OT: The proposed pumped storage scheme at Coire Glas

I bet that caused a fair bit of global warming!

Reply to
Ian Jackson
Loading thread data ...

The three stage burn is approximately 11 minutes, but the first stage with the lift engines are discarded at around 2.5 minutes.

Reply to
alan_m

The SpaceX Starship has about 1/3 the propellant of a SaturnV, and they're hoping to launch three per day to fly stuff to Mars.

Do Tesla's reductions make up for SpaceX's increases?

Reply to
Andy Burns

It still does. BUT it cant be used very often on account of low water levels.

Interestingly people in the USA are stupid enough to believe that water that is used to generate electricity cannot then be used for irrigation.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Why would it?

It's just adding water to a saturated atmosphere. It will just rain.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Bit of a generalisation there! All people? Some people?

Besides that, I have no idea whether there's any conflict between optimising for power generation or irrigation?

>
Reply to
GB

Ahem, they used kerosene as fuel, so not just water.

Reply to
GB

So you are one of them too!

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Oh, so they did. I was thinking of the apollo missions with liquid hydrogen.

Anyway we all know that CO2 at current levels has almost no impact on the climate anyway.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Am I? Suppose the need for electricity is in winter, so then they would need to release the dammed water during the winter, when there's no need for irrigation.

They have a lot of air con, so peak demand for electricity may, in fact, be in the summer.

That's why I said that I have no idea whether there's a conflict. Do try to keep up.

Reply to
GB

And where dies that 'released' water go, in the case of the colorado river? To the irrigation dams further downstream

Do keep up

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

So, what you are saying is that optimisation is not a problem. At least, only when the downstream dams are full. Which I gather is rarely.

If only the rest of us were as clever as you...

Reply to
GB

Well there is if the water for irrigation is being extracted upstream of the dam.

Tim

Reply to
Tim+

Of the fuels currently being bandied about, one concern is CO2, the other concern is "soot particles at high altitudes".

There might be regulations some day, pushing for hydrolox.

There is kerolox and methalox. Some are better for reusable engines than others (you can soot up an engine too).

"Unlike some other fuels, methalox does not "coke" the engines - so it is a good choice for reusable engines. "

Yesterday, a methalox tried to reach orbit, but didn't succeed. Main engines were fine, second stage didn't light properly.

formatting link
Paul

Reply to
Paul

Oh, the ones produced by volcanoes, forest fires, and the constant rain of micrometeorites? That are naff all to do with humans?

Well best abandon space flight altogether and cower in your safe space.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

My thermodynamics lecturer preferred the furlong-firkin-fortnight system of units.

Reply to
Davey

I finally got bored enough to work it out ...

taking an average elephant as 4500 kg the area of wales as 20779 m^2 and a cubic fortnight as 1209600 s^3

one elephant wales per cubic fortnight is 77.30 watts so a Saturn V is 1.55 giga elephant wales per cubic fortnight

Reply to
Andy Burns

formatting link
at
formatting link

Reply to
Chris Hogg

grrr try km^2 instead of m^2

77.3 MW

1.55 kew/f^3
Reply to
Andy Burns

Have you done a dimensional analysis on that? :-)

Reply to
Chris Hogg

HomeOwnersHub website 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.