Ultimate energy source

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let me know how long he laughs when you explain your "idea".

I'll do more than that. He/she will draw a diagram showing the numbers adding up one side and subtracting the other. According to you the bottom line number will be a negative one.
Either way I will post the conclusion
until then
-

According to you the bottom line number will be a negative one.

Without a doubt.

 

[JoeMoma]

Let me know how long he laughs when you explain your "idea".

I'll do more than that. He/she will draw a diagram showing the numbers adding up one side and subtracting the other. According to you the bottom line number will be a negative one.
Either way I will post the conclusion
until then
-[/QUOTE

How much money are you willing to spend?

The engineer will have to fill in some information you have not provided. For example, what is the energy efficiency of you pump. I will doubt that you will not find one that is more than 95% energy efficient, which means you will have at least a 5 % energy loss just by pumping the air under water.

Anyway, you get what you pay for, and if you hire a competent engineer, it could cost a nice roll of cash

 

[JoeMoma]

It takes the same amount of work/energy to lift a 1 lb object 10 feet as it takes to lift a 10 lb object one foot.

You are mixing apples and oranges calling them both fruit but they have nothing in common.

If you only have the power to lift 1 lb, 10 feet it matters not if you try to lift 10 lb because you can only lift 1 lb; period

Now if you have a gadget that can lift 1 lb 10 feet and you then have 10 gadgets lifting together then my guess is they can life 10 lbs
-

No, actually you are the one mixing apples an oranges. You don't understand the mathematical relationship between force and energy. Of course that's why you need to find that engineer.

 

[watchingfromafar]

What is not mentioning is the decline in current oil fields. As new oil fields are found old one dry up. Now put that into your predictions

Oil field production decline
Individual oil wells are typically within multi-well oil fields. As with individual wells, the production curves for oil fields vary depending on geology and how they are developed and produced. Some fields have symmetric bell-shaped production profiles, but it is more common that the period of inclining production is briefer and steeper than the subsequent decline. More than half the production usually occurs after a field has reached a peak or plateau. Production profiles of many fields show distinct peaks, but for giant oil fields, it is more common for production to reach and maintain a plateau before declining. Once a field declines, it usually follows an exponential decline.
Oil depletion - Wikipedia

A 2013 study concluded that peak oil "appears probable before 2030", and that there was a "significant risk" that it would occur before 2020
Peak oil - Wikipedia

When the price of gasoline rises, people naturally buy less of it; the amount of this reduction being determined by the amount of the price increase and the consumer's elasticity of demand for gasoline. This does not necessarily mean that people will drive less (though it is likely), it may mean that consumers trade in their SUVs for smaller cars, hybrid vehicles, electric cars or cars that run on alternative fuels.
Will the World Ever Run Out of Oil?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is not mentioning is the decline in current oil fields. As new oil fields are found old one dry up. Now put that into your predictions

Oil field production decline
Individual oil wells are typically within multi-well oil fields. As with individual wells, the production curves for oil fields vary depending on geology and how they are developed and produced. Some fields have symmetric bell-shaped production profiles, but it is more common that the period of inclining production is briefer and steeper than the subsequent decline. More than half the production usually occurs after a field has reached a peak or plateau. Production profiles of many fields show distinct peaks, but for giant oil fields, it is more common for production to reach and maintain a plateau before declining. Once a field declines, it usually follows an exponential decline.
Oil depletion - Wikipedia

A 2013 study concluded that peak oil "appears probable before 2030", and that there was a "significant risk" that it would occur before 2020
Peak oil - Wikipedia

When the price of gasoline rises, people naturally buy less of it; the amount of this reduction being determined by the amount of the price increase and the consumer's elasticity of demand for gasoline. This does not necessarily mean that people will drive less (though it is likely), it may mean that consumers trade in their SUVs for smaller cars, hybrid vehicles, electric cars or cars that run on alternative fuels.
Will the World Ever Run Out of Oil?

I predict we'll still be using fossil fuels decades after you give up on your ocean generator.

 

[watchingfromafar]

I predict we'll still be using fossil fuels decades after you give up on your ocean generator.

I hope your "prediction" comes true but as you and I know, predictions are no better than assumptions which reminds me of "ass-out-of-you-and-me"
-

 

[watchingfromafar]

There is one factor no one here has considered.

Filling the first 12 buckets is a zero sum game but once the 12 buckets are full and pushing to reach the surface; every new bucket filled not only adds to the sum total but it’s energy contribution is coupled with the 12 before it.
-

 

[JoeMoma]

There is one factor no one here has considered.

Filling the first 12 buckets is a zero sum game but once the 12 buckets are full and pushing to reach the surface; every new bucket filled not only adds to the sum total but it’s energy contribution is coupled with the 12 before it.
-

Find that engineer! And then get back to us as you promised.

And yes, that has been considered, but that does not work like you think. Already tried to explain why.

 

[JoeMoma]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is one factor no one here has considered.

Filling the first 12 buckets is a zero sum game but once the 12 buckets are full and pushing to reach the surface; every new bucket filled not only adds to the sum total but it’s energy contribution is coupled with the 12 before it.
-

Yes, you've just multiplied the energy loss due to friction.

 

[danielpalos]

...fusion (an energy with a future).

 

[watchingfromafar]

...fusion (an energy with a future).

I agree fusion has its possibilities but just remember it's not one or the other. Either or both or even other ideas combined could bring us to where we want to be,.
Fusion power is a proposed form of power generationthat would generate electricity by using heat from nuclear fusion reactions. In a fusion process, two lighter atomic nuclei combine to form a heavier nucleus, while releasing energy. Devices designed to harness this energy are known as fusion reactors.

Research into fusion reactors began in the 1940s, but to date, no design has produced more fusion power output than the electrical power input, defeating the purpose.[1] A second issue that affects common reactions, is managing neutrons that are released during the reaction, which over time degrade many common materials used within the reaction chamber.

Fusion researchers have investigated various confinement concepts. The early emphasis was on three main systems: z-pinch, stellarator and magnetic mirror. The current leading designs are the tokamak and inertial confinement (ICF) by laser. Both designs are under research at very large scales, most notably the ITER tokamak in France, and the National Ignition Facilitylaser in the United States. Researchers are also studying other designs that may offer cheaper approaches. Among these alternatives there is increasing interest in magnetized target fusionand inertial electrostatic confinement, and new variations of the stellarator.
Fusion power - Wikipedia
-

 

[watchingfromafar]

Anyway, you get what you pay for, and if you hire a competent engineer, it could cost a nice roll of cash

There are two phases to this.
(1) the energy to run the system
(2) the energy produced by the system
At the moment I am offering $1,000 to spend two hours running the basic numbers.
Currently I have three (3) mechanical engineers who are willing to run the numbers.
I gave them 30 days to do their thing. None of the Engineers know I have two others doing the same thing.
When they deliver their report I'll post them here.
Until then, I wish the best to you and yours for all time to come.
-

 

[JoeMoma]

So phase 1 is the energy (watts) to run the air pump, and phase 2 is the output energy (watts) of an electric generator turned by your device.

Phase 1 will be a number greater than phase 2.


$3,000 is a nice chunk of change to verify.

 

[JoeMoma]

He's pumping air to the bottom and generating power

The power is the rising force.
I need to calculate the energy needed to pump the air to fill the buckets and the electric energy I get from the turning cable.
Any suggestions-?
-

600 ft = 182.88 meters
Psi at depth = about 1 atmosphere (14.6 psi) per 10 meters
182,88/10= 18.288 atmospheres
18.288 x 14.6 = 267.0048

It would take 267.0048 psi just to fill the hose with air. Not enough information on size or weight of bucket, or weight per foot of cable to calculate additional pressure needed or volume required to fill buckets at required rate, but we're talking about a pretty big compressor which would take more energy to run than you could ever get from your idea.

Also, gases compress with pressure. Air is a gas. Assuming constant temperature, Boyle's law shows P1V1 = P2V2 (The numbers should be subscripts) The air pressure at the surface of the water is 1 atmosphere. Using Bulldog's calculation, the air 600 feet under water is at a pressure of 19 atmospheres (1 atmosphere at sea level + 18 atmospheres for being 600ft under water) Point is, the volume of the air in the bucket at 600 ft under water will expand by a factor of 19 as it travels the 600 ft journey to the water's surface. So if the bucket is completely filled at 600 ft below sea level, most of the air will spill out of the bucket long before the bucket reaches the surface of the water.

Just wondering if any of the 3 engineers will consider Boyles law when they come up with their numbers?

 

[BULLDOG]

He's pumping air to the bottom and generating power

The power is the rising force.
I need to calculate the energy needed to pump the air to fill the buckets and the electric energy I get from the turning cable.
Any suggestions-?
-

600 ft = 182.88 meters
Psi at depth = about 1 atmosphere (14.6 psi) per 10 meters
182,88/10= 18.288 atmospheres
18.288 x 14.6 = 267.0048

It would take 267.0048 psi just to fill the hose with air. Not enough information on size or weight of bucket, or weight per foot of cable to calculate additional pressure needed or volume required to fill buckets at required rate, but we're talking about a pretty big compressor which would take more energy to run than you could ever get from your idea.

Also, gases compress with pressure. Air is a gas. Assuming constant temperature, Boyle's law shows P1V1 = P2V2 (The numbers should be subscripts) The air pressure at the surface of the water is 1 atmosphere. Using Bulldog's calculation, the air 600 feet under water is at a pressure of 19 atmospheres (1 atmosphere at sea level + 18 atmospheres for being 600ft under water) Point is, the volume of the air in the bucket at 600 ft under water will expand by a factor of 19 as it travels the 600 ft journey to the water's surface. So if the bucket is completely filled at 600 ft below sea level, most of the air will spill out of the bucket long before the bucket reaches the surface of the water.

Just wondering if any of the 3 engineers will consider Boyles law when they come up with their numbers?

That would make the project closer to feasible because you wouldn't have to pump a full bucket of air to be considered a full bucket, but still, the energy required to pump even the reduced amount of air would be much more than you could ever expect to recover.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

He's pumping air to the bottom and generating power

The power is the rising force.
I need to calculate the energy needed to pump the air to fill the buckets and the electric energy I get from the turning cable.
Any suggestions-?
-

600 ft = 182.88 meters
Psi at depth = about 1 atmosphere (14.6 psi) per 10 meters
182,88/10= 18.288 atmospheres
18.288 x 14.6 = 267.0048

It would take 267.0048 psi just to fill the hose with air. Not enough information on size or weight of bucket, or weight per foot of cable to calculate additional pressure needed or volume required to fill buckets at required rate, but we're talking about a pretty big compressor which would take more energy to run than you could ever get from your idea.

Also, gases compress with pressure. Air is a gas. Assuming constant temperature, Boyle's law shows P1V1 = P2V2 (The numbers should be subscripts) The air pressure at the surface of the water is 1 atmosphere. Using Bulldog's calculation, the air 600 feet under water is at a pressure of 19 atmospheres (1 atmosphere at sea level + 18 atmospheres for being 600ft under water) Point is, the volume of the air in the bucket at 600 ft under water will expand by a factor of 19 as it travels the 600 ft journey to the water's surface. So if the bucket is completely filled at 600 ft below sea level, most of the air will spill out of the bucket long before the bucket reaches the surface of the water.

Just wondering if any of the 3 engineers will consider Boyles law when they come up with their numbers?

That would make the project closer to feasible because you wouldn't have to pump a full bucket of air to be considered a full bucket, but still, the energy required to pump even the reduced amount of air would be much more than you could ever expect to recover.

That would make the project closer to feasible because you wouldn't have to pump a full bucket of air to be considered a full bucket,

You would, but at that depth it would be compressed to a smaller volume.

but still, the energy required to pump even the reduced amount of air would be much more than you could ever expect to recover.

Correct.

 

[watchingfromafar]

Just wondering if any of the 3 engineers will consider Boyles law when they come up with their numbers?

I have passed along your post just to make sure this factor is taken into account. Since I created this gizmo I am going to include this in my original model.
JoeMoma; thanks
-

 

[watchingfromafar]

Just wondering if any of the 3 engineers will consider Boyles law when they come up with their numbers?

One possible remedy to this problem is to design the buckets to expand equalizing the pressure inside and out which would make the lifting force increase as the buckets rise.

Any comments-? -

 

[JoeMoma]

Just wondering if any of the 3 engineers will consider Boyles law when they come up with their numbers?

One possible remedy to this problem is to design the buckets to expand equalizing the pressure inside and out which would make the lifting force increase as the buckets rise.

Any comments-? -

They would have to expand a lot. balloons?