Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Off-Topic > The Lounge
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Closed Thread  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-10-2019, 01:01 PM   #5581 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,224
Thanks: 17,991
Thanked 5,974 Times in 3,631 Posts
electrify

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
Much of the equipment could be made more efficient if there was incentive due to the cost of batteries. For instance, hydraulic pumps run continuously in heavy equipment even if it isn't moving anything. Electrify those pumps and then the speed of the pumps can vary from off, to full speed depending on the demand.

Heavy machinery often has fuel capacity to run for days between refueling. If it's being charged nightly (or better yet, fast swap battery packs), it doesn't need to have days worth of capacity. Instead the battery can be sized to go 1 day, or perhaps as small as whatever is necessary to deliver peak power if packs can be swapped quickly.
Yes!
When I looked at the patent language for the JP Morgan-Chase-Siemens-Caterpillar open pit drag-line shovel,this 'electrifying' theme seemed to leap off the page.
It sounded like the electric motors,directly operating all the cable drum drives,and skipping the pump-to-hydraulic motor,made a jump in efficiency.Kinda like we see on contemporary automobiles,where power steering and belt-driven accessories have been electrified in the name of better fuel efficiency.
And any equipment articulation,which involves gravity-induced,kinetic energy is a candidate for regenerative energy recycling,something impossible/improbable with hydraulics?
AeroStealth had to take his Kabota tractor in for some service work,and while he was there,noticed that some trencher/excavator equipment offered for sale was electric.First he'd seen.
It looks like the opening salvo has been fired in that market.

__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
 
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 04-10-2019, 01:17 PM   #5582 (permalink)
EcoModding Newb
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,900

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 25.55 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 23.74 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,606
Thanked 3,110 Times in 2,314 Posts
I was going to mention how hydraulic systems in autos are being replaced with electric. My Prius has no belt-driven accessories (or belt). Electric brake booster, electric power steering, electric AC...

Hydraulic systems are expensive and need frequent maintenance, and they aren't as efficient as a directly driven system. Trains use electric motors and have extreme torque/power requirements over a range of speeds. It seems many other things traditionally moved by hydraulic systems could be electrified. Not only would it be more efficient, but it might be cheaper in the long run due to eliminating maintenance of hydraulic systems.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!

Last edited by redpoint5; 04-10-2019 at 01:55 PM..
 
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (04-10-2019)
Old 04-10-2019, 01:19 PM   #5583 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Missoula, MT
Posts: 2,087

Dark Egg - '12 VW Touareg TDI Sport AWD
90 day: 25.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 176
Thanked 874 Times in 597 Posts
Electric forklifts are widespread but mainly because they work indoors. We also have many electric "mules" to tow equipment around. Excavators actually sit in a small area for a long time, they could separate the power supply battery into a "trailer" like pod on it's own wheels. They could have multiple pods that go back to a charging station on their own to recharge without having to move the entire bulk of the machine. The pods could even call for a replacement and autonomously move to and from the charging station giving just a short stoppage on the machine.
 
The Following User Says Thank You to Hersbird For This Useful Post:
aerohead (04-10-2019)
Old 04-10-2019, 02:56 PM   #5584 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,224
Thanks: 17,991
Thanked 5,974 Times in 3,631 Posts
a carbon capture pilot plant,British Columbia

The October 2018 Motor Trend,page 24,offered a 1-page article,by Frank Marcus,about a three-year-old Stacked direct air capture (DAC),CO2-to-gasoline pilot plant in British Columbia.
Harvard Professor,David Keith is the founder of Carbon Engineering's plant,and Bill Gates has been underwriting the venture.
The facility pulls carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and converts it to liquid fuel.
Dr. Keith has incorporated elements from cooling towers,pulp/paper mills,water treatment,gold extraction,and the Fischer-Tropsch gas-to-liquid technology.
*30% of energy is used to scrub the carbon from the air,and the other 70% is to produce hydrogen to combine into the long chain hydrocarbon.
*When scaled for commercial production,the facility is targeting 300,000 metric tonnes per year scrubbing and 2,000-barrels gasoline per day.
*4,195,205 CFM of air will flow through the tower.
*They'll harvest 300-ppmv of the 400 ppmv carbon at about zero% efficiency of the air stream,as we're talking about 300ppmv out of 1-million ppmv.
*Total energy for the entire process is about 6.5-MWh/metric tonne.
*They'll use wind and solar for the electricity to run the plant.
*It would take 4,909 of these plants to cover carbon emissions for America's light vehicle fleet,and 31.912 GWh/year.
*The thermal efficiency of the plant is around 45%.
*every 100 units of energy out requires 55 units of energy in.
*The feedstock is free.
*The Earth boundary layer is free.
*After 5-10-years the input energy will be free.
*There won't be any grid losses,as power is generated onsite.
*Potassium and calcium used in carbon capture the will be perpetually recycled.
*Before breakeven,the renewable power will be 3.569-cents per kWh.
*After breakeven,this power will cost them 1.446-cents per kWh.
*For what they can sell the fuel for,it will be competitive on a carbon-intensity basis,as defined under California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard,as compared to corn ethanol.
*If it weren't for the renewable power,they probably couldn't pull this off.
*This technology appears to be the most impressive and doable,as Frank Marcus has seen so far.
*Carbon Engineering's cost projections are listed in the Joule energy journal.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
 
Old 04-10-2019, 05:39 PM   #5585 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 8,665

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 210
Thanked 2,862 Times in 2,238 Posts
Sounds like a good application for nuclear power.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
 
The Following User Says Thank You to oil pan 4 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (04-13-2019)
Old 04-10-2019, 09:17 PM   #5586 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 16,061
Thanks: 4,213
Thanked 5,405 Times in 4,303 Posts
Nuclear and wind/solar/tidal need to be frenemies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird
The pods could even call for a replacement and autonomously move to and from the charging station giving just a short stoppage on the machine.
Go the extra step and make them hot-swappable.

There're three articles from March at Cool Planet I need to catch up on.

https://www.coolplanet.com/media/news/
__________________
.

Who controls the memes
Controls the Universe

_________________
 
Old 04-11-2019, 06:00 AM   #5587 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
sendler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Syracuse, NY USA
Posts: 2,935

Honda CBR250R FI Single - '11 Honda CBR250R
90 day: 105.14 mpg (US)

2001 Honda Insight stick - '01 Honda Insight manual
90 day: 60.68 mpg (US)

2009 Honda Fit auto - '09 Honda Fit Auto
90 day: 38.51 mpg (US)

PCX153 - '13 Honda PCX150
90 day: 104.48 mpg (US)

2015 Yamaha R3 - '15 Yamaha R3
90 day: 80.94 mpg (US)

Ninja650 - '19 Kawasaki Ninja 650
90 day: 72.57 mpg (US)
Thanks: 326
Thanked 1,312 Times in 966 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
*The thermal efficiency of the plant is around 45%.
*every 100 units of energy out requires 55 units of energy in.
???
Perpetual Motion?
 
The Following User Says Thank You to sendler For This Useful Post:
aerohead (04-13-2019)
Old 04-13-2019, 03:16 PM   #5588 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,224
Thanks: 17,991
Thanked 5,974 Times in 3,631 Posts
youtube

Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
This is in Nieuwegein, right?

I knew he would win as soon as I saw the Democratic opponent name-check Pepe the frog from the podium. Shadilay, remember?

For some reason, this morning Suspicious 0bservers pointed back to the February 2019 video on Fatal Flaw In Climate Change Science, with emphasis on the anti-pollution aspect.


Temperature is only one threat to our comfort and safety.
I watched for 4-minutes.
When he went to 1979,I lost interest.
The solar insolation data up to that time was off my an order of magnitude,and subsequent modelling wasn't accomplished with any data recorded before 1999.The early radiometers/data weren't accurate enough.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 9-minutes,we're into space weather.Bear in mind that 'climate' is only 17-kilometers high.Other than what happens in the lower stratosphere,what happens above doesn't impact the tropopause,and on down to the Earth's surface.
Also,the ozone layer filters out quite a bit of the solar spectra arriving from space,allowing only certain bandwidths to penetrate,which are converted to long-wave infrared,then partially captured by greenhouse gases as they try and make it to space.
Byproducts of cosmic ray bombardment do affect cloud condensation nuclei and the stratospheric albedo,but this is accounted for in the climate models as well as water vapor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 25-minutes now and he's talking about space weather coupling to climate and so far,in the peer-reviewed science journals there's no mention of space weather having anything to do with climate other than what I've already mentioned.
Convection is responsible for the vertical mixing of the 17-km air column.A good supercell can punch upwards of 22-km,bringing a lot of energy with it.
I'll have to leave this here for another week,as Saturday is the only day a week that I have available audio.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 30-minutes and solar insolation and medium-energy cosmic particles are responsible for climate change.
*Solar irradiance is not a function of sunspots.
*Not all insolation maxima lead to interglacials.
*Some prominant solar insolation peaks are associated with incomplete deglaciations.
*Entire 11-year sunspot cycles can pass with zero change to irradiance.
*Giles Harrison of Reading University researched cosmic-ray-cloud data for 50-years,over the UK,and found a small,but small correlation to climate.
*Light leaving the Sun can move 750-times faster than a solar flare or coronal mass ejection.A solar flare or CME cannot have an immediate affect on Earth.They can take over 4-days to reach Earth.
*Earth is shielded from most cosmic radiation by the solar-wind flow and Interplanetary Magnetic Field.
*Relatively little cosmic radiation reaches Earth's surface.
*Electron-type neutrinos transform to Muon-type neutrinos and go undetected unless with a Gallium detector.
*Tau-type neutrinos can transform to Muon-type,and go undetected unless by a Gallium type detector.
*Medium-energy electrons would never make it through the atmosphere.
*The atmosphere is completely opaque to X-ray radiation,it could never make it to the surface of Earth.
*The most important solar-Earth climate coupling goes unmentioned in the video.
*Space weather has very little to do with Climate,as it happens around 400-miles above the climate.
*There are 2.4-million -year solar cycles.
*There are two,1.2-million-year solar cycles
*There is a 100,000-year solar cycle
*There is a 96,000-year solar cycle
*There is a 41,000-year solar cycle
*There is a 23,000-year solar cycle
All of these need to be accounted for in the video.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
At 32:3 we're at the global electric circuit and climate
*The Local Group circuit?
*The intergalactic circuit?
*The intragalactic circuit?
*The interplanetary circuit?
*The solar/Earth circuit?
*Solar 'fireflies'/Earth circuit?
*Fast Radio Burst circuit?
*Ultra-high-energy cosmic particle circuit?
*Gamma-ray radiation circuit?
Earth is affected by all of them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 36:50,solar irradiance is given as the overriding driver for climate change,whereas the National Academy of Science discounts all solar radiometric data sets recorded before 1994.labelled as deficient enough in accuracy such that they be excluded from models.
We didn't have space-based observations until 1978,and some of those radiometers data was so bad it couldn't be used without fudge factors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
At 37:2 the scientists are guilty of 'falsely modulating down' the impact of irradiance during solar maximums.
*Perhaps the fact has escaped the presenter,that during solar maximums,upper atmospheric photo-chemistry produces an increase in ozone,which blocks the increased ultraviolet radiation from reaching the ground where it would otherwise be converted to infrared,actually 'cooling' things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well,having completed this journey,I'd say that these people are free to think and say whatever they want.
I don't know how more dangerous they could be,and ignorant,and completely out of command of knowledge on the issue.
This is what you get when you stray from peer-reviewed scientific work,and enter the netherworld of untethered junk-science.
The most dangerous men in America.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/

Last edited by aerohead; 04-17-2019 at 01:45 PM.. Reason: add data
 
Old 04-13-2019, 03:40 PM   #5589 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,224
Thanks: 17,991
Thanked 5,974 Times in 3,631 Posts
nuclear

Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
Sounds like a good application for nuclear power.
A number of climate scientists go as far as advocating that almost all existing nuclear power be used towards carbon mitigation,as well as adding additional nuclear capacity.
It's likely a public relations challenge more than anything else.
If this were the 1970s,you'd see full-page ads by the nuclear power industry,advocating for permits and new construction,while explaining the situation in lay terms.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
 
Old 04-13-2019, 04:03 PM   #5590 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 11,224
Thanks: 17,991
Thanked 5,974 Times in 3,631 Posts
perpetual motion

Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler View Post
???
Perpetual Motion?
I probably failed at conveying the inefficiency of their process,by attempting to represent it in the manner that it was communicated in the article.
They pay for the solar and wind hardware,but they never pay for the sunlight or wind.
And the article only accounts for solar and wind-derived energy,not the actual gross solar or wind,pre-conversion inputted energy.
It's a bit of slight of hand.

__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
 
Closed Thread  Post New Thread


Tags
lies, opinion, reality, scam

Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com