|
|
Post by OziRiS on Sept 5, 2017 21:07:02 GMT
I think you are thinking of the 1883 eruption of the island of Krakatoa. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1883_eruption_of_KrakatoaEruptions of Krakatoa in the 15th and 16 century along with several other volcanos, combined with low solar output are believed to be major causes of the little ices age in the mid 2nd millennia AD. Also, the 1815 eruption of mount Tambora is generally considered be the main cause of the 1816 "Year without a summer." These would be peanuts compared to Yellowstone going. How much energy would we be talking about needing to extract? That is my biggest fear. You go all out but are not able to make a dent in the heat energy below there. Would make for an interesting Science fiction story. That's the one  Yes, there's a chance you could never extract enough energy to keep the volcano dormant, but as long as you make sure you don't "provoke it" into an early eruption, it's worth a try, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 5, 2017 23:52:45 GMT
I think you are thinking of the 1883 eruption of the island of Krakatoa. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1883_eruption_of_KrakatoaEruptions of Krakatoa in the 15th and 16 century along with several other volcanos, combined with low solar output are believed to be major causes of the little ices age in the mid 2nd millennia AD. Also, the 1815 eruption of mount Tambora is generally considered be the main cause of the 1816 "Year without a summer." These would be peanuts compared to Yellowstone going. How much energy would we be talking about needing to extract? That is my biggest fear. You go all out but are not able to make a dent in the heat energy below there. Would make for an interesting Science fiction story. That's the one Yes, there's a chance you could never extract enough energy to keep the volcano dormant, but as long as you make sure you don't "provoke it" into an early eruption, it's worth a try, isn't it? I'm not so sure poking at the earth's crust in a place like Yellowstone is a good idea. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 6, 2017 2:11:39 GMT
That's the one Yes, there's a chance you could never extract enough energy to keep the volcano dormant, but as long as you make sure you don't "provoke it" into an early eruption, it's worth a try, isn't it? I'm not so sure poking at the earth's crust in a place like Yellowstone is a good idea. no poking required to get geothermal from yellowstone... old faithful might not be the same with a turbine stuck on top, though. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 6, 2017 2:59:13 GMT
no poking required to get geothermal from yellowstone... old faithful might not be the same with a turbine stuck on top, though. The lights will be on at 9:30, 11:15, 1:00, 2:45, 4:30, 6:15 |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Sept 6, 2017 5:52:10 GMT
That's the one Yes, there's a chance you could never extract enough energy to keep the volcano dormant, but as long as you make sure you don't "provoke it" into an early eruption, it's worth a try, isn't it? I'm not so sure poking at the earth's crust in a place like Yellowstone is a good idea. Neither am I, since I'm neither a geologist or seismologist, but don't you think it might worth letting those kind of people try to figure out if it could be? I'm not saying they should just stick a drill in there and see what happens. Just that they should consider it and do the calculations and simulations to see if it's feasible. If it turns out it is, they could potentially solve two problems in one go. |
|
|
|
Post by ponytail61 on Sept 6, 2017 5:57:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 6, 2017 11:05:53 GMT
Not much different then our current efforts at preventing climate change. There's no way of knowing if what we are doing is actually accomplishing anything. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 8, 2017 9:00:49 GMT
We have old underground Coal seams in the UK.
The temp down there is several shades of warmer than an English summer.
I have questioned that surely a pumped water system and a thermal exchange at the surface couldnt provide a heat source for some kind of energy reclamation system.?..
"Oh, now, no one thought of that before".
Erm?.. I is just a truck driver, dont you be telling me I am the first to think that one through?.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 8, 2017 16:46:03 GMT
We have old underground Coal seams in the UK. The temp down there is several shades of warmer than an English summer. I have questioned that surely a pumped water system and a thermal exchange at the surface couldnt provide a heat source for some kind of energy reclamation system.?.. "Oh, now, no one thought of that before". Erm?.. I is just a truck driver, dont you be telling me I am the first to think that one through?. The amount of power you can extract from a thermodynamic system is a function of the temperature difference between your source and sink temperatures. Unless you have a large temperature differential, it's difficult to extract a large amount of power even though you may have a large quantity of heat available. A sterling engine is good at getting power from a low temperature differential system. A turbine is not. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 8, 2017 22:43:24 GMT
We have old underground Coal seams in the UK. The temp down there is several shades of warmer than an English summer. I have questioned that surely a pumped water system and a thermal exchange at the surface couldnt provide a heat source for some kind of energy reclamation system.?.. "Oh, now, no one thought of that before". Erm?.. I is just a truck driver, dont you be telling me I am the first to think that one through?. The amount of power you can extract from a thermodynamic system is a function of the temperature difference between your source and sink temperatures. Unless you have a large temperature differential, it's difficult to extract a large amount of power even though you may have a large quantity of heat available. A sterling engine is good at getting power from a low temperature differential system. A turbine is not. or a hydronic heating system. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 9, 2017 0:12:22 GMT
Yes, that is an excellent way of getting heat from lower temperature sources. A heat pump is another. But I was referring more to converting the heat to mechanical energy to generate electricity.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 9, 2017 0:42:30 GMT
Yes, that is an excellent way of getting heat from lower temperature sources. A heat pump is another. But I was referring more to converting the heat to mechanical energy to generate electricity. below a certain point, your conversion losses will make it less than worthwhile. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 9, 2017 13:51:28 GMT
We have old underground Coal seams in the UK. The temp down there is several shades of warmer than an English summer. I have questioned that surely a pumped water system and a thermal exchange at the surface couldnt provide a heat source for some kind of energy reclamation system.?.. "Oh, now, no one thought of that before". Erm?.. I is just a truck driver, dont you be telling me I am the first to think that one through?. The amount of power you can extract from a thermodynamic system is a function of the temperature difference between your source and sink temperatures. Unless you have a large temperature differential, it's difficult to extract a large amount of power even though you may have a large quantity of heat available. A sterling engine is good at getting power from a low temperature differential system. A turbine is not. No Turbine here. Think on it this way... take all the houses near that have central heating, take all of their central heating pumps, and replace them with one LONG run of super-insulated pipework and a suitable pump the same rating as the combined pumps taken away. Pump that water.... Pump down water to a hot ex coal face, or whatever else that was being mined, collect heat, circulate it around all those houses, on a CT circuit, with self isolating valves on all radiators set to a "reasonable" room temp. You could include heat exchange units to get the most from a small difference in heat, returning cold water to the mine feed. All houses have a hot water feed and a cold water return. Small idea, in Summer, run it "Backwards", and use the underground as a heat store from the hot water pumped down by "Air conditioning" units?. Yeah its going to cost a lot in the initial pipe run. But minus the cost of all those houses spending on one winters fuel.... then two winters... how long before its paid for its self?. And no one is using any power other than pumping water. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 9, 2017 14:11:50 GMT
The amount of power you can extract from a thermodynamic system is a function of the temperature difference between your source and sink temperatures. Unless you have a large temperature differential, it's difficult to extract a large amount of power even though you may have a large quantity of heat available. A sterling engine is good at getting power from a low temperature differential system. A turbine is not. No Turbine here. Think on it this way... take all the houses near that have central heating, take all of their central heating pumps, and replace them with one LONG run of super-insulated pipework and a suitable pump the same rating as the combined pumps taken away. Pump that water.... Pump down water to a hot ex coal face, or whatever else that was being mined, collect heat, circulate it around all those houses, on a CT circuit, with self isolating valves on all radiators set to a "reasonable" room temp. You could include heat exchange units to get the most from a small difference in heat, returning cold water to the mine feed. All houses have a hot water feed and a cold water return. Small idea, in Summer, run it "Backwards", and use the underground as a heat store from the hot water pumped down by "Air conditioning" units?. Yeah its going to cost a lot in the initial pipe run. But minus the cost of all those houses spending on one winters fuel.... then two winters... how long before its paid for its self?. And no one is using any power other than pumping water. that is basically what Klamath Falls did, only with a road de-icing system. I've heard that some buildings have it for heat, in the oldest part of town. |
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Sept 9, 2017 14:23:51 GMT
Sounds like a variation on a geothermal heat pump. My dad installed one of these, so I am familiar with how they work. All you would need to do is invert your control scheme.
I see two major expenses. 1st if drilling the actual wells. That is always the biggest cost by far. 2nd is getting a custom controller to use a hotter than average ground source. Nothing that can't be solved if you have the capitol.
Lots of info out there if you are interested.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 9, 2017 14:32:50 GMT
Sounds like a variation on a geothermal heat pump. My dad installed one of these, so I am familiar with how they work. All you would need to do is invert your control scheme. I see two major expenses. 1st if drilling the actual wells. That is always the biggest cost by far. 2nd is getting a custom controller to use a hotter than average ground source. Nothing that can't be solved if you have the capitol. Lots of info out there if you are interested. it essentially is. no inversion required, assuming the control scheme has both heating and cooling functions. if I ever get to rebuild my rental house, I plan to use the ground underneath as a heat sink for a passive system. it will just need a water-air heat exchanger added to the HVAC system, and connect the pump to the cooling controller. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 9, 2017 15:08:55 GMT
if I ever get to rebuild my rental house, I plan to use the ground underneath as a heat sink for a passive system. it will just need a water-air heat exchanger added to the HVAC system, and connect the pump to the cooling controller. Since you live in a climate that doesn't require a lot of heating and cooling, a system like that should work well for you. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 9, 2017 15:20:26 GMT
Since you live in a climate that doesn't require a lot of heating and cooling, a system like that should work well for you. I need a low of low output heating, but only a little cooling. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 9, 2017 15:31:35 GMT
Since you live in a climate that doesn't require a lot of heating and cooling, a system like that should work well for you. I need a low of low output heating, but only a little cooling. As long as the ground stays relativity warm, a heat pump should work well. I know they don't like to rate heat pumps in terms of being over 100% efficient, but from a money in vs heat output, they run around 300% |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 9, 2017 15:44:39 GMT
I need a low of low output heating, but only a little cooling. As long as the ground stays relativity warm, a heat pump should work well. I know they don't like to rate heat pumps in terms of being over 100% efficient, but from a money in vs heat output, they run around 300% heat pumps work very well, here - they were slow in being adopted, because there used to be little need for cooling, and most people thought of them as air conditioners. they really change the efficiency rating system because they transfer heat instead of converting energy to heat. |
|
