E
|-|ercules
Guest
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote ...
Say 80km/hr = 22 m/s. Although for cities 50km/hr would suffice.
A 30 cm bumper
v^2 = 2as
484 = 0.6a
a = 800m/s/s
Impact = 80G.
---------------------------
OK 100CC, top speed 50km/h, 50cm bumper.
14m/s
v^2 = 2as
200 = a
IMPACT = 20G.
PLUS 50cm give in the seat belt
IMPACT = 10G.
HUMAN CASUALITIES = 0.0
Herc
On 11/11/2010 10:12 AM, |-|ercules wrote:
"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote
On 10/11/2010 11:51 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote ...
On 10/11/2010 8:22 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote ...
On 10/11/2010 7:41 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote...
On 10/11/2010 7:22 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote ...
On 10/11/2010 4:42 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote ...
On 10/11/2010 3:50 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
"Sylvia Else"<sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in
On 10/11/2010 2:03 PM, Felix_the_cat wrote:
Is this for real..??
http://www.teslasecret.com
Depends what you mean by "for real"?
If you're asking whether it's possible to extract energy from an antenna, the answer is yes. Crystal radios have
always
worked
this way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_radio
Note the historical lack of any government attempts to keep that technology quiet.
Indeed, energy always has to come from an antenna, or there'd be no signal for the receiver to receive.
That does not follow considering the operation of a light dependant resister.
If you're asking whether it can be used to have a measurable impact on your electricity bill, the answer is no. The
amount
of
energy that can be extracted from an antenna is miniscule, which is one reason no one uses a crytal radio for their
listening
pleasure these days.
Sylvia.
Plenty of people listen to crystal radios, we built ones with a single component
plus earpiece, had old military high impedance headphones, amplifiers...
People build them out of interest. I did, many years ago. I strongly doubt that anyont uses them as a practical way of
listening
to radio broadcasts.
Jaycar or Leisuretronics had a solar powered hydrogen generator kit. I wondered
if it would scale up for practical fueling purposes, apparently it does.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/01/27/honda-unveils-new-solar-powered-hydrogen-generating-and-fueling/
"which would lower CO2 emissions by using less expensive off-peak electrical power."
It only lowers CO2 emissions if that off-peak power comes from nuclear power plants. Otherwise it will usually come
from
coal.
"During daytime peak power times, the Solar Hydrogen Station can export renewable electricity to the grid, providing a
cost
benefit to the customer, while remaining energy neutral."
Now, while possibly true, that's just plain dishonest. Energy neutrality is one thing. Carbon neutrality is another.
If
you're
using colar fire generation at night, and then displacing gas fired generation (typically) using solar power during
the
day,
then
you may be energy neutral, but there will still be a significant net CO2 production, because coal fired generation
produces
more
CO2 per unit energy output than does gas fired generation.
Sylvia.
You seem to have focused on the hybrid power induction phase and missed
the beauty of a few thousand dollar solar panel adding 1/2 kg of hydrogen
to your tank for a free daily 50km trip.
Herc
0.5kg of hydrogen is 500 grammes, so 500 * 6 * 10^23 atoms.
Splitting water requires one electron for each hydrogen atom, so that's
500 * 6 * 10^23 * 1.6 * 10^-19 columbs.
It requires a potential of 1.23 volts, so the total energy requirement is
500 * 6 * 10^23 * 1.6 * 10^-19 * 1.23 Joules.
which comes out 590.4 MJ, or 16.4kWh.
So if the electrolysis is 100% efficient, and you have 8 hours of daylight per day, you'll need 2kW from your solar
panels.
Show me a 2kW system that costs only a few thousand dollars.
Sylvia.
Try Google. I saw a dozen upon searching for "solar panels".
For example?
Sylvia.
Solar Power Special $1699
www.SolarPower-Brisbane.com.au 1.48kW Solar Power System Installed For $1699. Get 25 Year Warranty!
1.5kW Solar System $2990
OriginEnergy.com.au/Solar-Offer Just $299 Upfront& Pay Nothing For 3 Mnths On Our Payment Plan-See How
They're subsidised. Those figures are merely what the consumer has to pay, not what they cost. Typically RECs are created,
which
have to be surrendered to the supplier.
Sylvia.
Jaycar has 175Watt for $900. So about $10K from your local hobby shop.
Hardly a few thousand.
But solar panels haven't entered large mass production yet, who uses them?
It's a multi billion dollar market. The economies of scale are already there.
Plus you could halve the weight of the car with a smaller engine and carbon fibre, etc. etc.
You could do that just the same for a vehicle that was petrol driven. It's a separate issue.
Mind you, weight is only part of the issue. Wind resistance is very important at high speed.
For 350km a week you'd save $50 per week in fuel, that's $2500 per year.
Minus the interest on the money used to buy the panels, whether it's interest paid on money borrowed, or interest forgone on
money
that could have been put on deposit.
Don't forget that once electric vehicles become popular, a distance tax will be imposed to recover the petrol excise that's
not
being paid.
I think by then we'll realise 40% of private sector income going to the public
service is 4 times more than required. Tax is ultimately spent on the people,
I bet you complained about GST like everyone Else!
You complained about the government covering the cost of the solar panels
and use the opposite argument aswell when the money goes in the other direction.
I don't know what you mean by that.
Plus the ton of CO2 you'd not pollute each year.
It's clearly in the practical range. Bottled energy from the sun by sticking 2 electrodes in rain water! PERFECT!
Unless electroloysis is only 10% efficient, I doubt 90% goes into heat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis
Between 50% and 94% depending on who you believe. Getting the maximum efficiency probably requires that it be done slowly. If
you
increase the voltage above the minimum required to produce electrolysis, then the extra voltage times the current is energy
that
is being wasted.
Sylvia.
probably be a market for H and electric cars. Charging batteries is awkward on the road,
a quick refill will tilt the scales towards H fuel.
Reducing max speeds from 250km/hour to 90km/hour would drastically improve economy.
That is not self evidently true. Reducing the maximum speed reduces the size of the engine, and drive train, providing a saving
in
weight, and hence some improvement in economy. But otherwise the link between an engine's size and its efficiency at some
particular power is not so obvious. Certainly the Carnot cycle has nothing to say on the matter.
Sylvia.
And yet dodgem cars have more collisions than real cars and
there is yet to be a single fatality!
I'm not clear how that's relevant.
I wouldn't want to be so sure about the zero fatality figure, but I'll concede that the fatility rate is probably very low. I have
this vague notion that this might be because dodgem cars don't move very quickly, which would make them next to useless as a
practical form of transport.
I say we only allow 250cc engine Hydrogen dodgem cars on the road.
I'm sure such a vehicle would easily go fast enough to allow fatal crashes.
Sylvia.
Say 80km/hr = 22 m/s. Although for cities 50km/hr would suffice.
A 30 cm bumper
v^2 = 2as
484 = 0.6a
a = 800m/s/s
Impact = 80G.
---------------------------
OK 100CC, top speed 50km/h, 50cm bumper.
14m/s
v^2 = 2as
200 = a
IMPACT = 20G.
PLUS 50cm give in the seat belt
IMPACT = 10G.
HUMAN CASUALITIES = 0.0
Herc
