.
The process uses seawater to cool and humidify the air that ventilates
the greenhouse and sunlight to distil fresh water from seawater. This
enables the year round cultivation of high value crops that would
otherwise be difficult or impossible to grow in hot, arid regions.
Population growth is threatening the availability of fresh water in
many regions of the world. With agriculture accounting for
approximately 70% of all water used, the water crisis is closely
linked to food production and economic development. Conventional
agriculture is very inefficient in its use of water with several
hundred litres needed to produce just one kilogram of produce.
Although seawater is abundant, conventional desalination consumes
substantial energy, usually derived from fossil fuels. There is a need
for affordable and sustainable means of producing food and water,
without reliance on energy reserves.
Self-sufficiency in water production combined with low internal
irrigation requirements mean that The Seawater Greenhouse offers
significant water savings by reducing agricultural demands on mains
and ground water. The Seawater Greenhouse solution has the potential
to make a positive impact on the impending global water crisis. It may
also become the lowest cost method of desalination and perhaps the
only one that is truly sustainable.
Today, the Seawater Greenhouse is ready for implementation in any arid
region where a sustainable approach to agriculture and water
production is needed.
...The MNES has been promoting the sales of box solar cookers since the
early 1980’s. This type of cooker is designed to prepare food for up
to 4-5 people and can be supplied with or without electrical back-up.
However, the Dish Solar Cooker designed for 10-15 people and the
Community Solar Cooker for 35-40 people have also been developed. In
March 1999 the world’s largest Solar Steam Cooking System was
installed at Mount Abu, Rajasthan. It is a hybrid system with back-up
oil-fired boilers and is designed to prepare food for 10 000 people
The facts about the use of energy from the ocean are undisputable and
with the large concentration of populations along coastal areas, ocean
energy can be found nearby.
—In Europe, an estimated 150,000 square kilometers of ocean would
provide an area for offshore wind farms that would provide enough
power to satisfy all of Europe 's electricity demands.
—About 0.1% of the energy in ocean waves could supply the entire
world's energy requirements five times over.
—Each day, the oceans absorb enough heat from the sun to equal the
thermal energy contained in 250 billion barrels of oil. The world
currently consumes about 3 billion barrels of oil per day.
Energy without any harmful emissions or global warming effects and in
some cases such as OTEC has the added benefit of freshwater as a
byproduct. A 10 megawatt OTEC plant could produce about 3 million
gallons of freshwater per day—a real bonus for island or developing
countries.
The technology for putting equipment in the ocean was developed years
ago and has been demonstrated repeatedly in oilfield applications.
For additional information, contact Dan White, Organizer, EnergyOcean
2005 at (772) 221 7720 or email dwhitetsc@mac.com, Web site:
www.EnergyOcean.com.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 08:49:09 AM |
|
|
"habshi" <habshi@anony.com> crapped in message
news:43367e41.7727771@news.clara.net...
"India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans"
Maybe India is the world's leader in energy technology today (ha ha),
but it is China first and India second that are causing the problem.
Population:
1 World 6,446,131,400 July 2005 est.
2 China 1,306,313,812 July 2005 est.
3 India 1,080,264,388 July 2005 est.
4 European Union 456,953,258 July 2005 est.
5 United States 295,734,134 July 2005 est.
6 Indonesia 241,973,879 July 2005 est.
7 Brazil 186,112,794 July 2005 est.
8 Pakistan 162,419,946 July 2005 est.
9 Bangladesh 144,319,628 July 2005 est.
10 Russia 143,420,309 July 2005 est.
11 Nigeria 128,765,768 July 2005 est.
12 Japan 127,417,244 July 2005 est.
13 Mexico 106,202,903 July 2005 est.
14 Philippines 87,857,473 July 2005 est.
15 Vietnam 83,535,576 July 2005 est.
16 Germany 82,431,390 July 2005 est.
17 Egypt 77,505,756 July 2005 est.
18 Ethiopia 73,053,286 July 2005 est.
19 Turkey 69,660,559 July 2005 est.
20 Iran 68,017,860 July 2005 est.
21 Thailand 64,185,502 July 2005 est.
22 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 60,764,490 July 2005 est.
23 France 60,656,178 July 2005 est.
24 United Kingdom 60,441,457 July 2005 est.
25 Italy 58,103,033 July 2005 est.
26 Korea, South 48,640,671 July 2005 est.
27 Ukraine 46,996,765 July 2005 est.
28 Burma 46,996,558 July 2005 est.
29 South Africa 44,344,136 July 2005 est.
30 Colombia 42,954,279 July 2005 est.
31 Spain 40,341,462 July 2005 est.
32 Sudan 40,187,486 July 2005 est.
33 Argentina 39,537,943 July 2005 est.
34 Poland 38,557,984 July 2005 est.
35 Tanzania 36,766,356 July 2005 est.
36 Kenya 33,829,590 July 2005 est.
37 Canada 32,805,041 July 2005 est.
38 Morocco 32,725,847 July 2005 est.
39 Algeria 32,531,853 July 2005 est.
40 Afghanistan 29,928,987 July 2005 est.
41 Peru 27,925,628 July 2005 est.
42 Nepal 27,676,547 July 2005 est.
43 Uganda 27,269,482 July 2005 est.
44 Uzbekistan 26,851,195 July 2005 est.
45 Saudi Arabia 26,417,599 July 2005 est.
46 Iraq 26,074,906 July 2005 est.
47 Venezuela 25,375,281 July 2005 est.
48 Malaysia 23,953,136 July 2005 est.
49 Korea, North 22,912,177 July 2005 est.
50 Taiwan 22,894,384 July 2005 est.
51 Romania 22,329,977 July 2005 est.
52 Ghana 21,946,247 July 2005 est.
53 Yemen 20,727,063 July 2005 est.
54 Australia 20,090,437 July 2005 est.
55 Sri Lanka 20,064,776 July 2005 est.
56 Mozambique 19,406,703 July 2005 est.
57 Syria 18,448,752 July 2005 est.
58 Madagascar 18,040,341 July 2005 est.
59 Cote d'Ivoire 17,298,040 July 2005 est.
60 Cameroon 16,988,132 July 2005 est.
61 Netherlands 16,407,491 July 2005 est.
62 Chile 15,980,912 July 2005 est.
63 Kazakhstan 15,185,844 July 2005 est.
64 Cambodia 13,636,398 July 2005 est.
65 Burkina Faso 13,491,736 July 2005 est.
66 Ecuador 13,363,593 July 2005 est.
67 Malawi 12,707,464 July 2005 est.
68 Niger 12,162,856 July 2005 est.
69 Zimbabwe 12,160,782 July 2005 est.
70 Guatemala 12,013,907 July 2005 est.
71 Angola 11,827,315 July 2005 est.
72 Senegal 11,706,498 July 2005 est.
73 Mali 11,415,261 July 2005 est.
74 Cuba 11,346,670 July 2005 est.
75 Zambia 11,261,795 July 2005 est.
76 Serbia and Montenegro 10,829,175 July 2005 est.
77 Greece 10,668,354 July 2005 est.
78 Portugal 10,566,212 July 2005 est.
79 Belgium 10,364,388 July 2005 est.
80 Belarus 10,300,483 July 2005 est.
81 Czech Republic 10,241,138 July 2005 est.
82 Tunisia 10,074,951 July 2005 est.
83 Hungary 10,006,835 July 2005 est.
84 Chad 9,657,069 July 2005 est.
85 Guinea 9,452,670 July 2005 est.
86 Dominican Republic 9,049,595 July 2005 est.
87 Sweden 9,001,774 July 2005 est.
88 Bolivia 8,857,870 July 2005 est.
89 Somalia 8,591,629 July 2005 est.
90 Rwanda 8,440,820 July 2005 est.
91 Austria 8,184,691 July 2005 est.
92 Haiti 8,121,622 July 2005 est.
93 Azerbaijan 7,911,974 July 2005 est.
94 Burundi 7,795,426 July 2005 est.
95 Benin 7,649,360 July 2005 est.
96 Switzerland 7,489,370 July 2005 est.
97 Bulgaria 7,450,349 July 2005 est.
98 Honduras 7,167,902 July 2005 est.
99 Tajikistan 7,163,506 July 2005 est.
100 Hong Kong 6,898,686 July 2005 est.
101 El Salvador 6,704,932 July 2005 est.
102 Paraguay 6,347,884 July 2005 est.
103 Israel 6,276,883 July 2005 est.
104 Laos 6,217,141 July 2005 est.
105 Sierra Leone 5,867,426 July 2005 est.
106 Libya 5,765,563 July 2005 est.
107 Jordan 5,759,732 July 2005 est.
108 Papua New Guinea 5,545,268 July 2005 est.
109 Nicaragua 5,465,100 July 2005 est.
110 Denmark 5,432,335 July 2005 est.
111 Slovakia 5,431,363 July 2005 est.
112 Togo 5,399,991 July 2005 est.
113 Finland 5,223,442 July 2005 est.
114 Kyrgyzstan 5,146,281 July 2005 est.
115 Turkmenistan 4,952,081 July 2005 est.
116 Georgia 4,677,401 July 2005 est.
117 Eritrea 4,669,638 July 2005 est.
118 Norway 4,593,041 July 2005 est.
119 Croatia 4,495,904 July 2005 est.
120 Moldova 4,455,421 July 2005 est.
121 Bosnia and Herzegovina 4,430,494 July 2005 est.
122 Singapore 4,425,720 July 2005 est.
123 Central African Republic 4,237,703 July 2005 est.
124 New Zealand 4,035,461 July 2005 est.
125 Costa Rica 4,016,173 July 2005 est.
126 Ireland 4,015,676 July 2005 est.
127 Puerto Rico 3,911,299 July 2005 est.
128 Lebanon 3,826,018 July 2005 est.
129 Congo, Republic of the 3,602,269 July 2005 est.
130 Lithuania 3,596,617 July 2005 est.
131 Albania 3,563,112 July 2005 est.
132 Uruguay 3,415,920 July 2005 est.
133 Panama 3,140,232 July 2005 est.
134 Mauritania 3,086,859 July 2005 est.
135 Oman 3,001,583 July 2005 est.
136 Armenia 2,982,904 July 2005 est.
137 Liberia 2,900,269 July 2005 est.
138 Mongolia 2,791,272 July 2005 est.
139 Jamaica 2,735,520 July 2005 est.
140 United Arab Emirates 2,563,212 July 2005 est.
141 West Bank 2,385,615 NA
142 Kuwait 2,335,648 July 2005 est.
143 Latvia 2,290,237 July 2005 est.
144 Bhutan 2,232,291 July 2005 est.
145 Macedonia 2,045,262 July 2005 est.
146 Lesotho 2,031,348 July 2005 est.
147 Namibia 2,030,692 July 2005 est.
148 Slovenia 2,011,070 July 2005 est.
149 Botswana 1,640,115 July 2005 est.
150 Gambia, The 1,595,086 July 2005 est.
151 Guinea-Bissau 1,413,446 July 2005 est.
152 Gabon 1,394,307 July 2005 est.
153 Gaza Strip 1,376,289 July 2005 est.
154 Estonia 1,332,893 July 2005 est.
155 Mauritius 1,230,602 July 2005 est.
156 Swaziland 1,138,227 July 2005 est.
157 Trinidad and Tobago 1,075,066 July 2005 est.
158 East Timor 1,040,880 July 2005 est.
159 Fiji 893,354 July 2005 est.
160 Qatar 863,051 July 2005 est.
161 Cyprus 780,133 July 2005 est.
162 Reunion 776,948 July 2005 est.
163 Guyana 765,283 July 2005 est.
164 Bahrain 688,345 July 2005 est.
165 Comoros 671,247 July 2005 est.
166 Solomon Islands 538,032 July 2005 est.
167 Equatorial Guinea 529,034 July 2005 est.
168 Djibouti 476,703 July 2005 est.
169 Luxembourg 468,571 July 2005 est.
170 Macau 449,198 July 2005 est.
171 Guadeloupe 448,713 July 2005 est.
172 Suriname 438,144 July 2005 est.
173 Martinique 432,900 July 2005 est.
174 Cape Verde 418,224 July 2005 est.
175 Malta 398,534 July 2005 est.
176 Brunei 372,361 July 2005 est.
177 Maldives 349,106 July 2005 est.
178 Bahamas, The 301,790 July 2005 est.
179 Iceland 296,737 July 2005 est.
180 Belize 281,084 July 2005 est.
181 Barbados 278,870 July 2005 est.
182 Western Sahara 273,008 July 2005 est.
183 French Polynesia 270,485 July 2005 est.
184 Netherlands Antilles 219,958 July 2005 est.
185 New Caledonia 216,494 July 2005 est.
186 Vanuatu 205,754 July 2005 est.
187 French Guiana 195,506 July 2005 est.
188 Mayotte 193,633 July 2005 est.
189 Sao Tome and Principe 187,410 July 2005 est.
190 Samoa 177,287 July 2005 est.
191 Guam 168,564 July 2005 est.
192 Saint Lucia 166,312 July 2005 est.
193 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 117,534 July 2005 est.
194 Tonga 112,422 July 2005 est.
195 Virgin Islands 108,708 July 2005 est.
196 Micronesia, Federated States of 108,105 July 2005 est.
197 Kiribati 103,092 July 2005 est.
198 Jersey 90,812 July 2005 est.
199 Grenada 89,502 July 2005 est.
200 Seychelles 81,188 July 2005 est.
201 Northern Mariana Islands 80,362 July 2005 est.
202 Man, Isle of 75,049 July 2005 est.
203 Aruba 71,566 July 2005 est.
204 Andorra 70,549 July 2005 est.
205 Dominica 69,029 July 2005 est.
206 Antigua and Barbuda 68,722 July 2005 est.
207 Bermuda 65,365 July 2005 est.
208 Guernsey 65,228 July 2005 est.
209 Marshall Islands 59,071 July 2005 est.
210 American Samoa 57,881 July 2005 est.
211 Greenland 56,375 July 2005 est.
212 Faroe Islands 46,962 July 2005 est.
213 Cayman Islands 44,270 July 2005 est.
214 Saint Kitts and Nevis 38,958 July 2005 est.
215 Liechtenstein 33,717 July 2005 est.
216 Monaco 32,409 July 2005 est.
217 San Marino 28,880 July 2005 est.
218 Gibraltar 27,884 July 2005 est.
219 British Virgin Islands 22,643 July 2005 est.
220 Cook Islands 21,388 July 2005 est.
221 Turks and Caicos Islands 20,556 July 2005 est.
222 Palau 20,303 July 2005 est.
223 Wallis and Futuna 16,025 July 2005 est.
224 Anguilla 13,254 July 2005 est.
225 Nauru 13,048 July 2005 est.
226 Tuvalu 11,636 July 2005 est.
227 Montserrat 9,341 July 2005 est.
228 Saint Helena 7,460 July 2005 est.
229 Saint Pierre and Miquelon 7,012 July 2005 est.
230 Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas) 2,967 July 2005 est.
231 Svalbard 2,701 July 2005 est.
232 Niue 2,166 July 2005 est.
233 Norfolk Island 1,828 July 2005 est.
234 Tokelau 1,392 July 2005 est.
235 Holy See (Vatican City) 932 July 2005 est.
236 Cocos (Keeling) Islands 628 July 2005 est.
237 Johnston Atoll 361 July 2005 est.
238 Christmas Island 361 July 2005 est.
239 Pitcairn Islands 45 July 2005 est.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2119rank.html
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 10:00:11 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics, Androcles
<Androcles@MyPlace.org>
wrote
on Sun, 25 Sep 2005 13:49:09 GMT
<pVxZe.8975$lL1.418@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>:
"habshi" <habshi@anony.com> crapped in message
news:43367e41.7727771@news.clara.net...
"India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans"
Maybe India is the world's leader in energy technology today (ha ha),
but it is China first and India second that are causing the problem.
Population:
1 World 6,446,131,400 July 2005 est.
2 China 1,306,313,812 July 2005 est.
3 India 1,080,264,388 July 2005 est.
4 European Union 456,953,258 July 2005 est.
5 United States 295,734,134 July 2005 est.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_usa_per_per
1 United States 8.35 tonnes of oil equivalent (TOE)
per person per year
2 Canada 8.16 TOE/person/year
3 Finland 6.40 TOE/person/year
4 Belgium 5.78 TOE/person/year
5 Australia 5.71 TOE/person/year
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_pri_ene_con_mil_ton_oil_equ
1 United States 2331.60 million tonnes oil equivalent (MTOE) per year
2 China 1386.20 MTOE/y
3 Russia 668.60 MTOE/y
4 Japan 514.60 MTOE/y
5 India 375.80 MTOE/y
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_ele_con
[not ranked]
US 3.66 trillion KWH [2002]
1 China 1.312 trillion KWH [2001]
2 Japan 964.2 billion KWH [2001]
3 Russia 773 billion KWH [2001]
4 Germany 506.8 billion KWH [2001]
5 Canada 504.4 billion KWH [2001]
Granted, China's second. But guess who's first.
--
#191, -- insert random power piggery here
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
26 Sep 2005 08:52:13 AM |
|
|
The population problem has been solved except for Islamic groups
1.Whites are a dying race -current birth rate 1.2 , ie pop falls to one tenth today's level this
century ,Britain from 50m to 4m whites
2. China is solved , one child policy
3.Indian Hindu birth rate is close to replacement level
However Islam is proliferating with high birth rates , five fold increase every fifty years
, 25 fold every 100 , so current 1.2b Muslims will rise to 30b while non Muslim pop sticks at around
5. Note 30b vs 5b !!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
26 Sep 2005 02:50:50 PM |
|
|
"habshi" <habshi@anony.net> wrote in message
news:4337fc56.22508911@news.clara.net...
| The population problem has been solved except for Islamic groups
|
| 1.Whites are a dying race -current birth rate 1.2 , ie pop falls to
one tenth today's level this
| century ,Britain from 50m to 4m whites
| 2. China is solved , one child policy
| 3.Indian Hindu birth rate is close to replacement level
| However Islam is proliferating with high birth rates , five fold
increase every fifty years
| , 25 fold every 100 , so current 1.2b Muslims will rise to 30b while
non Muslim pop sticks at around
| 5. Note 30b vs 5b !!!
Love of religion is the root if all evil.
Androcles
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
26 Sep 2005 04:21:01 AM |
|
|
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
message news:ir1k03-an5.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
| In sci.physics, Androcles
| <Androcles@MyPlace.org>
| wrote
| on Sun, 25 Sep 2005 13:49:09 GMT
| <pVxZe.8975$lL1.418@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>:
| >
| > "habshi" <habshi@anony.com> crapped in message
| > news:43367e41.7727771@news.clara.net...
| >
| >
| > "India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans"
| >
| > Maybe India is the world's leader in energy technology today (ha
ha),
| > but it is China first and India second that are causing the problem.
| > Population:
| >
| > 1 World 6,446,131,400 July 2005 est.
| > 2 China 1,306,313,812 July 2005 est.
| > 3 India 1,080,264,388 July 2005 est.
| > 4 European Union 456,953,258 July 2005 est.
| > 5 United States 295,734,134 July 2005 est.
|
| http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_usa_per_per
|
| 1 United States 8.35 tonnes of oil equivalent (TOE)
| per person per year
| 2 Canada 8.16 TOE/person/year
| 3 Finland 6.40 TOE/person/year
| 4 Belgium 5.78 TOE/person/year
| 5 Australia 5.71 TOE/person/year
|
| http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_pri_ene_con_mil_ton_oil_equ
|
| 1 United States 2331.60 million tonnes oil equivalent (MTOE) per year
| 2 China 1386.20 MTOE/y
| 3 Russia 668.60 MTOE/y
| 4 Japan 514.60 MTOE/y
| 5 India 375.80 MTOE/y
|
| http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_ele_con
|
| [not ranked]
| US 3.66 trillion KWH [2002]
| 1 China 1.312 trillion KWH [2001]
| 2 Japan 964.2 billion KWH [2001]
| 3 Russia 773 billion KWH [2001]
| 4 Germany 506.8 billion KWH [2001]
| 5 Canada 504.4 billion KWH [2001]
|
| Granted, China's second. But guess who's first.
At what?
The good life for the few or the rice paddies for the many?
I'll take the good life now, in 100 years the population will
be 8-fold, the third world will be trashing the breadbasket
of the mid-West clamouring for more rice, my great
grandchildren will also starve and fight them off with nukes.
Prevention is better than cure, let the small war begin
while we have the advantage and save the big one
from happening.
I've nothing against India or China solving their own
problems they caused in the first place. Education has failed,
the population wars are inevitable. The West will have to take
care of its energy usage, it already has population control.
And kick that no-fucking Pope out, free condoms for all,
we've gone forth and multiplied enough.
Androcles
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
26 Sep 2005 05:18:16 AM |
|
|
The good life for the few or the rice paddies for the many?
I'll take the good life now, in 100 years the population will
be 8-fold, the third world will be trashing the breadbasket
of the mid-West clamouring for more rice, my great
grandchildren will also starve and fight them off with nukes.
Prevention is better than cure, let the small war begin
while we have the advantage and save the big one
from happening.
I've nothing against India or China solving their own
problems they caused in the first place. Education has failed,
the population wars are inevitable. The West will have to take
care of its energy usage, it already has population control.
And kick that no-fucking Pope out, free condoms for all,
we've gone forth and multiplied enough.
Androcles
***************
Words of a towering intellectual. Ever get that thorn out of that
lion's paw, phuckwit?????
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 09:37:07 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
excerpts
U.S. oil production peaked in 1970 at 8 million barrels per day and
fell to less than 3 million barrels per day in 2004.
How much energy does the ocean store, you ask? It is estimated that
each day, the oceans absorb enough heat from the sun to equal the
thermal energy contained in 250 billion barrels of oil. The world
currently consumes more than 3 billion barrels of oil per day.
habshi ***** and nonsence production peaked at enough energy to
provide a tepid cup of tea.
<snip crap>
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 09:58:39 AM |
|
|
India can do with cheap gas and that is available in Turkmenistan
which has an estimated reserve of 71 trillion cubic feet and in Iran
whose natural gas reserves is estimated to be 940 trillion cubic feet
(tcf). If we can get natural gas just from these two countries via
pipelines, it would cost 35 per cent less than the cost of Liquified
Natural Gas (LNG) in India and Pakistan. And that is a bargain. The
length of the pipeline from Iran through Pakistan to India would be
about 2,700 km and would cost around dollar five billion to build and
deliver about 3.3 billion cubic feet per day (bcpd).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "cyril" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
26 Sep 2005 08:57:20 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 10:54:52 GMT, (habshi) wrote:
The world
currently consumes more than 3 billion barrels of oil per day.
!!!!
Less than 85 millions in fact.
Where on earth did you pick that figure ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "habshi" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 09:58:34 AM |
|
|
The United States consumed an average of about 20.4 million bbl/d of
oil during the first ten months of 2004, up from 20.0 million bbl/d in
2003. Of this, motor gasoline consumption was 9.0 million bbl/d (or
44% of the total), distillate fuel oil consumption was 4.1 million
bbl/d (20%), jet fuel consumption was 1.6 million bbl/d (8%), and
residual fuel oil consumption was 0.8 million bbl/d (4%)l. Total 2005
petroleum demand is projected to grow by just 1.4% (280,000 bbl/d), to
an average 20.7 million bbl/d, in response to the combined effects of
somewhat slower economic growth and relatively high crude oil and
product prices. All the major products (except residual fuel oil) are
expected to contribute to this growth. Motor gasoline demand is
projected to increase 1.8%, to 9.22 million bbl/d. Jet fuel demand is
projected to post a growth rate of 3.1% in 2005 to average 1.67
million barrels per day, still below 2000 jet fuel consumption but
sharply up from post-9/11 lows it reached in 2002 and 2003. Distillate
demand in 2005 is projected to grow only 1.5% year-over-year as
industrial growth slows. Demand for residual fuel oil is projected to
remain about flat in 2005.
Petroleum Prices
Since the third week of June 2004, the U.S. monthly average pump price
for regular gasoline varied from the upper $1.80s to just over $2.00
per gallon. On October 18, 2004, the average price was $2.04 per
gallon
NATURAL GAS
As of January 1, 2004, the United States had estimated proven natural
gas reserves of 187 trillion cubic feet (reservers are 9 years), or
3.1% of world reserves (6th in the world). Natural gas consumption for
2004 is estimated at about 22.0 Tcf, with gross imports of 4.1 Tcf.
More than 80% of U.S. natural gas imports come from Canada, mainly the
western provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, and Saskatchewan.
Overall, the United States depends on natural gas for about 24% of its
total primary energy requirements (oil accounts for around 40% and
coal for 23%).
ELECTRICITY
In 2003, the United States generated 3,848 billion kilowatthours (Kwh)
of electricity, including 3,691 billion Kwh from the electric power
sector plus an additional 157 billion Kwh coming from combined heat
and power (CHP) facilities in the commercial and industrial sectors.
For the electric power sector, coal-fired plants accounted for 53% of
generation, nuclear 21%, natural gas 15%, hydroelectricity 7%, oil 3%,
geothermal and "other" 1%. During the first eight months of 2004,
electric power generation rose about 2.2% year-over-year.
As of 2002, U.S. net summer electric generating capacity was 905
gigawatts (GW). Of this total, 76% was thermal (35% coal, 19% natural
gas, 18% "dual-fired," 4% petroleum), 11% hydro, 11% nuclear, and 2%
"other renewables" (geothermal, solar, wind). The amount and
geographical distribution of capacity by energy source is a function
of, among other things, availability and price of fuels and/or
regulations. Capacity by energy source generally shows a geographical
pattern such as: significant nuclear capacity in New England, coal in
the central U.S., hydroelectric in the Pacific West, and
natural-gas-fired capacity in the Coastal South.
Nuclear
In 2003, U.S. nuclear power accounted for about 20% of total U.S.
electricity generation, second only to coal in the U.S. electricity
generation mix. Nearly 40% of U.S. nuclear output was generated in
just five states: Illinois, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, North
Carolina, and New York. The average utilization rate for all nuclear
units nationwide increased from 66% in 1990 to over 90% in 2002, an
all-time record high2003, nuclear power output had increased
nine-fold, with 104 licensed nuclear power units generating 764
billion kWh of electricity (nuclear generation was up 4.1%
year-over-year during the first seven months of 2004). This rapid
growth in nuclear power generation, however, obscures serious
underlying problems in the U.S. nuclear industry. After 1974, many
planned units were canceled, and since 1977, no orders have been
placed for new nuclear units, and none are currently planned.
THydroelectricity/Other Renewables
During 2003, the United States consumed 6.2 quadrillion Btu of
renewable energy, about 6% of total domestic gross energy demand, with
the largest component used for electricity production. As of June
2004, 18 states had adopted renewables portfolio standards (RPS) or
mandates aimed at increasing the share of renewable power in the
energy mix. Several other states are considering adoption of an RPS,
while others with RPS already in place are looking for ways to
accelerate the development of renewables. Growth in renewable energy
continues to be challenged by little or no development of new
hydroelectric sites, a slow but lengthy decline in the use of biomass
for non-electric purposes, and the high capital costs of most
renewable energy production facilities, relative to fossil-fueled
alternatives.
Overall, hydropower provided
India
OIL
Oil accounts for about 30% of India's total energy consumption. The
majority of India's roughly 5.4 billion barrels in oil reserves are
located in the Mumbai High, Upper Assam, Cambay, Krishna-Godavari, and
Cauvery basins. The offshore Mumbai High field is by far India's
largest producing field, with current output of around 260,000 barrels
per day (bbl/d). India's average oil production level (total liquids)
for 2003 was 819,000 bbl/d, of which 660,000 bbl/d was crude oil.
India had net oil imports of over 1.4 million bbl/d in 2003.
Future oil consumption in India is expected to grow rapidly, to 2.8
million bbl/d by 2010, from 2.2 million bbl/d in 2003
NATURAL GAS
Indian consumption of natural gas has risen faster than any other fuel
in recent years. From only 0.6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) per year in
1995, natural gas use was nearly 0.9 Tcf in 2002 and is projected to
reach 1.2 Tcf in 2010 and 1.6 Tcf in 2015. A major development in
December 2002 was the announcement by Reliance Industries of its
discovery of a large amount of natural gas in the Krishna-Godavari
Basin offshore from Andhra Pradesh along India's southeast coast. New
reserves from this find are estimated at about 7 Tcf. Reliance
reported another find offshore from Orissa in June 2004, with
estimated reserves of 1 Tcf. Cairn Energy also reported natural gas
finds in late 2002 offshore from Andhra Pradesh as well as Gujarat,
which contain reserves estimated at nearly 2 Tcf. The main market
impacts from the new finds will be on India's east coast, which
currently lacks extensive natural gas infrastructureCoal is the
dominant commercial fuel in India, satisfying more than half of
India's energy demand. Power generation accounts for about 70% of
India's coal consumption, followed by heavy industry. Coal consumption
is projected in the International Energy Annual 2004 to increase to
430 million short tons (Mmst) in 2010, up from 359 million short tons
(Mmst) in 2000. India is the world's third largest coal producer
(after China and the United States), so domestic supplies satisfy most
of the country's coal demand. Indian coal generally has a high ash
content and low calorific value, so most coking coal must be imported.
Major Indian coal fields are found in Bihar, West Bengal, and Madhya
Pradesh.ELECTRICITY
India is trying to expand electric power generation capacity, as
current generation is seriously below peak demand. Although about 80%
of the population has access to electricity, power outages are common,
and the unreliability of electricity supplies is severe enough to
constitute a constraint on the country's overall economic development.
The government had targeted capacity increases totaling 100,000
megawatts (MW) over the next ten years. As of January 2002, total
installed Indian power generating capacity was 120,000 MW.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 01:12:23 PM |
|
|
"habshi" <habshi@anony.com> wrote in message
news:4336848d.9339829@news.clara.net...
| The United States consumed ...
That's got ***** all to do with Indian and Chinese over population,
the greatest peril on the planet.
Half the British population is now of Indian and Pakistani origin,
you bastards seem to enjoy our way of life and want to come here
and change it. Now we've got you fuckers everywhere and trying
to blow up London. Whose fucking language are you using anyway?
It looks as if in 30 or 40 years we'll have to nuke the lot of you to
thin
out the locust plague you are, you jealous greedy ignorant idiots.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 09:39:19 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics habshi <habshi@anony.com> wrote:
The United States consumed an average of about 20.4 million bbl/d of
oil during the first ten months of 2004, up from 20.0 million bbl/d in
2003.
Yep, gotta power flush toilets somehow, but you wouldn't know about
such things.
<snip crap>
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: India otec to extract unlimited energy from the oceans |
25 Sep 2005 05:00:36 PM |
|
|
habshi wrote:
[snip crap]
Can the ocean provide all the types of energy we require?
[snip rst of crap]
Do you mind if the moon cuts loose from orbit around the Earth, idiot
wog?
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
