What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Can geothermal energy potential save us before it's too late-?

1pet2_9 said:
Sodium is not. You extract it from seawater. Which is the reason why the Nobel Laureate came up with it.



If we could store the wind power in a hurricane, we could meet North American demand for a year or longer.


However, your website is interesting, and it leads back to End Times: what is your motivation for naysaying everything? Clearly, your website states that you are out to destroy wind power. Meaning you have some motive, and flowing out from that is every argument against it you can think of.

Why? What's the real reason? Because you want the end to come sooner so you can see Jesus?
Click to expand...
Water extraction from salt water uses reverse osmosis.very energy intensive.

Also well salt level in,the ocean is gonna go down .that said a cat 4,5. I live in Florida those things will be ripped to shred,they disenage them to save them ,they pull them down .wind will grab the fan and do more then push it.

www.telegraph.co.uk

Wind turbine blades fly off in storm

Fears over the safety of wind farms has been raised after blades were ripped off three turbines in winds of up to 112mph.
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
 
We are still not arriving at the real reason. Obviously today's windmills fall apart in a Cat5 storm. The inductors are not fine-tuned for efficient operation at high wind speeds, as has already been mentioned, so the rotors are not engineered to withstand 200kph gusts. Thus right thing to do in that situation is remove the rotors ahead of the storm. We can work to solve the efficiency problem, as we want to capture the hurricane and power NA with it. But even then, I already know you are not interested in solving it; and even if we did, you will argue something else. You did the same with geothermal energy (the OP). What is the real reason?

Desalination is already being done, simply for the fresh water. That energy is spent already. The additional energy required is only the amount needed to decouple the Na from the Cl, and only for the amount of Na actually needed to manufacture a battery, which is very small. The battery can be recharged 2000 times over.
 
1pet2_9 said:
We are still not arriving at the real reason. Obviously today's windmills fall apart in a Cat5 storm. The inductors are not fine-tuned for efficient operation at high wind speeds, as has already been mentioned, so the rotors are not engineered to withstand 200kph gusts. Thus right thing to do in that situation is remove the rotors ahead of the storm. We can work to solve the efficiency problem, as we want to capture the hurricane and power NA with it. But even then, I already know you are not interested in solving it; and even if we did, you will argue something else. You did the same with geothermal energy (the OP). What is the real reason?

Desalination is already being done, simply for the fresh water. That energy is spent already. The additional energy required is only the amount needed to decouple the Na from the Cl, and only for the amount of Na actually needed to manufacture a battery, which is very small. The battery can be recharged 2000 times over.
Click to expand...
You,are assuming that other allocations for na batteries won't be ,that reverses osmosis plants won't be built on the beach to extract water to make salt that is how its done in newer salt mines .

Brine ,from,that can't simply,be dumped into the ocean.it will destroy reeefs etc ,fish .I work for a utility that has reverse osmosis ,it ,it deep well injects it ..

Sorry you,must include this argument that wind power is intermittent ,given a massive heat snap.devastation from,a cat 4,the grid will have to use up,those battery power ,anf can't wait on a gusty day.you,ignore that power is lost from,a.c. to dc conversion.that you,must also xmfr power down from the source to be used and in,this case charged.st.Lucie one ,and two at max produce 5 megawatt of power. You can't fast charge batteries on that.we may store that one day ,possibly but I'm skeptical of large scale alt power .those will be large batteries .
 
I honestly can't understand what you're saying.

I can go to the gas station in Canada and pick up 25kg bags of salt for $10 CAD. So I don't know what suddenly got so expensive about obtaining NaCl when it's used for renewable energy. Just one 25kg bag would probably suffice for over a thousand Na batteries.

And I don't know what ac-to-dc conversion has to do with it. Any time you plug in a wall wart (e.g. convert 120VAC to 12VDC), you have that problem now. Now if you are talking about DC-to-AC conversion, power inverters only have a 1-1.5% loss.

And I don't know what "Cat 4 devastation" you refer to, if you simply address the efficiency problem in wind turbines and engineer the rotors to withstand Cat5's (which right now they are not, because there is no point--for the reason aforementioned). Wind power lets you run OFF the grid. So if you are worried about a hurricane shutting down the grid...I mean...that's exactly what they did in Puerto Rico, was send down a bunch of wind turbines and solar panels. And if you run off-grid, then you might have lost your reason to even convert it from DC to AC in the first place.

Even using "batteries" at all may be unnecessary. Simply feed the power you get into an endothermic chemical process, such as breaking up H2O molecules. When you combine H2 and O2 again, you get a big release of energy.
 
1pet2_9 said:
Even using "batteries" at all may be unnecessary.
Click to expand...
Battery storage – the future

Our future energy sources are well known.
[1] wave power
[2] wind power
[3] solar power
[4] you fill in the blank ___________

All these never-ending energy sources have one very big flaw.

The ocean sometimes goes calm and the wave power stops

The wind stops blowing & the energy from it stops too

The sun sets, clouds cover the sky & the light of the sun is blocked

Whatever you fill in online [4] is not a 24-hour source of energy. There will be dead spots in these sources

The future for us is the ability to “store” those energy sources for future needs.

That storage mechanism is the “battery”; that is our future.

If you want a piece of the pie; I strongly suggest you invest in hydrogen fuel cells.

Our cars will have a large hydrogen fuel cell under their car and when the battery needs recharging all you have to do is drive your vehicle over an exchanger, the exchanger reaches up; removes the discharged battery and replaces it with a freshly charged one. Now your off to do what you do with a 300-mile charge to get you where you want to go.
 
If you want a piece of the pie; I strongly suggest you invest in hydrogen fuel cells.
Click to expand...


Did I explain that about endothermic chemical reactions adequately? There is potential energy stored in some common chemicals. For example, wood: wood has more potential energy than ash, in that you can burn wood and release energy. Likewise, H2(hydrogen) has potential energy, because you can combine it with H2, create fresh water, and release energy. Or you can feed O2 to a fire and release energy, producing CO2. Those are exothermic chemical reactions.

But if you have energy on-hand, say, from wave power: you can feed that to an endothermic reaction instead of necessarily store it in a battery. It might not be as efficient, but--all told, it may actually be more efficient. So for example you could have a wind farm, and use that to split CO2 into C and O2 (commonly called "carbon capture"). Or split saltwater into Na, Cl, H2, and O2. That requires energy. But you can get that energy back later--say, by sending the H2 down a pipe to somewhere else and making freshwater.

Thus you don't necessarily need batteries. In addition to freshwater, O2, H2, and Na being valuable commodities in themselves.
 
1pet2_9 said:
Likewise, H2(hydrogen) has potential energy, because you can combine it with H2, create fresh water, and release energy.
Click to expand...
I don't know if this was a typo or not but since I saw you make a similar error twice....combining H2 with H2 will just result in more hydrogen. To get water, two atoms of hydrogen must be combined with one atom of oxygen to form a water molecule, hence, H2O.
 
Oh. But I think that's right. 2H2 + O2 = 2H2O.

Oxygen's low potential energy state exists in the form of O2, with a pair of covalent bonds. As a chemical reaction--not an atomic one--the transition is not as simple as 2 hydrogen atoms combine with 1 oxygen atom. It's two H2 molecules combine with one O2 molecule.

That reaction produces a lot of energy. Going the reverse requires a lot of energy. That's hydrogen fuel cell.
 
1pet2_9 said:
Oh. But I think that's right. 2H2 + O2 = 2H2O.
Click to expand...
But that would not be water. I don't know what 2H2 would be, if it is even a compound. I don't believe the designation 2H is a proper description.

H2O2 is hydrogen peroxide.
 
1pet2_9 said:
2 H2 = 2 hydrogen molecules.

Thus 2H2 + 1O2 = 2H2O.
www.thoughtco.com

Making Water From Hydrogen and Oxygen

Here's how to make water from hydrogen and oxygen—and why making drinking water this way is impractical due to the intensity of the chemical reaction.
www.thoughtco.com www.thoughtco.com
Click to expand...
I'm a huge fan and proponent of fuel cell technology. I know that the military can make hydrogen for their fuel cell vehicles directly from JP8. Would be nice to see the industry go that way. Seems like a win win between big oil and green technology.

You know more about this than I do. What are your thoughts?
 
What I like about fuel cell is its ability to transport not just energy from place-to-place, but fresh water. No more water trucks--you need only transport hydrogen. The best really large renewable energy farms tend to sit in really remote locations, like a solar farm in the desert, or a wind farm just offshore. I don't necessarily think fuel cell is the best energy storage based on its energy merits alone, though.

Politically, I see a problem where naysayers will claim we are taking fresh water away from people dying of thirst, and using it to propel our SUV's instead. Similar to how the anti-ethanol crowd says we are taking corn away from our food supply and making diesel instead. It's not accurate, but that would be applying logic to a political issue.

I could see a complicated hydrocarbon such as JP8 being a part of the chemical process; especially since carbon capture is one of those holy-grails of renewable energy. Someone has a $10 million prize out for coming up with a good, economically-favorable carbon capture process.

..come to think of it, a "water drone" would seem extremely viable. A fuel cell drone, except...hydrogen floats in air. Think Hindenberg, only without any people. Google search turned up this for me:
https://ces.tech/Articles/2019/Long-Endurance-Fuel-Cell-Drone.aspx
Two hours of flight time..for a DRONE?!?? 10 minutes charge time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top