|
|
Post by besoeker3 on Apr 16, 2023 14:39:43 GMT
OK. Cut to the chase. Why isn't sand used a storage an an energy system? Your grammar is now screwed. I think you must be pissed. Why isn't sand used as a storage an energy system? Just answer the question. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 16, 2023 14:56:59 GMT
Your grammar is now screwed. I think you must be pissed. Why isn't sand used as a storage an energy system? Just answer the question. I don't know. I can't speak for the world. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 16, 2023 15:02:42 GMT
Why isn't sand used as a storage an energy system? Just answer the question. I don't know. I can't speak for the world. By the way, what might have given the idea to use a jet engine was that around that time the thrust of a Blighty bomber was calculated as the thrust of the prop and a significant additional thrust was added to the calculation just by pointing the exhaust out back. It was kind of pointing towards a remarkable solution.
Another thing one can say is that since quite recently we never needed to do this because the gas came in 24/7.
|
|
|
|
Post by besoeker3 on Apr 16, 2023 15:19:32 GMT
Why isn't sand used as a storage an energy system? Just answer the question. I don't know. I can't speak for the world. At least you don't know for a change. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 16, 2023 17:01:29 GMT
I don't know. I can't speak for the world. At least you don't know for a change. When you were designing your electrical products, did you ever find a situation where your head suddenly transitioned from not having any idea to a fully working design specification? Or was it that you were already born with this technology in your non-volatile memory?
I always thought we start with a rough idea and gradually work on it to refine it, not throw it out at the first opportunity.
Or do we just copy legacy technology over and over again?
|
|
|
|
Post by besoeker3 on Apr 16, 2023 18:01:59 GMT
When you were designing your electrical products, did you ever find a situation where your head suddenly transitioned from not having any idea to a fully working design specification? Or was it that you were already born with this technology in your non-volatile memory?
I always thought we start with a rough idea and gradually work on it to refine it, not throw it out at the first opportunity.
Or do we just copy legacy technology over and over again?
I have commented on this before for a few innovate systems. For example unity power factors instead of conventual DC drives. Much greater efficiency particularly for industrial variable speed systems. I also commented on the Orient Express. It was a one off in this case. Different countries had from 1,000V to 3,000V but our system had to accommodate all of those. Then there were a few systems far3.3kV and 11kW. So no, absolutely not the copy of the legacy copy. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 16, 2023 21:49:46 GMT
When you were designing your electrical products, did you ever find a situation where your head suddenly transitioned from not having any idea to a fully working design specification? Or was it that you were already born with this technology in your non-volatile memory?
I always thought we start with a rough idea and gradually work on it to refine it, not throw it out at the first opportunity.
Or do we just copy legacy technology over and over again?
I have commented on this before for a few innovate systems. For example unity power factors instead of conventual DC drives. Much greater efficiency particularly for industrial variable speed systems. I also commented on the Orient Express. It was a one off in this case. Different countries had from 1,000V to 3,000V but our system had to accommodate all of those. Then there were a few systems far3.3kV and 11kW. So no, absolutely not the copy of the legacy copy. So this is what I had in mind here. We already have heat to electricity generators in power stations, but they run at a lower temperature such that their efficiency is quite low. I think a gas flame gives you about 600C. The question is can this be modified in some way to increase its operating temperature. We have various physical constraints in the substances we use, but I would personally have a look to see what has been invented in the past to do it and then get some inspiration from that. The other area to research would be how one exactly creates very good insulators cheaply. It's good to consult specialists here. There will be guys who have worked in insulation for 40 years and know all there is to know. Take an example where you have a kiln of 1 cubic meter capacity that can reach that kind of temperature and the power to run it is the power that leaks from it. Then if you take a cubic meter in a block 100m in L, D and H you get 1/1300 of the running costs as we measure for the small version. As you can see that's a big difference. I don't know what the final performance would be, but then that's what research is all about. The UK should get those lazy university bums onto it, rather than counting tadpoles in ponds. |
|
|
|
Post by borchester on Apr 17, 2023 16:06:47 GMT
Wind and solar are definitely cheaper than burning hydrocarbons, ... Do you have figures for that ? |
|
|
|
Post by besoeker3 on Apr 17, 2023 17:21:39 GMT
I have commented on this before for a few innovate systems. For example unity power factors instead of conventual DC drives. Much greater efficiency particularly for industrial variable speed systems. I also commented on the Orient Express. It was a one off in this case. Different countries had from 1,000V to 3,000V but our system had to accommodate all of those. Then there were a few systems far3.3kV and 11kW. So no, absolutely not the copy of the legacy copy. So this is what I had in mind here. We already have heat to electricity generators in power stations, but they run at a lower temperature such that their efficiency is quite low. I think a gas flame gives you about 600C. The question is can this be modified in some way to increase its operating temperature. We have various physical constraint It's actually the round for power stations. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 17, 2023 22:46:08 GMT
Sand is really cheap stuff and at 1700C it would contain 1.4MJ of energy per kg. The loss of that heat over time is directly proportional to the surface area. as you scale it, the energy storage increases by d^3, but the losses increase by only d^2 giving you a storage time that increases as you make the thing bigger. That's so simple eh? To make it better you make it big. There are other tricks you can do as well to keep the heat in.
Of course the UK is too bloody stupid to think of this, so we are being up-staged by the Americans and the Germans. Sand does not blow up like hydrogen tanks or lithium batteries, nor does it wear out or even run out.
Sand is cheap stuff. Heat it to 1700C and that is not cheap. I thought you might have understood that instead of denigrating the Brits. Do the Germans heat their sand yo 1700C? Do the Chinese? The Finns seem to polarnightenergy.fi/sand-batteryMy own work on using solar power to heat water in the 1970s as part of my paid short term research studentship in tbe summer holiday showed it was quite feasible to use dirt cheap plastic microtube solar panels designed to be about 30% efficient at capturing the heat from the sun to heat water from the 8 degrees c it arrived in the pipe to 20 to 30 degrees C in a header tank and reduce your electricity bill on immersion heaters in a block of student flats for a meagre sum. The heat losses in reasonably well insulated plastic storage tsnks as opposed to metal ones meant the water had barely lost one or two degrees sitting around all day before it was called for to refill individual immersion heater tanks throughout the block. I have absolutely no idea what the heat losses on this sand battery as they call it amount to, but it is a fact a commercial firm seems to have facts to support their claims of its success in a social CHP setting. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 18, 2023 0:48:46 GMT
Wind and solar are definitely cheaper than burning hydrocarbons, ... Do you have figures for that ? I did have a video with a bunch of graphs for each type of energy over the last 20 years. I'm damned if I can find it now though. Onshore wind is the cheapest. Mind you solar looks interesting. At the moment it is 25% efficient, but there is a trick using perovskites which can be tuned to different wavelengths, so you can double it. In this case it might overtake wind. You see solar hardly has any running costs at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 18, 2023 0:53:50 GMT
Sand is cheap stuff. Heat it to 1700C and that is not cheap. I thought you might have understood that instead of denigrating the Brits. Do the Germans heat their sand yo 1700C? Do the Chinese? The Finns seem to polarnightenergy.fi/sand-batteryMy own work on using solar power to heat water in the 1970s as part of my paid short term research studentship in tbe summer holiday showed it was quite feasible to use dirt cheap plastic microtube solar panels designed to be about 30% efficient at capturing the heat from the sun to heat water from the 8 degrees c it arrived in the pipe to 20 to 30 degrees C in a header tank and reduce your electricity bill on immersion heaters in a block of student flats for a meagre sum. The heat losses in reasonably well insulated plastic storage tsnks as opposed to metal ones meant the water had barely lost one or two degrees sitting around all day before it was called for to refill individual immersion heater tanks throughout the block. I have absolutely no idea what the heat losses on this sand battery as they call it amount to, but it is a fact a commercial firm seems to have facts to support their claims of its success in a social CHP setting. The next door neighbour to my old school friend did a similar thing to heat a swimming pool. I'm not sure how well it worked, but the downside was there were these big black things all over the lawn. He was a mad inventor type and so was his father. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 18, 2023 7:13:10 GMT
The Finns seem to polarnightenergy.fi/sand-batteryMy own work on using solar power to heat water in the 1970s as part of my paid short term research studentship in tbe summer holiday showed it was quite feasible to use dirt cheap plastic microtube solar panels designed to be about 30% efficient at capturing the heat from the sun to heat water from the 8 degrees c it arrived in the pipe to 20 to 30 degrees C in a header tank and reduce your electricity bill on immersion heaters in a block of student flats for a meagre sum. The heat losses in reasonably well insulated plastic storage tsnks as opposed to metal ones meant the water had barely lost one or two degrees sitting around all day before it was called for to refill individual immersion heater tanks throughout the block. I have absolutely no idea what the heat losses on this sand battery as they call it amount to, but it is a fact a commercial firm seems to have facts to support their claims of its success in a social CHP setting. The next door neighbour to my old school friend did a similar thing to heat a swimming pool. I'm not sure how well it worked, but the downside was there were these big black things all over the lawn. He was a mad inventor type and so was his father. To be fair those panels have a far more lucrative use. Fit them inside your loft space after you spray insulating foam on the spaces between the roof timbers and connect to a source of cold water and all that nasty heat that gets created by the high pressure sodium lamps is dissipated so your roof does not sell you out to the overflying chopper coppers …. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 18, 2023 12:10:41 GMT
I wonder if someone one day on this forum will contribute to a solution to the engineering problem posed in the OP. We spend our time talking about anything but the solution. Indeed I think this is why corporate Britain never gets anything done on time.
|
|
|
|
Post by besoeker3 on Apr 18, 2023 12:22:33 GMT
I wonder if someone one day on this forum will contribute to a solution to the engineering problem posed in the OP. We spend our time talking about anything but the solution. Indeed I think this is why corporate Britain never gets anything done on time. I have already commented on it several times. Electricity is not storage - it is instantaneous. Somehow you just don't seem to grasp that. |
|
