Tankless water heaters -- inneresting take.

Page 3 of 7  


Follow the example. It doesn't require 100% efficiency. You have a river that's flowing at 100MW an hour. During the day, there is a market for all that power. At night the demand is only 60MW. So, you could let that water pass by unused or use the 40MW available to pump water to a reservoir above the power plant. Then, during the day when you need more than 100MW, you release some of that water. You now have more than 100MW of water availble to turn the generator because you have EXTRA water beyond what the river supplies during that peak period. Hence you can produce more than 100MW of power during the day when you need it.

That's real nice. Let the river go dry at night. I'm sure the cities, towns, farmers downstream and all the farmers will be OK with that.....
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

for all that power. At night the demand is only 60MW. So, you could let that water pass by unused or use the 40MW available to pump water to a reservoir above the power plant. Then, during the day when you need more than 100MW, you release some of that water. You now have more than 100MW of water availble to turn the generator because you have EXTRA water beyond what the river supplies

That makes no sense at all. You are saying let the water flow past the dam. Then pump it back up to the top ? It is not like getting the water down stream 10 miles or more from the dam. Why not just cut the flow back to the demand for power.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 19:44:51 -0500, "Ralph Mowery"

stop up the flow? During the day they can only deflect so much water into the generators - must maintain minimum flow over the falls. - Now they COULD build a "lake" a few feet higher than the inlet of the generator and only have to lift the water a small amount form ABOVE the falls overnight to fill the reservoir - which is then available to supplement flow during peak power periods the next day.
There are many situations where the same could be done, with a definite net gain in power output.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Feb 4, 9:17 pm, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Finally, someone that gets it! Thank you. Here I was being accused of violating the laws of thermodynamics.....
Only thing I'd point out is that I don't think it's strictly limited to pumping water only from above to a level higher than the generator inlet. Some pump water from below back to the upper reservoir.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/4/2013 8:17 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Which is done at the Robert Mosses Niagra power plant/Lewiston Pump-Generating Plant.
I don't understand why the concept is so difficult to understand. It is called "pumped storage". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity It is a way of storing large amounts of energy as potential energy.
There are 11 pumped storage facilities in the US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pumpedstorage_hydroelectric_power_stations
(And that does not include Lewiston.)

For part of the day.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

.
Thank you Bud! A perfect example of what I was talking about! Apparently the laws of physics still apply there and it works....
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That is fine IF you can cut the river flow back to equal demand during periods of low demand. In some cases you can. In others you may not be able to. And IF the river upstream of the dam has a reservoir. What if it doesn't have a reservoir, but there is a suitable location for a reservoir, even higher up a few miles away? Then do you recognize that the system as I outlined would work and is not a violation of thermodynamics? That was the essential point being argued here. You and krw claim that it somehow violates thermodynamics. It doesn't. All your doing is capturing the excess generating capacity and storing it in the form of water at a higher elevation.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:24:04 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

Don't be absurd. If you're pumping water by using falling water, there can be no gain. If you're using falling water at night to pump water during the day, where's the storage of that energy?

Good grief. Just store the water behind the dam and forget the whole thing.

It violates common sense.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Feb 4, 5:31 pm, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

You're not gaining energy. You're storing energy at night by pumping water up to a reservoir above the power plant. Then during the day, you're releasing the water, to get the energy back.

It's stored in the reservoir above the dam. If I expend energy to pump 100 gallons of water 500 ft higher, then later I can run that water back down the 500ft drop and into a generator, generating energy. If there were no losses you'd get all the stored energy back. But let's say it's only 75% efficient. In the example I gave, it doesn't matter, because if the river is flowing at 100MW and the plant only has demand at night of 60MW, then 40MW is going to waste. 40MW * 75% is 30MW of additonal power that the utility can sell in the peak daytime.

Yeah, if there is a suitable dam area to contain the additonal water as part of the river ahead of the dam and IF you can throttle back the river withoug screwing up everything below it. You with Ralph on the idea of just turning off the river at night? But none of that has anything to do with your claim that the pumping system I described violates some law of thermodynamics, does it?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 16:37:00 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

You're losing energy.

Then leave it there!

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Feb 4, 7:54 pm, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

First you claimed "you're not gaining energy" Well, duh, no one in this thread said that using water to STORE energy creates a gain in energy. Now you shift to "you're losing energy". Well, duh, there is always going to be some energy loss, nothing is 100% efficient. Any energy storage system that uses pumping water to store energy off peak and then release it later is going to lose SOME of the energy. It doesn't stop power companies from doing it though, because it still makes economic sense.
You claimed it violated the laws of thermodynamics. Explain how.

You said that in the previous post and I addressed it. You carefully avoided the whole part where I pointed out that is not always possible. You can't necessarily reduce the flow on a river at night to match the low electricity demand because there could be issues with maintaining river flow for other purposes downstream. And there may not be a suitable location directly above the plant to create a suitable place to store the water. But there could be a great place for a storage reservoir a few miles away and higher up.
Again, please address what law of thermodynamics this system violates. Or just concede that it does not.

As usual, now instead of addressing the example given, you're starting with the insults. Explain what law of thermo the above violates. That is what you claimed. Or do you now agree that it does not violate any laws of physics?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

-snip-
Don't know where TDD is-- but in NY-- Yes! Every night.
Here's one I watched them build in the 70's- http://www.nypa.gov/facilities/blengil.htm
5 billion gallons on top of the hill-- Takes more power to pump it back up, but it is 'off peak' power that would have been shunted to the ground otherwise.
Jim
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/4/2013 8:22 AM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:

That may be what I read about years ago. By the way, I reside in beautiful Alabamastan. There's a lot of hydro power in the Northern part of the state along with some nuclear reactors. The TVA project from the last century did a lot to bring electricity to us Hillbillies. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I worked on this project as a young engineer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manicouagan_Reservoir The drainage area for the dam is about half the size of Rhode Island.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/4/2013 10:48 AM, Attila Iskander wrote:

Cool, so that's the what's left of the cataclysmic impact that killed the French Canadian dinosaurs. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually they suffered heart failure from eating too much poutine.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 02-04-2013 13:54, Attila Iskander wrote:

This French Canadian dinosaur is still kicking.....
Or at least walking and pedaling.
--
Wes Groleau

The man who says, “I can do it!" may sometimes fail.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, I haven't, dummy Are you trying to claim that the electric grid has storage facilities to help during peak loads ?

Keep winking, boi It's the only way you can justify all that ignorance you spout.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Go to your store and check the terminology used Another example where the terms have been played with
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 12:37:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"

a plastic or steel stiffener that slides into the frame of the wiper blade assembly. In North America always has been that way.
Some companies, like Honda, still supply the refills for a reasonable cost - a viable alternative to replacing the whole Blade. Most aftermarket blades are built so that refills are not available, practical, or even possible.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.