What is happening is the potential energy at the top has become kinetic energy at the bottom. The energy is still in the water, it's now moving faster, the energy has not been "liberated".
Yes but you are now slowing some of the water down which *will* liberate some of it's kinetic energy.
|The message |from Matt contains these words: | |> It's Dinorwig by the way and not Dinorgig. It was Dinorwic for a |> short period of time before the Welsh nationalists got their way - |> can't see why they caved in, its a lot harder to burn water that a |> holiday cottage. | |The village from which it takes its name was Dinorwic on Ordnance Survey |maps for a long time and due to the vagaries of the OS system lasted |several years longer than other prominent name changes such as Cader to |Cadair and Dolgelley to Dolgellau.
Been touring Wales this year and masses of place names have now been changed to Welsh forms. Some years ago we went to "Conway", whereas all the signs now say "Conwy". Maybe it is the effect of the Welsh Parliament.
The message from "Dave Liquorice" contains these words:
But if, as tnp said, it was the discharge from a turbine, then most of the energy would have been liberated, just so long as it was the right sort of turbine.
I have just been for a quick google and found:
"The Kaplan turbine is aimed at very low head sites (down to 2 metres)
- in particular existing mill sites which would require very little modification to the existing civil works."
So not only would a turbine work, there are commercial applications already available.
Alright, so for the pedants among you, I should have said can liberate, so you could be absolutely sure of what I meant without reference to the previous context.
Or I could take a leaf out of the tnp's book and refer you to the first law of thermodynamics, but the amount of heat generated in a free fall probably wouldn't be much more that the 750 watts he erroneously attributed to the amount of energy that could be extracted from the water. (That by the way is a guess).
If so, it must be the only one..
The message from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:
The only one what?
The Ordnance Survey shifted from Conway to Conwy some years before they got round to changing Dinorwic to Dinorwig. Somewhere between 1971 and
1974 as opposed to 1986 or later as far as I can tell from the 1:50000 mapping.It is my experience that Welsh road signs now generally have names in both Welsh and English at least where the language fadists believe the Welsh alternative is important but I doubt very much if many of the natives of Aberhonddu actually call it that even among themselves.
Certainly when I lived in N Wales in the early to mid 70s it was Dinorwic on road signs and buses (or bus) and Conwy on road signs and buses for there.
As far as Aberhonddu is concerned, I (B)rec(k)on you're right.... but then that's not real Wales there.
tnp wrote:
Me2. In fact we have one. Dungeness 'B'. OK its 40 miles way, but whats
40 miles in a reactor meltdown?Its a tad ugly from Dunwich, but not arf so ugly as te 'sculptures' they are proposing to drop in the sea offshore.
The above is actually an extract from Google but it has been bugging me sufficiently for me to actually measure how far it was from Dungeness to Suffolk where it is rumoured tnp has his home.
The closest bit of Suffolk to Dungeness B is Landguard Point, a mere 72 miles away. From previous comments it would appear tnp lives somewhere in the NW of Suffolk so his 40 miles is getting on for 100 which I suppose is about par for the course where he is concerned.
Or did he really mean to refer to Sizewell?
Wireless or via ADSL?
For ADSL, Metronet do a metered PAYG package for 11.75/month.
Thanks for the pointer John, I fumble around maintaining a web presence for a small charity run by a committee of volunteers. A couple of our members have a habit of sending huge (>1MB) attachments by e-mail (often word docs including pictures). Two of the management committee grudgingly have e-mail via dial up but don't use it other than to receive charity e-mail. These big attachments have the effect of denying their normal telephone service whilst they download and timeouts are frequent, so I have had to limit the size of an e-mail one lady can receive in her e-mail client. I have mooted that they allow me to install ADSL for them and a cheaper package like this looks ideal.
Other suggestions gratefully received
AJH
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 00:02:51 +0100 someone who may be John Rumm wrote this:-
Indeed. A far better offer than some of the well known names trying to get into the market from the mobile telephone market.
Probably.
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:52:30 +0100 someone who may be Dave Fawthrop wrote this:-
Not particularly, though high heads are certainly better for some types of water turbine and a higher head will mean there is more energy to be extracted.
The first large scale power station in Iceland was opened in Reykjavik in 1921 and reached the designed full capacity of 3MW in
1933. This involves a low concrete dam across the river.I haven't looked at it, but it is certainly worth investigating all sorts of energy conversion.
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 14:04:31 +0100 someone who may be Roger wrote this:-
Even in an area that has a rather convoluted history with regard to whether it is in Wales or England, Monmouthshire, place names in Welsh had started to appear on road signs in the late 1970s.
I find it is also worth explaining to dialup users the problems of maintaining a secure system these days without BB. Your not safe online without keeping the computer patched and up to date, and with current AV signatures etc. However maintaining that state on dialup is almost impossible for the casual user these days. If you connect every couple of days, then the patching traffic will swamp your dialup for hours at a time! Net result is that email and brosing becomes a very slow and frustrating experiance.
My usual suggestion would be plusnet PAYG. They have a headline grabbing service at 9.99/month however by the time you add the missing bits to the service you are close to the 14.99/month service anyway. So that is usually the one to go for. Standard included traffic is 2G/month. You can then buy extra as you need it. No need to pre arrange (although if you do it is slightly cheaper). However usage between midnight and 8am is does not come off your usage budget (On occations I have ended up using half of my pre arranged 6G/month, but then had a further 40G of "free" traffic in a month)
On the positive side they are platform agnostic, and ar happy for you to use any connection hardware. You get static IP, control of any number of email boxes etc, fax2email, decent web portal for control of your account plus other handy stuff. Support is on an 0845 number, and loads of automated support tools on the web site. The negatives: support response times seem to have got slower lately (mainy due to clearing up the fallout from the rollout of DSLMax it seems) and they have had a few intermittent network related problems affecting email, newsgroups, and DNS.
Details:
Meanwhile, back to the B&Q machine...
It needs 12.5m/s of wind to produce 1kw,
If it was running flat out all year that's only 24x365 =3D 8760 kWhr, at
10p/kWhr =3D =A3876. We don't need 1kW over night, do we? And when it's not windy it won't be producing anything so how can the payback be in 3-5 years if it cost =A31500 + the support pole and brackets?Surely it's more efficient to have large ones in windfarms than lots of these.
Does anyone know about the wind turbine on the business park beside the M4 in Reading?
Ah but what you really need is the root mean cube of the wind speed which will be ever so slightly higher.
Jon
Yes. It's an eyesore. However, since it's next to a chemical works it probably doesn't matter - might as well have all the crap in one place.
On 15 Oct 2006 11:43:22 -0700 someone who may be snipped-for-privacy@btinternet.com wrote this:-
There are three ways that an operator of such a turbine will gain financially:
1) reducing the amount of electricity they import. If the occupants of the house are consuming more electricity than the turbine is generating then its effect is to stop the electricity meter spinning round (or the little red light flashing) as fast as it would do without the turbine. 2) if the occupants of the house are not consuming all that the turbine is generating then the surplus can be sold to someone else. Various companies offer to buy the electricity, the price varying from 4.5p to 10p per kWh the last time I checked. 3) obtaining various government financial instruments, of which ROCs are the most well known, for the electricity they generate, no matter where it exported or used on site. This is not easy and the most likely way of doing it is for the company in 2) to deal with the administration for a large number of their customers.Traditional measures of efficiency are to do with how much of the fuel input is turned into useful work. However, when the fuel is free a number of other considerations are important.
Home generation as part of a decentralised electricity system does make sense. There is plenty to be found on the subject in search engines.
Know what? There are a growing number of wind turbines in such locations.
If the infrastructure is in place to distribute power and there is no significant increase in consumption in the country does it make sense to have 100/1000 etc of these compared with 1 designed to last longer (expected life of the WS1000 is 10 years) and designed and managed as a professional service.
2) does the meter run backwards (doubt it!) or is there a cost to install a additional meter?My main point is that I can't see how the B&Q WS1000 can generate a cost effective amount of electricity compared with a windfarm managed by a power company.
It's interesting that B&Q say it starts producing 100W at 4.5m/s.
Remember that for a third of the time we are asleep and not using the kettle, TV, lights etc.
It's a good idea but not at =A31500 + brackets and an unknown life.
If the infrastructure is in place to distribute power and there is no significant increase in consumption in the country does it make sense to have 100/1000 etc of these compared with 1 designed to last longer (expected life of the WS1000 is 10 years) and designed and managed as a professional service.
2) does the meter run backwards (doubt it!) or is there a cost to install a additional meter?My main point is that I can't see how the B&Q WS1000 can generate a cost effective amount of electricity compared with a windfarm managed by a power company.
It's interesting that B&Q say it starts producing 100W at 4.5m/s.
Remember that for a third of the time we are asleep and not using the kettle, TV, lights etc.
It's a good idea but not at =A31500 + brackets and an unknown life.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required