Consumer Homes.

Question:

Any reasons why a reservoir (which provides fish habitat, recreation, concurrent fresh water storage, etc.) is a bad thing, other than taking up space better used for farming. Fish farming is still farming… Robert (just thinking out loud…)

> All,

Some clips for brevity… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> You do rather need the geography for it, though. > Good point.  Does anyone know of a technology that is stores energy > efficiently, and doesn’t take up a whole mountain side to build a reservoir?

Response:

I just thought of a green SUV for your idea. You buy a vehicle built to last……Peterbuilt. You then skin all the sheetmetal off the van trailer and replace the skin with the PV’s that are popular on this news. They are seried out to a useable voltage like 2500volts dc for the railroad traction motor you slip under the Pete. Then you fill the van with10 Farah induction furnace capacitors(about the size of a footlocker) and control circuits. Like magic you got a15 passenger SUV after removing the bunks in the sleeper. Of course,it would probably cost you about 2 to 3 million an SUV.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Good point.  Does anyone know of a technology that is stores energy >efficiently, and doesn’t take up a whole mountain side to build a reservoir? > Yes – although it is just an idea…..EER > Extra crispy revised edition…… > In one sentence, I am saying that a very, very advanced capacitor is possible, > and would accommodate most of the energy problems we have today — basically it > does the job that oil now does. > An energy concept > Yes, there is a 21st Law of Thermodynamics.  That is no knock on Faraday, just > a reference to the 21st century, and the new technology it has brought. > Simply stated, it is, "No energy concept involving renewables shall ever be > considered unless the word ‘diffuse’ is used, understood, and taken into > consideration." > Faraday could not have seen this coming.  In his day, there was not the > multitude of diffuse renewable energy sources available, which can be converted > to electricity. > If human beings are ever to use renewable, natural energy sources, they will > have to take into consideration the diffuse nature of sunlight, wind, wave, > etc.  I was actually surprised to find that Faraday, himself, used the word > "diffuse" in his writings.  But, this was in reference to the spread of charge > on capacitor plates, and not the UN-concentrated free energy that is available > today for conversion to electricity. > There is NO way around this Law.  By that, I mean that there in no way around > solving the "diffuse problem," before we are able to put renewable energy > sources to work in any effective way. is no > crises. > We don’t need no oil. > We don’t need no batteries. > We don’t need no internal combustion engine. > We don’t need no fusion. > We don’t need no hybrids. > We don’t need no hydrogen-powered cars. > We don’t need no ethanol. > We don’t need no natural gas. > We don’t need no methane. > We don’t even need no efficiency. > We don’t even need no conservation. > All we need are the renewable energy sources that God – in His infinite wisdom > — provided us. > Some could be used, some not.  For a while.  Eventually renewable energy > sources would be all we would need to power our EV’s, and heat our homes. We > would have the luxury of choice, while at the same time powering our EV’s with > them.  All of them.  Any of them.  As long as they are able to generate any > amount of electricity. > To those who have read this before, and may have rejected it out of hand, let > me say that it is my strong belief that two major companies may be engaged in > pretty much the basic idea presented here. They have patents – I do not. In no > way do I – nor will I – attempt to claim any right whatsoever to this idea — > even though all my writing on it came from my own independent thinking for over > 12 years. I wish them well. But, in case I am wrong about that effort being > made, I surely wish some interested party would help me connect this to the > people in government who say they want an energy solution. What they are > looking for is contained on this letter. I am THAT confident. > Note: I can see EER powering an automobile.  That is almost a lock, in my mind. >  Further applications are, perhaps, a little harder to deal with.  Once a car > IS powered by EER, then all the entrepreneurs will take the rest to the logical > conclusion. > EER in Brief > Electronic Electricity Repository (EER) is merely a concept at this time. There > is no business, no patent, and no money involved with this. > This involves solid state capacitors as a usable energy storage device for > electric vehicles, and other items. Conventional wisdom limits capacitors to > power surges, and the like. The full text of this concept will suggest a way to > make them fully competitive with the internal combustion engine, while not > violating the laws of energy density. > The easiest way to explain it is to use an electric vehicle as an > example. To power an EV with EER, an array of electronic devices — > perhaps solid-state capacitors, perhaps another device — would > contain the electrical charge accumulated from a variety of sources > of electricity. Renewable energy sources are suggested, but *any* > source of electricity would work. With the questionable future of > battery-powered EV’s, and fusion as an energy source, and the political debate > about fossil fuels, there are strong reasons to take a look at EER. > In fairness, many say it cannot be done. But, perhaps another war > — or avoiding one — could put the right minds to work on this concept. It > *would* provide a way to be independent of foreign > oil, while providing a structure for the transition to renewable forms > of energy to power EV’s – or any other device powered by electricity. > This is merely a shell of an idea, but perhaps some further thought could help > bring it about. > A TRIP TO THE STORE IN AN EER POWERED EV > Let’s suppose that the EER concept is fully developed, and built > into an electric vehicle. Let’s also suppose that the newest and best > technological devices — some of which are now being used in EV’s – are > integrated into the vehicle’s design. What follows is a description > of what might possibly have happened during an everyday trip to the store > in such a vehicle. (This assumes the use of an *advanced* solid-state > capacitor). > Ms. Jones notices her "fuel gauge" as she starts her vehicle; it > tells her that her microchip capacitor battery is 85% full. This means > that of the vast number of microchip capacitors in her "battery," 85% are > charged with their very small electric capacitance. > She proceeds to the store, and returns home — a quarter mile > trip. As she pulls in her driveway, she looks again at her gauge. It > reads 84%. She thinks that she used only 1% of her battery capacity for > her trip. > But, she is wrong. > She used 10% of her available charged capacitors for the quarter > mile trip. So, why didn’t her gauge read 75% when she returned? > There were several devices built into her vehicle which were > replenishing used capacitors, almost as fast as she was using them. (All > figures below are guesses — just to make the point.) > 1. The advanced solar panel on the roof of her vehicle was, as > always during sunlight, continuously recharging at a slow, but > steady rate. Because she had happened to drive and park in > the sunlight, the solar panel recharged 5% of her capacitors. > 2. The air scoops arranged in her vehicle’s design — although > accounting for some drag — were directing the air through > small dynamos, which recharged another 2%. > 3. The regenerative brakes on all four wheels replenished another > 2% of the capacitors. > So, she did, in fact, use 10% of the available capacitor charges, > but 9% were replaced by the activity of her trip. > This is nothing like perpetual motion; it is merely taking > advantage of the natural surrounding energy to replenish the energy > spent on the trip. > It is even conceivable that her "fuel gauge" might have read a > higher percentage upon her return; a shorter trip on a windier and > sunnier day, in a more sunlit route and parking spot, and many more > occasions to use the brakes, might have made that possible. The Second > Law of Thermodynamics is not violated, because energy from outside the > vehicle was being absorbed along the way. > It is noted that a battery-powered EV could have done much the > same, but the weight difference would have changed the percentages, so > as to defeat the purpose. > Frank Lincoln CS# 72430,2407 > It is understood that high energy density is something that has been sought for > many years — the concept is nothing new. What is suggested here is the > possibility that modern technology may now be in the position to actually > attain it — to a degree that could combine the many energy sources (new and > old) into a common pool. > GIVEN: > – Trench capacitors, at the present time, have nowhere near the capability to > deal with the degree of energy that would be required in Electronic Electricity > Repository. > – The area of the plates in a trench capacitor will, for the most part, > determine the capacitance — not exclusively, but this is the factor that is > dealt with here as having the most potential for improvement. It is assumed > that progress in the other factors — dielectric strength, dielectric > composition, etc., will continue, and will accommodate the supposition of > surface area increase made here. > HYPOTHESIS: > – The surface area of a trench capacitor plate can be greatly increased without > increasing the perimeter, or the space required to store the capacitor. > – Etching a groove on the plate surface will do this, to a small degree, and it > is done, to some extent, today. What is surmised, here, is that, as the > technology allows, many cross-grooves could be

… read more »

Response:

You are not far off on what happens when  a squirrel crawls across the terminals of a substation transformer. While the squirrel is turning to pure carbon,the cooling oil turns to steam fast enorgh to flatten the safety fence with pieces of the transformer. Also,saw three electrians die in a bad load shift ship power to shore power.Both ended up on the same transmission with a instant replay of the squirrel transformer. Four other shipmates got  burns to 50%+ of their body in that dumb incident.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> what I most enjoy about this concept is the idea of making powerful > weapons from the seemingly mundane. Having the energy density that you > hint at makes for a good bomb. Just short the sucker out and you will > have either a nice explosion or a fair em pulse (which just might do > more damage) Think of a 500 or 750 pound bomb whose case is just sheet > aluminum and inside is a collection or just a honker sdesd. Drop it > where you will for the explosive effect or wrap copper coils around it > for the discharge path and when you trigger it you take out all the > electrons (non-hardened) and a (half-)mile radius. Take out a power > plant or just kill everyones cars and trucks. Scale it down to the size > of a laptop battery and you can probably make it start up the computer > so you can pass security. Then walk into your nearest concentration of > computers–government building, wall street trading pit, airport or what > have you and boom you take it out. Or we could just do what you keep > trying to promote, make a car with it, but lets make it a hot rod with > five times, ten times, a thousand times the storage and then park it in > front of a nice target (of course you could do that with other means but > this would be so much more effective). And best part of all, you can > just make them em pulse generators and you don’t destroy targets but > just disable them so you can repair them later. No messy building debris. > >Good point.  Does anyone know of a technology that is stores energy > >efficiently, and doesn’t take up a whole mountain side to build a reservoir? > Yes – although it is just an idea…..EER > Extra crispy revised edition……

Response:

that indeed would be the Extra crispy revised edition. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > You are not far off on what happens when  a squirrel crawls across the > terminals of a substation transformer. > While the squirrel is turning to pure carbon,the cooling oil turns to steam > fast enorgh to flatten the safety fence with pieces of the transformer. > Also,saw three electrians die in a bad load shift ship power to shore > power.Both ended up on the same transmission with a instant replay of the > squirrel transformer. > Four other shipmates got  burns to 50%+ of their body in that dumb incident. > what I most enjoy about this concept is the idea of making powerful > weapons from the seemingly mundane. Having the energy density that you > hint at makes for a good bomb. Just short the sucker out and you will > have either a nice explosion or a fair em pulse (which just might do > more damage) Think of a 500 or 750 pound bomb whose case is just sheet > aluminum and inside is a collection or just a honker sdesd. Drop it > where you will for the explosive effect or wrap copper coils around it > for the discharge path and when you trigger it you take out all the > electrons (non-hardened) and a (half-)mile radius. Take out a power > plant or just kill everyones cars and trucks. Scale it down to the size > of a laptop battery and you can probably make it start up the computer > so you can pass security. Then walk into your nearest concentration of > computers–government building, wall street trading pit, airport or what > have you and boom you take it out. Or we could just do what you keep > trying to promote, make a car with it, but lets make it a hot rod with > five times, ten times, a thousand times the storage and then park it in > front of a nice target (of course you could do that with other means but > this would be so much more effective). And best part of all, you can > just make them em pulse generators and you don’t destroy targets but > just disable them so you can repair them later. No messy building debris. > > >Good point.  Does anyone know of a technology that is stores energy > > >efficiently, and doesn’t take up a whole mountain side to build a > reservoir? > > Yes – although it is just an idea…..EER > > Extra crispy revised edition……

Response:

what I most enjoy about this concept is the idea of making powerful weapons from the seemingly mundane. Having the energy density that you hint at makes for a good bomb. Just short the sucker out and you will have either a nice explosion or a fair em pulse (which just might do more damage) Think of a 500 or 750 pound bomb whose case is just sheet aluminum and inside is a collection or just a honker sdesd. Drop it where you will for the explosive effect or wrap copper coils around it for the discharge path and when you trigger it you take out all the electrons (non-hardened) and a (half-)mile radius. Take out a power plant or just kill everyones cars and trucks. Scale it down to the size of a laptop battery and you can probably make it start up the computer so you can pass security. Then walk into your nearest concentration of computers–government building, wall street trading pit, airport or what have you and boom you take it out. Or we could just do what you keep trying to promote, make a car with it, but lets make it a hot rod with five times, ten times, a thousand times the storage and then park it in front of a nice target (of course you could do that with other means but this would be so much more effective). And best part of all, you can just make them em pulse generators and you don’t destroy targets but just disable them so you can repair them later. No messy building debris. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Good point.  Does anyone know of a technology that is stores energy >efficiently, and doesn’t take up a whole mountain side to build a reservoir? > Yes – although it is just an idea…..EER > Extra crispy revised edition……

Response:

>Good point.  Does anyone know of a technology that is stores energy >efficiently, and doesn’t take up a whole mountain side to build a reservoir?

Yes – although it is just an idea…..EER Extra crispy revised edition…… In one sentence, I am saying that a very, very advanced capacitor is possible, and would accommodate most of the energy problems we have today — basically it does the job that oil now does. An energy concept Yes, there is a 21st Law of Thermodynamics.  That is no knock on Faraday, just a reference to the 21st century, and the new technology it has brought. Simply stated, it is, "No energy concept involving renewables shall ever be considered unless the word ‘diffuse’ is used, understood, and taken into consideration." Faraday could not have seen this coming.  In his day, there was not the multitude of diffuse renewable energy sources available, which can be converted to electricity. If human beings are ever to use renewable, natural energy sources, they will have to take into consideration the diffuse nature of sunlight, wind, wave, etc.  I was actually surprised to find that Faraday, himself, used the word "diffuse" in his writings.  But, this was in reference to the spread of charge on capacitor plates, and not the UN-concentrated free energy that is available today for conversion to electricity. There is NO way around this Law.  By that, I mean that there in no way around solving the "diffuse problem," before we are able to put renewable energy sources to work in any effective way. crises. We don’t need no oil.   We don’t need no batteries.   We don’t need no internal combustion engine.   We don’t need no fusion.   We don’t need no hybrids. We don’t need no hydrogen-powered cars.   We don’t need no ethanol. We don’t need no natural gas. We don’t need no methane. We don’t even need no efficiency.   We don’t even need no conservation. All we need are the renewable energy sources that God – in His infinite wisdom — provided us. Some could be used, some not.  For a while.  Eventually renewable energy sources would be all we would need to power our EV’s, and heat our homes.  We would have the luxury of choice, while at the same time powering our EV’s with them.  All of them.  Any of them.  As long as they are able to generate any amount of electricity. To those who have read this before, and may have rejected it out of hand, let me say that it is my strong belief that two major companies may be engaged in pretty much the basic idea presented here. They have patents – I do not. In no way do I – nor will I – attempt to claim any right whatsoever to this idea — even though all my writing on it came from my own independent thinking for over 12 years. I wish them well. But, in case I am wrong about that effort being made, I surely wish some interested party would help me connect this to the people in government who say they want an energy solution. What they are looking for is contained on this letter. I am THAT confident. Note: I can see EER powering an automobile.  That is almost a lock, in my mind.  Further applications are, perhaps, a little harder to deal with.  Once a car IS powered by EER, then all the entrepreneurs will take the rest to the logical conclusion. EER in Brief Electronic Electricity Repository (EER) is merely a concept at this time. There is no business, no patent, and no money involved with this.   This involves solid state capacitors as a usable energy storage device for electric vehicles, and other items. Conventional wisdom limits capacitors to power surges, and the like. The full text of this concept will suggest a way to make them fully competitive with the internal combustion engine, while not violating the laws of energy density. The easiest way to explain it is to use an electric vehicle as an example. To power an EV with EER, an array of electronic devices — perhaps solid-state capacitors, perhaps another device — would contain the electrical charge accumulated from a variety of sources of electricity. Renewable energy sources are suggested, but *any* source of electricity would work. With the questionable future of battery-powered EV’s, and fusion as an energy source, and the political debate about fossil fuels, there are strong reasons to take a look at EER. In fairness, many say it cannot be done. But, perhaps another war — or avoiding one — could put the right minds to work on this concept. It *would* provide a way to be independent of foreign oil, while providing a structure for the transition to renewable forms of energy to power EV’s – or any other device powered by electricity. This is merely a shell of an idea, but perhaps some further thought could help bring it about. A TRIP TO THE STORE IN AN EER POWERED EV Let’s suppose that the EER concept is fully developed, and built into an electric vehicle. Let’s also suppose that the newest and best technological devices — some of which are now being used in EV’s – are integrated into the vehicle’s design. What follows is a description of what might possibly have happened during an everyday trip to the store in such a vehicle. (This assumes the use of an *advanced* solid-state capacitor). Ms. Jones notices her "fuel gauge" as she starts her vehicle; it tells her that her microchip capacitor battery is 85% full. This means that of the vast number of microchip capacitors in her "battery," 85% are charged with their very small electric capacitance. She proceeds to the store, and returns home — a quarter mile trip. As she pulls in her driveway, she looks again at her gauge. It reads 84%. She thinks that she used only 1% of her battery capacity for her trip. But, she is wrong. She used 10% of her available charged capacitors for the quarter mile trip. So, why didn’t her gauge read 75% when she returned? There were several devices built into her vehicle which were replenishing used capacitors, almost as fast as she was using them. (All figures below are guesses — just to make the point.) 1. The advanced solar panel on the roof of her vehicle was, as always during sunlight, continuously recharging at a slow, but steady rate. Because she had happened to drive and park in the sunlight, the solar panel recharged 5% of her capacitors. 2. The air scoops arranged in her vehicle’s design — although accounting for some drag — were directing the air through small dynamos, which recharged another 2%. 3. The regenerative brakes on all four wheels replenished another 2% of the capacitors. So, she did, in fact, use 10% of the available capacitor charges, but 9% were replaced by the activity of her trip. This is nothing like perpetual motion; it is merely taking advantage of the natural surrounding energy to replenish the energy spent on the trip. It is even conceivable that her "fuel gauge" might have read a higher percentage upon her return; a shorter trip on a windier and sunnier day, in a more sunlit route and parking spot, and many more occasions to use the brakes, might have made that possible. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is not violated, because energy from outside the vehicle was being absorbed along the way. It is noted that a battery-powered EV could have done much the same, but the weight difference would have changed the percentages, so as to defeat the purpose. Frank Lincoln CS# 72430,2407 It is understood that high energy density is something that has been sought for many years — the concept is nothing new. What is suggested here is the possibility that modern technology may now be in the position to actually attain it — to a degree that could combine the many energy sources (new and old) into a common pool. GIVEN: – Trench capacitors, at the present time, have nowhere near the capability to deal with the degree of energy that would be required in Electronic Electricity Repository. – The area of the plates in a trench capacitor will, for the most part, determine the capacitance — not exclusively, but this is the factor that is dealt with here as having the most potential for improvement. It is assumed that progress in the other factors — dielectric strength, dielectric composition, etc., will continue, and will accommodate the supposition of surface area increase made here. HYPOTHESIS: – The surface area of a trench capacitor plate can be greatly increased without increasing the perimeter, or the space required to store the capacitor. – Etching a groove on the plate surface will do this, to a small degree, and it is done, to some extent, today. What is surmised, here, is that, as the technology allows, many cross-grooves could be etched *within* the first groove. Then, with increasing precision, these cross-grooves could, in turn, be cross-grooved. And, then those cross-grooves cross-grooved. Each successive cross-grooving would be progressively smaller – magnitudes smaller. This could be repeated until the molecular level was reached — each time increasing the surface area of the plate, and thus the capacitance. An inexact estimate of the number of times it could be repeated is 26. It is surmised that each groove, cross-groove, and, etc., would be matched by a ridge, a cross-ridge, and, etc., on the opposite plate, with corresponding shapes for the dielectric. The resulting configuration would yield a perfectly matching set of plates (sandwiching an appropriately shaped, and expectedly advanced dielectric). Such a configuration and material composition may not be possible at this time, but the direction of efforts in their respective technologies may lead … read more »

Response:

> Anthony, > Thank’s for the info.  To clarify, I am more interested in utility size > system, but am still interested in the small scale systems.  From what I > understand, Holland’s wind energy production has reached about 13% of total > electricity for the country.

I think you’re thinking about Denmark. >orrect me if I am wrong, but I recently read > that they are starting to have problems absorbing the variability of wind > energy on their grid.  I understand that the US wind energy production is no > where close to 13%, however every person that I have spoke to who works at a > utility company always complain about the unreliability of wind power.

An important factor to consider is that the US has around 52 times the population of Denmark 278 million versus 5.3 million. As well, the US has more energy intensive industries. > By the way, I am a HUGE windpower advocate, and am seeking a way around an > obstacle. > Seth

There are issues with high percentages of wind energy. It’s so unlikley that the US will ever get close to 10% from wind energy (let alone 13%) that it isn’t an obsticle there. Karl Johanson

Response:

> All, > In Scotland we have Hydro Power.  We also have Pumped Storage, where the > excess production of electricity from sources which are most economic to > run continuously is used to pump the water back up, ready for the next > peak in demand.  Windpower could do that. > You do rather need the geography for it, though.

Good point.  Does anyone know of a technology that is stores energy efficiently, and doesn’t take up a whole mountain side to build a reservoir? > I believe we have around 18% of our energy produced by renewable (or was > that non fossil – we do have nukes), with a target of 28% by 2010. > Question – economics of windpower – I understand there are a bunch of > planning applications in the pipeline for windfarms in the UK, so there > must be a return to be made.  Good – money is the great motivator. > But can wind power truly compete against the rest on a level playing > field with no subsidies or artificial prices paid to generators?

Right now.  No.  In the future probably.  The other consideration that some economists through into the whole equation is the value of a non polluting source of energy — but thats really hard to put a number on. > Q2 – same as above for Wave / tidal power.  There have been many > objections to windfarms for reasons of looks and noise.

These are issues, however blades today are designed to reduce noise. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->and how does that help? just adds the cost of the storage, therefore >making the whole process more expensive. >Geothermal is constant, doesn’t need to be stored. >> > I understand that the US wind energy production is no where close to 13%, >> however every person that I have spoke to who works at a utility company >always >> complain about the unreliability of wind power. >> The answer is to convert the windpower to electricity, then store it along >with >> electricity from the sun, wave, stream, geothermal, plus about 10 more. Then >> you have energy on a cloudy day, a windless day, a dry day, etc. >> >By the way, I am a HUGE windpower advocate, and am seeking a way around an >> >obstacle. >> The way around it is storage. > — > Iain Blackie

Response:

We produce 11% of our electricity from renewables.  Target is 40% by 2020. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->All, >In Scotland we have Hydro Power.  We also have Pumped Storage, where the >excess production of electricity from sources which are most economic to >run continuously is used to pump the water back up, ready for the next >peak in demand.  Windpower could do that. >You do rather need the geography for it, though. >I believe we have around 18% of our energy produced by renewable (or was >that non fossil – we do have nukes), with a target of 28% by 2010. >Question – economics of windpower – I understand there are a bunch of >planning applications in the pipeline for windfarms in the UK, so there >must be a return to be made.  Good – money is the great motivator. >But can wind power truly compete against the rest on a level playing >field with no subsidies or artificial prices paid to generators? >Q2 – same as above for Wave / tidal power.  There have been many >objections to windfarms for reasons of looks and noise. >and how does that help? just adds the cost of the storage, therefore >making the whole process more expensive. >Geothermal is constant, doesn’t need to be stored. >> > I understand that the US wind energy production is no where close to 13%, >> however every person that I have spoke to who works at a utility company >always >> complain about the unreliability of wind power. >> The answer is to convert the windpower to electricity, then store it along >with >> electricity from the sun, wave, stream, geothermal, plus about 10 more.  Then >> you have energy on a cloudy day, a windless day, a dry day, etc. >> >By the way, I am a HUGE windpower advocate, and am seeking a way around an >> >obstacle. >> The way around it is storage.

– Iain Blackie

Response:

All, In Scotland we have Hydro Power.  We also have Pumped Storage, where the excess production of electricity from sources which are most economic to run continuously is used to pump the water back up, ready for the next peak in demand.  Windpower could do that. You do rather need the geography for it, though. I believe we have around 18% of our energy produced by renewable (or was that non fossil – we do have nukes), with a target of 28% by 2010. Question – economics of windpower – I understand there are a bunch of planning applications in the pipeline for windfarms in the UK, so there must be a return to be made.  Good – money is the great motivator. But can wind power truly compete against the rest on a level playing field with no subsidies or artificial prices paid to generators? Q2 – same as above for Wave / tidal power.  There have been many objections to windfarms for reasons of looks and noise. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->and how does that help? just adds the cost of the storage, therefore >making the whole process more expensive. >Geothermal is constant, doesn’t need to be stored. > > I understand that the US wind energy production is no where close to 13%, > however every person that I have spoke to who works at a utility company >always > complain about the unreliability of wind power. > The answer is to convert the windpower to electricity, then store it along >with > electricity from the sun, wave, stream, geothermal, plus about 10 more.  Then > you have energy on a cloudy day, a windless day, a dry day, etc. > >By the way, I am a HUGE windpower advocate, and am seeking a way around an > >obstacle. > The way around it is storage.

– Iain Blackie

Response:

and how does that help? just adds the cost of the storage, therefore making the whole process more expensive. Geothermal is constant, doesn’t need to be stored. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I understand that the US wind energy production is no where close to 13%, > however every person that I have spoke to who works at a utility company always > complain about the unreliability of wind power. > The answer is to convert the windpower to electricity, then store it along with > electricity from the sun, wave, stream, geothermal, plus about 10 more.  Then > you have energy on a cloudy day, a windless day, a dry day, etc. >By the way, I am a HUGE windpower advocate, and am seeking a way around an >obstacle. > The way around it is storage.

Response:

> I understand that the US wind energy production is no where close to 13%,

however every person that I have spoke to who works at a utility company always complain about the unreliability of wind power. The answer is to convert the windpower to electricity, then store it along with electricity from the sun, wave, stream, geothermal, plus about 10 more.  Then you have energy on a cloudy day, a windless day, a dry day, etc. >By the way, I am a HUGE windpower advocate, and am seeking a way around an >obstacle.

The way around it is storage. Frank – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Seth > … > > You seem to be pretty knowledgeable on this subject.   I am sorry I >didn’t > > check the newsgroup earlier this week! > I only know what I read on the internet. > > Which of these storage technologies do you think will pan out with >regard to > > grid backup systems?  My interests lie in wind power generation — since > > winds intermittent nature is a big issue with its reliability. > I’m not sure I understand your question. What kind of a grid backup > system are you proposing? How big? How long of an outage? What does > intermittent have to do with reliability? > Small grid backup, house sized, seems to work quite well with lead > acid batteries. I think this technology is going to be hard to beat > for quite a while yet. Big grid backup is probably best done with > big grid generators. That said, I’ve heard all kinds of things that > might work and pumped hydro seems to be the one out in front right > now. I’m not sure wind needs a backup system though. The grid already > has a wide variety of generation and I’ve heard that it can absorb > as much as 10 to 20% of it’s power from variable sources such as > wind without any changes to it’s basic structure. Since wind makes > up less than 1% in most places, it’s going to be quite a while before > this becomes an issue. > Anthony

Response:

… > You seem to be pretty knowledgeable on this subject.   I am sorry I didn’t > check the newsgroup earlier this week!

I only know what I read on the internet. > Which of these storage technologies do you think will pan out with regard to > grid backup systems?  My interests lie in wind power generation — since > winds intermittent nature is a big issue with its reliability.

I’m not sure I understand your question. What kind of a grid backup system are you proposing? How big? How long of an outage? What does intermittent have to do with reliability? Small grid backup, house sized, seems to work quite well with lead acid batteries. I think this technology is going to be hard to beat for quite a while yet. Big grid backup is probably best done with big grid generators. That said, I’ve heard all kinds of things that might work and pumped hydro seems to be the one out in front right now. I’m not sure wind needs a backup system though. The grid already has a wide variety of generation and I’ve heard that it can absorb as much as 10 to 20% of it’s power from variable sources such as wind without any changes to it’s basic structure. Since wind makes up less than 1% in most places, it’s going to be quite a while before this becomes an issue. Anthony

Response:

Anthony, Thank’s for the info.  To clarify, I am more interested in utility size system, but am still interested in the small scale systems.  From what I understand, Holland’s wind energy production has reached about 13% of total electricity for the country.  Correct me if I am wrong, but I recently read that they are starting to have problems absorbing the variability of wind energy on their grid.  I understand that the US wind energy production is no where close to 13%, however every person that I have spoke to who works at a utility company always complain about the unreliability of wind power. By the way, I am a HUGE windpower advocate, and am seeking a way around an obstacle. Seth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > … > You seem to be pretty knowledgeable on this subject.   I am sorry I didn’t > check the newsgroup earlier this week! > I only know what I read on the internet. > Which of these storage technologies do you think will pan out with regard to > grid backup systems?  My interests lie in wind power generation — since > winds intermittent nature is a big issue with its reliability. > I’m not sure I understand your question. What kind of a grid backup > system are you proposing? How big? How long of an outage? What does > intermittent have to do with reliability? > Small grid backup, house sized, seems to work quite well with lead > acid batteries. I think this technology is going to be hard to beat > for quite a while yet. Big grid backup is probably best done with > big grid generators. That said, I’ve heard all kinds of things that > might work and pumped hydro seems to be the one out in front right > now. I’m not sure wind needs a backup system though. The grid already > has a wide variety of generation and I’ve heard that it can absorb > as much as 10 to 20% of it’s power from variable sources such as > wind without any changes to it’s basic structure. Since wind makes > up less than 1% in most places, it’s going to be quite a while before > this becomes an issue. > Anthony

Response:

This would be a hybrid system with an internal combustion engine where the pneumatic energy loop conserves kinetic energy otherwise lost by braking. >Sounds like a good idea, the only problem is having to recharge the >gas once it is used.

– Doug Dwyer

Response:

Anthony, You seem to be pretty knowledgeable on this subject.   I am sorry I didn’t check the newsgroup earlier this week! Which of these storage technologies do you think will pan out with regard to grid backup systems?  My interests lie in wind power generation — since winds intermittent nature is a big issue with its reliability. Seth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> New Electrical Energy Storage Technologies > I am looking for an idea to do a Ph.D. thesis. > I want to do it on new electical energy storage technologies. > I am looking for a way to produce a storage device that could be > recharged (electrically) and be used to power electric vehicles. > Current battery technologies are too bulky, expensive, maintenance prone > and inefficient. > … > Well, energy storage is kind of the Holy Grail when it comes to electric > cars and/or grid backup systems. There are a lot of technologies out there > that have been tried to one degree of success or another. You might start > by first doing a review and analysis of existing technologies and their > strengths or weaknesses. > For instance… > Mechanical storage. Springs, rubber bands and the like. Baygen radios > use this fairly successfully. > Compressed or liquefied gasses. I believe someone put together a liquid > nitrogen powered car and there is a start-up company trying to get a > compressed air powered car out there on the roads. > Phase change materials. These have been used for thermal storage in some > solar power plants to provide the heat to run the turbines at night. > Flywheels. Some outfits are working on these as battery replacements. > Some other technologies, both promising and not… > Super conducting coils, reversible fuel cells, microwave power transmission, > electrified roadbeds, falling weights… I’m sure there are many other > technologies that just simply aren’t practical for one reason or another. > Who is to say that whatever is impractical with these can’t be fixed? > The ultimate, of course, would be some form of fusion reactor. There are > at least two table-top fusion reactors out there, maybe more, but they > don’t generate more energy than they consume in operation. These aren’t > energy storage devices as such but if someone only has to fill the tank > on their car once every dozen years then they probably wouldn’t mind. > Anthony

Response:

Your search shows optimism . Either there is a blinding flash of light and a new discovery is made or you must help to move existing technologies forward a little bit! The latter is more reliable and success is orders of magnitude more sure. I believe complexity increases with time for most engineered products and this can be used to exploit the two best energy storage mechanisms ; the kinetic energy of the vehicle and short term storage in battery, compressed air etc. I am describing the hybrid vehicle with low friction and efficient regenerative braking. Note if some research was to be done I propose regenerative braking employing pneumatic energy transfer and energy storage by means of the compressed gas as an alternative to the generally employed electrical storage. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->The last I under stood – generators require an energy input! >Your car would only run until the battery dies! > >New Electrical Energy Storage Technologies > >I am looking for an idea to do a Ph.D. thesis. > >I want to do it on new electical energy storage technologies. > >I am looking for a way to produce a storage device that could be > >recharged (electrically) and be used to power electric vehicles. > >Current battery technologies are too bulky, expensive, maintenance prone > >and inefficient. > >The supercapacitors come close to being practical, but are probably > >still a couple orders of magnitude away from being practical (due to low > >energy densities and cost). > >If anyone has any leads on new technologies, or theories for new > >technologies for storing electrical energy your ideas would be really > >appreciated. > >Thanks in advance, > >Roger Zimmerman > Storage devices, I don’t have plans for, but I do have plans for a > generator that would allow electric vehicles use only 1 battery > instead of a whole array.  No need for a standard engine, it would be > the battery, the generator, a starter for the generator and then the > electric motors to run the car.  Interested? E-mail me,

– Doug Dwyer

Response:

The last I under stood – generators require an energy input! Your car would only run until the battery dies!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->New Electrical Energy Storage Technologies >I am looking for an idea to do a Ph.D. thesis. >I want to do it on new electical energy storage technologies. >I am looking for a way to produce a storage device that could be >recharged (electrically) and be used to power electric vehicles. >Current battery technologies are too bulky, expensive, maintenance prone >and inefficient. >The supercapacitors come close to being practical, but are probably >still a couple orders of magnitude away from being practical (due to low >energy densities and cost). >If anyone has any leads on new technologies, or theories for new >technologies for storing electrical energy your ideas would be really >appreciated. >Thanks in advance, >Roger Zimmerman > Storage devices, I don’t have plans for, but I do have plans for a > generator that would allow electric vehicles use only 1 battery > instead of a whole array.  No need for a standard engine, it would be > the battery, the generator, a starter for the generator and then the > electric motors to run the car.  Interested? E-mail me,

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > … > Thanks for you comments.  Do you have any links to the 2 table top fusion > reactors you mentioned?  I didn’t know anyone had them working. > … > Well, care of google.com, > #1 uses a high-power laser fired through a jet of deuterium clusters. > http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/tablefusion990324.html > http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc99/3_27_99/fob1.htm > #2 uses sonoluminescence in acetone containing deuterium. > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1855672.stm > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-03/aaft-fia030102.php > These have nothing to do with cold fusion, which is another thing > entirely.

        A lot of doubt has been cast on the sonoluminescence work now.         See:         Sonoluminescence is not bubble fusion         http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-07/aps-pts072402.php         http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2002/split/599-3.html http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v418/… <regards> -het — "Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you." -olde Vulcan saying Energy Alternatives: http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/energy.html H.E. Taylor  http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/

Response:

… > Thanks for you comments.  Do you have any links to the 2 table top fusion > reactors you mentioned?  I didn’t know anyone had them working.

… Well, care of google.com, #1 uses a high-power laser fired through a jet of deuterium clusters. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/tablefusion990324.html http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc99/3_27_99/fob1.htm #2 uses sonoluminescence in acetone containing deuterium. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1855672.stm http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-03/aaft-fia030102.php These have nothing to do with cold fusion, which is another thing entirely. Anthony

Response:

Antony, Thanks for you comments.  Do you have any links to the 2 table top fusion reactors you mentioned?  I didn’t know anyone had them working. Thanks, Roger Zimmerman – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> New Electrical Energy Storage Technologies > I am looking for an idea to do a Ph.D. thesis. > I want to do it on new electical energy storage technologies. > I am looking for a way to produce a storage device that could be > recharged (electrically) and be used to power electric vehicles. > Current battery technologies are too bulky, expensive, maintenance prone > and inefficient. > … > Well, energy storage is kind of the Holy Grail when it comes to electric > cars and/or grid backup systems. There are a lot of technologies out there > that have been tried to one degree of success or another. You might start > by first doing a review and analysis of existing technologies and their > strengths or weaknesses. > For instance… > Mechanical storage. Springs, rubber bands and the like. Baygen radios > use this fairly successfully. > Compressed or liquefied gasses. I believe someone put together a liquid > nitrogen powered car and there is a start-up company trying to get a > compressed air powered car out there on the roads. > Phase change materials. These have been used for thermal storage in some > solar power plants to provide the heat to run the turbines at night. > Flywheels. Some outfits are working on these as battery replacements. > Some other technologies, both promising and not… > Super conducting coils, reversible fuel cells, microwave power transmission, > electrified roadbeds, falling weights… I’m sure there are many other > technologies that just simply aren’t practical for one reason or another. > Who is to say that whatever is impractical with these can’t be fixed? > The ultimate, of course, would be some form of fusion reactor. There are > at least two table-top fusion reactors out there, maybe more, but they > don’t generate more energy than they consume in operation. These aren’t > energy storage devices as such but if someone only has to fill the tank > on their car once every dozen years then they probably wouldn’t mind. > Anthony

Response:

> New Electrical Energy Storage Technologies > I am looking for an idea to do a Ph.D. thesis. > I want to do it on new electical energy storage technologies. > I am looking for a way to produce a storage device that could be > recharged (electrically) and be used to power electric vehicles. > Current battery technologies are too bulky, expensive, maintenance prone > and inefficient.

… Well, energy storage is kind of the Holy Grail when it comes to electric cars and/or grid backup systems. There are a lot of technologies out there that have been tried to one degree of success or another. You might start by first doing a review and analysis of existing technologies and their strengths or weaknesses. For instance… Mechanical storage. Springs, rubber bands and the like. Baygen radios use this fairly successfully. Compressed or liquefied gasses. I believe someone put together a liquid nitrogen powered car and there is a start-up company trying to get a compressed air powered car out there on the roads. Phase change materials. These have been used for thermal storage in some solar power plants to provide the heat to run the turbines at night. Flywheels. Some outfits are working on these as battery replacements. Some other technologies, both promising and not… Super conducting coils, reversible fuel cells, microwave power transmission, electrified roadbeds, falling weights… I’m sure there are many other technologies that just simply aren’t practical for one reason or another. Who is to say that whatever is impractical with these can’t be fixed? The ultimate, of course, would be some form of fusion reactor. There are at least two table-top fusion reactors out there, maybe more, but they don’t generate more energy than they consume in operation. These aren’t energy storage devices as such but if someone only has to fill the tank on their car once every dozen years then they probably wouldn’t mind. Anthony

Response:

New Electrical Energy Storage Technologies I am looking for an idea to do a Ph.D. thesis. I want to do it on new electical energy storage technologies. I am looking for a way to produce a storage device that could be recharged (electrically) and be used to power electric vehicles. Current battery technologies are too bulky, expensive, maintenance prone and inefficient. The supercapacitors come close to being practical, but are probably still a couple orders of magnitude away from being practical (due to low energy densities and cost). If anyone has any leads on new technologies, or theories for new technologies for storing electrical energy your ideas would be really appreciated. Thanks in advance, Roger Zimmerman

Response:

New Electrical Energy Storage Technologies I am looking for an idea to do a Ph.D. thesis. I want to do it on new electical energy storage technologies. I am looking for a way to produce a storage device that could be recharged (electrically) and be used to power electric vehicles. Current battery technologies are too bulky, expensive, maintenance prone and inefficient. The supercapacitors come close to being practical, but are probably still a couple orders of magnitude away from being practical (due to low energy densities and cost). If anyone has any leads on new technologies, or theories for new technologies for storing electrical energy your ideas would be really appreciated. Thanks in advance, Roger Zimmerman

Response:

>If anyone has any leads on new technologies, or theories for new >technologies for storing electrical energy your ideas would be really >appreciated. >Thanks in advance, >Roger Zimmerman

HERE ya go!  Have fun and good luck! Extra crispy revised edition……there are some mistakes in here In one sentence, I am saying that a very, very advanced capacitor is possible, and would accommodate most of the energy problems we have today — basically it does the job that oil now does. An energy concept Yes, there is a 21st Law of Thermodynamics.  That is no knock on Faraday, just a reference to the 21st century, and the new technology it has brought. Simply stated, it is, "No energy concept involving renewables shall ever be considered unless the word ‘diffuse’ is used, understood, and taken into consideration." Faraday could not have seen this coming.  In his day, there was not the multitude of diffuse renewable energy sources available, which can be converted to electricity. If human beings are ever to use renewable, natural energy sources, they will have to take into consideration the diffuse nature of sunlight, wind, wave, etc.  I was actually surprised to find that Faraday, himself, used the word "diffuse" in his writings.  But, this was in reference to the spread of charge on capacitor plates, and not the UN-concentrated free energy that is available today for conversion to electricity. There is NO way around this Law.  By that, I mean that there in no way around solving the "diffuse problem," before we are able to put renewable energy sources to work in any effective way. crises. We don’t need no oil.   We don’t need no batteries.   We don’t need no internal combustion engine.   We don’t need no fusion.   We don’t need no hybrids. We don’t need no hydrogen-powered cars.   We don’t need no ethanol. We don’t need no natural gas. We don’t need no methane. We don’t even need no efficiency.   We don’t even need no conservation. All we need are the renewable energy sources that God – in His infinite wisdom — provided us. Some could be used, some not.  For a while.  Eventually renewable energy sources would be all we would need to power our EV’s, and heat our homes.  We would have the luxury of choice, while at the same time powering our EV’s with them.  All of them.  Any of them.  As long as they are able to generate any amount of electricity. To those who have read this before, and may have rejected it out of hand, let me say that it is my strong belief that two major companies may be engaged in pretty much the basic idea presented here. They have patents – I do not. In no way do I – nor will I – attempt to claim any right whatsoever to this idea — even though all my writing on it came from my own independent thinking for over 12 years. I wish them well. But, in case I am wrong about that effort being made, I surely wish some interested party would help me connect this to the people in government who say they want an energy solution. What they are looking for is contained on this letter. I am THAT confident. Note: I can see EER powering an automobile.  That is almost a lock, in my mind.  Further applications are, perhaps, a little harder to deal with.  Once a car IS powered by EER, then all the entrepreneurs will take the rest to the logical conclusion. EER in Brief Electronic Electricity Repository (EER) is merely a concept at this time. There is no business, no patent, and no money involved with this.   This involves solid state capacitors as a usable energy storage device for electric vehicles, and other items. Conventional wisdom limits capacitors to power surges, and the like. The full text of this concept will suggest a way to make them fully competitive with the internal combustion engine, while not violating the laws of energy density. The easiest way to explain it is to use an electric vehicle as an example. To power an EV with EER, an array of electronic devices — perhaps solid-state capacitors, perhaps another device — would contain the electrical charge accumulated from a variety of sources of electricity. Renewable energy sources are suggested, but *any* source of electricity would work. With the questionable future of battery-powered EV’s, and fusion as an energy source, and the political debate about fossil fuels, there are strong reasons to take a look at EER. In fairness, many say it cannot be done. But, perhaps another war — or avoiding one — could put the right minds to work on this concept. It *would* provide a way to be independent of foreign oil, while providing a structure for the transition to renewable forms of energy to power EV’s – or any other device powered by electricity. This is merely a shell of an idea, but perhaps some further thought could help bring it about. A TRIP TO THE STORE IN AN EER POWERED EV Let’s suppose that the EER concept is fully developed, and built into an electric vehicle. Let’s also suppose that the newest and best technological devices — some of which are now being used in EV’s – are integrated into the vehicle’s design. What follows is a description of what might possibly have happened during an everyday trip to the store in such a vehicle. (This assumes the use of an *advanced* solid-state capacitor). Ms. Jones notices her "fuel gauge" as she starts her vehicle; it tells her that her microchip capacitor battery is 85% full. This means that of the vast number of microchip capacitors in her "battery," 85% are charged with their very small electric capacitance. She proceeds to the store, and returns home — a quarter mile trip. As she pulls in her driveway, she looks again at her gauge. It reads 84%. She thinks that she used only 1% of her battery capacity for her trip. But, she is wrong. She used 10% of her available charged capacitors for the quarter mile trip. So, why didn’t her gauge read 75% when she returned? There were several devices built into her vehicle which were replenishing used capacitors, almost as fast as she was using them. (All figures below are guesses — just to make the point.) 1. The advanced solar panel on the roof of her vehicle was, as always during sunlight, continuously recharging at a slow, but steady rate. Because she had happened to drive and park in the sunlight, the solar panel recharged 5% of her capacitors. 2. The air scoops arranged in her vehicle’s design — although accounting for some drag — were directing the air through small dynamos, which recharged another 2%. 3. The regenerative brakes on all four wheels replenished another 2% of the capacitors. So, she did, in fact, use 10% of the available capacitor charges, but 9% were replaced by the activity of her trip. This is nothing like perpetual motion; it is merely taking advantage of the natural surrounding energy to replenish the energy spent on the trip. It is even conceivable that her "fuel gauge" might have read a higher percentage upon her return; a shorter trip on a windier and sunnier day, in a more sunlit route and parking spot, and many more occasions to use the brakes, might have made that possible. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is not violated, because energy from outside the vehicle was being absorbed along the way. It is noted that a battery-powered EV could have done much the same, but the weight difference would have changed the percentages, so as to defeat the purpose. Frank Lincoln CS# 72430,2407 It is understood that high energy density is something that has been sought for many years — the concept is nothing new. What is suggested here is the possibility that modern technology may now be in the position to actually attain it — to a degree that could combine the many energy sources (new and old) into a common pool. GIVEN: – Trench capacitors, at the present time, have nowhere near the capability to deal with the degree of energy that would be required in Electronic Electricity Repository. – The area of the plates in a trench capacitor will, for the most part, determine the capacitance — not exclusively, but this is the factor that is dealt with here as having the most potential for improvement. It is assumed that progress in the other factors — dielectric strength, dielectric composition, etc., will continue, and will accommodate the supposition of surface area increase made here. HYPOTHESIS: – The surface area of a trench capacitor plate can be greatly increased without increasing the perimeter, or the space required to store the capacitor. – Etching a groove on the plate surface will do this, to a small degree, and it is done, to some extent, today. What is surmised, here, is that, as the technology allows, many cross-grooves could be etched *within* the first groove. Then, with increasing precision, these cross-grooves could, in turn, be cross-grooved. And, then those cross-grooves cross-grooved. Each successive cross-grooving would be progressively smaller – magnitudes smaller. This could be repeated until the molecular level was reached — each time increasing the surface area of the plate, and thus the capacitance. An inexact estimate of the number of times it could be repeated is 26. It is surmised that each groove, cross-groove, and, etc., would be matched by a ridge, a cross-ridge, and, etc., on the opposite plate, with corresponding shapes for the dielectric. The resulting configuration would yield a perfectly matching set of plates (sandwiching an appropriately shaped, and expectedly advanced dielectric). Such a configuration and material composition may not … read more »

Response: