News
Ultra-efficient LED puts out more power than is pumped in
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 5:35 PM | comments (0) |
Ultra-efficient LED puts out more power than is pumped in
MIT physicists have managed to build a light-emitting diode that has an electricalefficiency of more than 100 percent. You may ask, "Wouldn'tthat mean it breaks the first law of thermodynamics?" The answer,happily, is no.
The LED produces 69 picowatts of light using 30 picowatts of power, giving it an efficiency of230 percent. That means it operates above "unity efficiency" --putting it into a category normally occupied by perpetual motionmachines.
However, while MIT's diode puts out more than twice as muchenergy in photons as it's fed in electrons, it doesn't violate theconservation of energy because it appears to draw in heat energyfrom its surroundings instead. When it gets more than 100 percentelectrically-efficient, it begins to cool down, stealingenergy from its environment to convert into more photons.
In slightly more detail, the researchers chose an LED with asmall band gap,and applied smaller and smaller voltages. Every time the voltagewas halved, the electrical power was reduced by a factor of four,but the light power emitted only dropped by a factor of two. Theextra energy came instead from latticevibrations.
Don't miss: Let there be LED: The future of the light bulb
The scientists involved have detailed their discovery in a paper publishedin Physical Review Letters, saying: "Experimentsdirectly confirm for the first time that this behaviour continuesbeyond the conventional limit of unity electrical-to-optical powerconversion efficiency."
69 picowatts of light, of course, is a very small amount -- soyou're not likely to be able to read in bed with one of these LEDs.However, it could have applications in low-power electronics,acting as a thermodynamic heatengine but with fast electrical control.
ECAT Cold Fusion Revolution
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 5:30 PM | comments (0) |
Inventor Andrea Rossi
Andrea Rossi, the ECAT developer, is an Italian inventor who has a Doctor’s Degree in Philosophy from Milan University 1975 (Dottore Magistrale in Filosofia) Università degli studi di Milano 1975) where he conducted his thesis on relativity.
During his twenties, he already started to produce plants to recover energy from waste heat from organic waste and similar sources. At the age of 22, he started his own company in the field of energy. He has always been interested in the production of energy and in the last forty years, he has worked in this field.
But it wasn’t until in 1988 when Fleischmann of the University of Southampton and Pons of the University of Utah, applied to the United States Department of Energy for funding towards a larger series of experiments on what was popularly called cold fusion, that Andrea Rossi became seriously interested in the field. Up to this point Fleischmann & Pons had been funding their experiments using a small device built with $100,000 out-of-pocket money.
The grant proposal was turned over for peer review, and one of the reviewers was Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University. Jones had worked for some time on muon-catalyzed fusion, a known method of inducing nuclear fusion without high temperatures, and had written an article on the topic entitled Cold nuclear fusion. Fleischmann and Pons and co-workers met with Jones and co-workers on occasion in Utah to share research and techniques. During this time, Fleischmann and Pons described their experiments as generating considerable excess energy, because it could not be explained by chemical reactions alone.
They felt that such a discovery could bear significant commercial value and would be entitled to patent protection. Jones, however, was measuring neutron flux, which was not of commercial interest. This findings will have a great influence on the young Andrea Rossi.
In mid-March of 1989, the Pons and Fleischmann paper was published by the Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry. Their announcement drew wide media attention. The 1986 discovery of high-temperature superconductivity had caused the scientific community to be more open to revelations of unexpected scientific results that could have huge economic repercussions and that could be replicated reliably even if they had not been predicted by current theory. Cold fusion was then proposing the counterintuitive idea that a nuclear reaction could be caused to occur inside a chemically bound crystal structure.
However, the US Department of Energy (DOE) formed a panel to investigate cold fusion, which is also called low energy nuclear reactor. They subsequently issued a report in November 1989 that concluded that the results did not present convincing evidence that useful sources of energy would result from the phenomena attributed to cold fusion.This put an end to Pon’s and Fleischmann’s application for DOE funding.
Mr. Rossi was already working in the energy field at that time. He was fascinated with the Pons and Fleischmann discovery and tried to replicate their effect with electrolysis too. Although he did not succeed at that time, the seed in the development of the energy catalyzer fusor, i.e. ECAT, had been planted. He continued working on the ECAT in between his other contracts in power plant production. In 2007, Andrea Rossi arrived at the very critical point in his research and concentrated his time on his invention.
This was not only by chance or sheer luck, but rather a direct result of a long trial and error process where a vast amount of different configurations of the ECAT had been tried. And finally, a stable, reproducible configuration was discovered. Back then, in 2007, Andrea Rossi knew there was no turning back. He instantly realized the need of a 3rd party expert verification. Mainly because of caution since at these energy levels, both gamma radiation and neutron radiation could be lethal. He needed external verification and assurance that the amount of radiation was low enough to be non-hazardous.
Rossi knew he was on to something big, something so powerful it could change the world forever. There was no room for mistakes here. In July 2007 Rossi therefore contacted one of the most respected physics scientists in the Nickel-Hydrogen field, Professor Emeritus Sergio Focardi of the Bologna University. Professor Focardi, who had been researching Nickel-hydrogen phenomenon since early 90’s was intrigued.
Another reason Rossi decided to contact Prof. Focardi was that he felt that he was at a point where all other projects had to be dropped in favor for the ECAT. An invention of this magnitude would require all his focus. For Rossi it was all or nothing. Before putting all eggs in the same basket, he needed to be absolutely 100% percent sure of its capabilities. So Rossi arranged a challenge for Prof. Focardi, telling him “I will give you a prize (size non-disclosed) if you can show me that what I have done is wrong and does not work”. Professor Focardi accepted the challenge immediately and examined the ECAT under great scrutiny for several days in a controlled environment. A few days later he came back disappointed but with a smiling grin on his face telling Rossi that he was sorry (for not winning the prize) and that he believed that the Energy Catalyzer truly worked as stated.
Andrea Rossi then hired Sergio Focardi as a consultant and his work on nickel hydrogen reactions prior with physicist Piantelli proved to be invaluable. Together they looked into the aspect of protecting the environment from the radiations, and to thermalize the radiations to in order to produce heat.
An application in 2008 to patent the device internationally had received an unfavorable preliminary report from the World Intellectual Property Organization at the European Patent Office. It was noted that the description of the device was based on general statements and speculations. EPO also cited numerous deficiencies in both the description and in the evidence provided to support its feasibility. They also found incompatibilities with current scientific theories.
Andrea Rossi’s patent approved by the Italian Office for Patents and Trademarks
In April of 2011, however, an application was approved by the Italian Office for Patents and Trademarks. The agency issued a patent for the invention, valid only in Italy. The Energy Catalyzer’s International, European, and U.S. patent applications are still pending up to this time.
In 2009, Mr. Rossi introduced to the public a process and a device called the Energy Catalyzer. This is a revolutionary process in energy production and is also called low energy nuclear reactions. It could be a breakthrough invention since it can solve some of the energy problems of our planet.
The method does not use or produce radioactive materials. It utilizes nickel and hydrogen. And when the reactor is turned off, after twenty minutes, every kind of radiation is thermalized. What is left are metals like nickel and some copper. The radiation that is produced here are contained inside the box of the reactor which is shielded by lead. These gamma ray radiations are in the range between 50 and 200 KEVS (kiloelectronvolts), which are very low energy radiations. It also has a maximum life of twenty minutes, because they are completely thermalized, which also means that they are transformed into heat. The fact this reactor does not use radioactive materials and do not leave radioactive materials makes it a safe nuclear reactor.
Before going public with his ECAT fusion invention, Andrea Rossi had also manufactured a boiler, using this method, that has heated his factory Ferrara, a small town in Northeast Italy. Since this boiler has heated the factory for about a year, they were able to make experiments in an actual working reactor. The reactor in Ferrara reactor is similar to the modern ECAT that they are making and has a module of about 20 kilowatts. It provides heat to an area that measures about 1000 square feet.
Ferrara is a very cold area in Italy where winter can go on for the duration of five months in a year. With temperatures ranging from 6 to 10 degree Celsius. The reactor was able to provide heat to the office and factory for over a year. This result encouraged Andrea Rossi to make the other modules that later would be tested by other scientists. They are now in the process of building a one megawatt plant.
The 2009 patent application applied for by Andrea Rossi claims a method and apparatus for carrying out nickel and hydrogen exothermal reactions with production of copper. Although the patent cites previous works on cold fusion, Rossi also asserted that it is not cold fusion, but rather LENR, Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction system. Here, the hydrogen is heated at a given temperature with a simple resistor. When the ignition temperature is reached, the energy production process starts where the hydrogen atoms penetrate into the nickel and transform it into copper.
The test on the 14 Jan 2011 was decided upon already in October-November 2010 and was more or less enforced by Prof. Focardi. People from the University of Bologna that was there as outside, private observers and Focardi himself were very eager to make this test, in order to show the world the game changing developments that have been made in a field that, historically, has suffered such bad reputation in mainstream scientific community since Fleischmann–Pons cold fusion research in 1989 failed to deliver replication.
Andrea Rossi himself was very skeptical about such an early test, as he, as an inventor and entrepreneur was more eager to develop the end product than to step forward as a public figure in the scientific community. However, in the end he felt obliged to go along with the testing because the Bologna University has had prominent historic figures such as Nicolaus Copernicus working there and he was impressed that the University was prepared to champion this new technology. After all, University of Bologna is the oldest continually operating university in the world with roots from the 11th century.
One negative aspect of these early tests was that they required a lot of time, and deviated from Rossi’s original research plan and therefore slowed down the product development. Rossi has also been exposed to journalists in the past who are more interested in discrediting him and his research than to objectively explore this new groundbreaking technology.
Today, Andrea Rossi is so tired from all the journalistic inquiries that he has decided, from now on, to let the ECAT talk for itself. He stresses, though, that not all bad has come from these tests; through them he has gotten to know many interesting persons, which several has a Swedish connection. These persons have increased and influenced Andrea Rossi’s appreciation of Sweden tremendously, to some extent because of their scientific approach but also because Andrea Rossi find them to be genuinely warm hearted persons.
This ECAT invention also recieve some skepticism, Discovery Channel analyst Benjamin Radford wrote, citing a physorg.com column, that the method is fishy. On the other hand, Levi, in an interview with Ny Teknik, stated that what has impressed him was that it produced 10 kW of measured energy output, and this output is completely repeatable. He alsdo urged an experiment with continuous operation for at least one or more days.
Another test that lasted for a period of 18 hours, was performed in Bologna, in February 2011, by Levi and Rossi, which was not open to the public. The process was ignited by 1,250 watts for five to ten minutes, and power was then reduced to 80 watts . Cooling was supplied by tap water and flow volume was monitored. As again reported by Ny Teknik, at the start of the experiment, the temperature of the inflowing water was seven degrees Celsius. For a while the outlet temperature was 40 degrees Celsius.
It had a flow rate of about one liter per second, which equates to a peak power of 130 kilowatts. The power output was later stabilized at 15 to 20 kilowatts. In this experiment, Levi stated that all chemical sources are now excluded.
Another ECAT test was done In March 29, 2011 by two renowned Swedish physicists. They were Hanno Essén, an associate professor of theoretical physics and a lecturer at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology and former chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society and Sven Kullander, Professor Emeritus of High Energy Physics at Uppsala University. He is also chairman of the Royal Swedish Academy of Science’s Energy Committee.
Andrea Rossi with Sven Kullander and Hanno Essén
They participated as observers in a test of a smaller version of the Energy Catalyzer. This test ran for six hours with a power output estimated at 4.4 kW. Total energy produced was about 25 kWh. Essen and Kullander later reported that any chemical process should be ruled out for producing 25 kWh from whatever is in a 50 cubic centimeter container. The only alternative explanation they can give is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production.
Two more ECAT demonstrations were held in July 2011. The first one was covered by the Italian 24-hour all-news State-owned television channel Rai News. In this demonstration, an Ny Teknik author attended and tested for some previously noted possibilities of fraud. He calibrated the ammeter, measured the water flow by weighing and calibrated the temperature-sensor probe to confirm that all water is converted to steam. The result was a measurement that showed a net power of between 2.3 and 2.6 kilowatts. The input power was pegged at 300 watts.
By this time, Andrea Rossi’s ECAT invention has attracted a lot of attention. The Italian newspapers Il Sole 24 Ore, Il Tempo, La Stampa, Il Fatto Quotidiano, Rinascita, Il Resto del Carlino and La Republica reported on Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer. Many national Italian radio stations and news magazines , and a 25-minute television documentary on Rai News, have also reported on the Energy Catalyzer. It was also the topic of a series of articles in the Swedish Ny Teknik and an article in German Telepolis.
In Greece, the coverage appeared in the daily financial newspaper Express and on the State-owned New Hellenic Television. In the United States it was covered in EE Times, presented in the Fox News Channel, Discovery News, the Washington Times and in the show Coast to Coast AM. Its coverage about was also aired by the Voice of Russia where Rossi’s involvement in the Petroldragon affair was also mentioned.
Rossi and Focardi’s invention recieved a setback when it was rejected by a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Rossi self-published it in his blog, Journal of Nuclear Physics. Many physicists are skeptical of the method because fusion of nuclei requires very high temperatures according to current knowledge and because fusion should produce very high levels of gamma radiation.
Peter Ekström, a lecturer at the Department of Nuclear Physics at Lund University in Sweden, concluded that the whole story is one big scam, which will be revealed in less than one year. Kjell Aleklett, a physics professor at Uppsala University in Sweden also voiced his skepticism, albet, in a more diplomatic way.
During 2011, the EV World published an audio interview with Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist at NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. Bushnell identified the LENR-field as the most interesting and promising field of energy production. Dr. Kim E. Yeong, a respected physicist from the Purdue University also presented a theoretical explanation on the method.
Rossi has co-founded the company Leonardo Technologies Inc. or LTI, which stocks he later sold. The company has done contracts for the US Department of Energy in the past. At present, Andrea Rossi is back in Miami, Florida presumably producing his Energy Catalyzers there for his company Leonardo Corporation.
In a more recent development, Andrea Rossi made a contract with AmpEnergo, a US company. The latter is to receive royalties on sales of licenses and products built on the Energy Catalyzer, i.e. ECAT, in the Americas.
Some content was originally published at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion
ECAT.COM highly recommends that you watch this excellent documentary about the ECAT and Andrea Rossi.
Particle Annihilation - A Source of Renewable Energy?
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 5:10 PM | comments (0) |
Particle Annihilation - A Source of Renewable Energy?
Florian Ion Petrescu, an engineering PhD and senior lecturer at the Bucharest Polytechnic University in Rumania, has written about a variety of subjects including physics, mechanical engineering, and the development of flight. His books are available through LuLu publishers at http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/petrescuflorian
One of those books, TURN ON THE LIGHTS! describes how the process of particle annihilation, the destructive interference between a particle and its anti-particle, could be used to obtain comparatively cheap and perfectly renewable energy.
Although using the energy of sub-atomic particles, the process would neither necessitate nor create radioactive particles. It would also be much cheaper and simpler to realize than atomic fusion and present-day atomic fission reactors.
Here is a summary, slightly edited, from a communication printed in the January/February 2012 issue of Infinite Energy Magazine.
Obtaining Energy by Annihilation of an Electron with a Positron
by Florian Ion Petrescu Bucharest, Romania
We can obtain renewable, clean, safe, cheap energy by annihilation, for example, of an electron with an anti-electron (positron). An electron and positron are obtained by extracting them from atoms; the extraction consumes a negligible amount of energy. Then, the two particles are brought near one another (collision).
The phenomenon of annihilation occurs when particle rest mass is converted totally into energy (gamma photons). Gamma photons occur as much as needed to retrieve the total energy of the electron and positron (rest energy and kinetic energy); usually one can get two or three gamma particles when we have a low energy annihilation, i.e. two anti-particles with lower energy, each with a little beyond rest mass (the particles are accelerated at a low-speed motion), but we can get more particles when we have a high energy annihilation (i.e. when the particle energy is high and the particles were strongly accelerated before the collision).
The rest energy of an electron-positron pair slightly exceeds 1 MeV which is an extremely large amount of energy from a small particle, comparable with that achieved by the merger of two much larger particles, having a rest mass about 2,000 times higher. Hence the first great advantage of the new method proposed: namely, that the most complex physical process that has so far been tried to obtain particle energy (hot or cold fusion) draws only about a thousandth part of the rest mass of the particle, resulting in the fusion of two particles. Practically, only the energy gap between two particles is freed when their energy is united. The proposed method would be able to extract virtually all the internal energy of the particles that are annihilated.
We started with the electron positron pair because these small particles are more easily extracted from the atoms. The atoms are then immediately regenerated naturally, which makes energy from the annihilation of particles perfectly renewable. A future step will be to test the annihilation between a proton and an anti-proton, because their mass is about 1,800 times higher than that of the electron and positron, resulting in their annihilation energy being about 1,000 times higher. Instead of 1 MeV, 1 GeV is considered as the really obtainable energy, the energy donated by the proton of the hydrogen ion. The energy of an antiproton is considered to be donated by us almost entirely, for now, because to obtain an anti-proton we must accelerate some particles at very high-energy and then collide them. So the real comparison must be made between the deuteron fusion and annihilation processes of a hydrogen ion (proton) with an anti-proton. It will be a difference of energy of about 1,000 times higher per pair of particles used, in favor of the annihilation process.
Practically this realizes the dream of extracting all of the energy from matter.
Another great advantage of this method is that there are no radioactive substances nor radioactive wastes from the process. The process produces only gamma photons (i.e. energy) and possibly other energetic mini particles. The process does not pose any threat to humans and the environment. The energy produced is clean.
The technology required, however, is much simpler than that for nuclear fission or fusion, it is also cheaper and easier to maintain. A great amount of energy is released by the annihilation process (virtually unlimited), and it will be cheap, clean, safe, as well as immediately renewable (sustainable), while using technology that is currently available.We can extract the energy of the rest mass of an electron. For a pair of an electron and a positron, this energy is about 1 MeV. "Synchrotron radiation" as produced in a synchrotron light source is a deliberately produced source of radiation. Electrons are accelerated to high speeds in several stages to achieve a final energy (typically in the GeV range).
We need two synchrotrons, a synchrotron for electrons and another that accelerates positrons. The particles must be collided, after they are accelerated to an optimal energy level. All the energy is collected at the exit of the synchrotrons, after the collision of the opposite particles. We will recover the accelerating energy, and in addition we also collect the rest energy of the electrons and positrons.
At a rate of 1019 electrons/s we obtain an energy of about 7 GWh/year, even if only half of the possible collisions are produced. This high rate can be obtained with 60 pulses per minute and 1019 electrons per pulse, or with 600 pulses per minute and 1018 electrons per pulse. If we increase the flow rate 1,000 times, we can have a power of about 7 TWh/year. This type of energy can be a complement to fusion energy, and together they must replace the energy obtained by burning hydrocarbons.
Advantages of the annihilation of an electron with a positron, compared with nuclear fission reactors, are the absence of radioactive waste, and a much lessened risk (no explosion or chain reaction). Energy from the rest mass of the electron is more easily controlled compared with the fusion reaction, cold or hot.
There will be no need for enriched radioactive fuel (as in nuclear fission), for deuterium, lithium and accelerated neutrons (like in cold fusion), or of extremely high temperatures and pressures (as in hot fusion).
Evacuated Tube Travel To Replace Trains, Planes And Automobiles?
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 5:00 PM | comments (0) |
Evacuated Tube Travel To Replace Trains, Planes And Automobiles?
Some people spend their life watching the tube, but Daryl Oster is spending his trying to get people to travel in one.With experience that includes farming; marine, aeronautical and mechanical design and certification; and stock-trading, Oster is now trying to engineer the biggest change in transportation since the invention of the car cup holder: Evacuated Tube Travel.
To be fair, Evacuated Tube Travel might be even bigger — Oster is proposing uisng magnetic levitation to send car-sized capsules through giant long vacuum tubes at speeds of up to 4,000 miles per hour.
The passenger vehicle is pressurized and has plenty of air, but moves through the airless tube on a magnetic track and all movement is controlled by manipulating the magnetic forces that are at play between the track and the capsule, according to Discovery.
That means the approximately 8,000-mile trip from Washington, D.C., to Beijing might take two hours, compared to the 14 hours it currently takes, not counting layovers.
And, he claims, the cost for the trip would only be $100.
Some people look at what Oster is proposing and think of the pneumatic tubes used at banks to transport cash and checks to car customers, but Oster says the real inspiration came from the great beyond.
“I was looking at how the moon moves around the Earth so fast and the perpetual motion that exists with all the planets,” Oster told HuffPost Weird News moments before presenting his concept to California state officials in hopes of getting permission to build the first 3-mile track on a state right-of-way.
Oster sees the tubes being routed along current freeway right-of-ways to avoid congestion, but says building above ground will be the most cost-effective solution at first.
“Building across water will be the most expensive part, but even if you go from Washington to Beijing, you only need to build 90 miles of track across the Bering Strait,” he said.
The idea of traveling by capsule may sound claustrophobic, but Oster’s ET3 consortium claims that the transport would provide more room per passenger than airplanes or cars, and TVs could be provided to “provide distraction from negative thoughts,” Gadling reported.
In addition, each tube would be constructed with emergency escape hatches and EMT facilities in case of emergency. Likewise, the braking system would be automatic with multiple backups, unlike, the website points out, the Springfield monorail.
Oster believes ETT is a cheaper alternative to other forms of transportation because it uses lighter, stronger materials. For instance, a 400-pound-capsule can hold up to 800 pounds and says he could get a sample track up in a year that only costs 25 percent of constructing a freeway.
“Also, it will be possible to ship goods and services the size of a single pallet without having to load up a full truck,” Oster said.
Oster and his team are selling licenses for the rights to build the tracks and tubes, but says the ultimate network will need both private and public funding. He also plans to start a Kickstarter campaign in hopes of raising funds for a documentary about ETT.
Wind Power Without the Blades
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 4:50 PM | comments (0) |
By Alyssa Danigelis
Noise from wind turbine blades, inadvertent bat and bird kills and even the way wind turbines look have made installing them anything but a breeze. New York design firm Atelier DNA has an alternative concept that ditches blades in favor of stalks. Resembling thin cattails, the Windstalks generate electricity when the wind sets them waving. The designers came up with the idea for the planned city Masdar, a 2.3-square-mile, automobile-free area being built outside of Abu Dhabi. Atelier DNA’s "Windstalk"project came in second in the Land Art Generator competition a contest sponsored by Madsar to identify the best work of art that generates renewable energy from a pool of international submissions.
The proposed design calls for 1,203 "“stalks," each 180-feet high with concrete bases that are between about 33- and 66-feet wide. The carbon-fiber stalks, reinforced with resin, are about a foot wide at the base tapering to about 2 inches at the top. Each stalk will contain alternating layers of electrodes and ceramic discs made from piezoelectric material, which generates a current when put under pressure. In the case of the stalks, the discs will compress as they sway in the wind, creating a charge.
“The idea came from trying to find kinetic models in nature that could be tapped to produce energy,” explained Atelier DNA founding partner Darío Núñez-Ameni.
In the proposal for Masdar, the Windstalk wind farm spans 280,000 square feet. Based on rough estimates, said Núñez-Ameni the output would be comparable to that of a conventional wind farm covering the same area.
“Our system is very efficient in that there is no friction loss associated with more mechanical systems such as conventional wind turbines,” he said.
Each base is slightly different, and is sloped so that rain will funnel into the areas between the concrete to help plants grow wild. These bases form a sort of public park space and serve a technological purpose. Each one contains a torque generator that converts the kinetic energy from the stalk into energy using shock absorber cylinders similar to the kind being developed by Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Levant Power .
Wind isn’t constant, though, so Núñez-Ameni says two large chambers below the whole site will work like a battery to store energy. The idea is based on existing hydroelectric pumped storage systems. Water in the upper chamber will flow through turbines to the lower chamber, releasing stored energy until the wind starts up again.
The top of each tall stalk has an LED lamp that glows when the wind is blowing -- more intensely during strong winds and not all when the air is still. The firm anticipates that the stalks will behave naturally, vibrating and fluttering in the air.
“Windstalk is completely silent, and the image associated with them is something we're already used to seeing in a field of wheat or reeds in a marsh. Our hope is that people living close to them will like to walk through the field -- especially at night -- under their own, private sky of swarming stars,” said Núñez-Ameni.
After completion, a Windstalk should be able to produce as much electricity as a single wind turbine, with the advantage that output could be increased with a denser array of stalks. Density is not possible with conventional turbines, which need to be spaced about three times the rotor's diameter in order to avoid air turbulence. But Windstalks work on chaos and turbulence so they can be installed much closer together, said Núñez-Ameni.
Núñez-Ameni also reports that the firm is currently working on taking the Windstalk idea underwater. Called Wavestalk, the whole system would be inverted to harness energy from the flow of ocean currents and waves. The firm’s long-term goal is to build a large system in the United States, either on land or in the water.
New materials from old materials
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 4:40 PM | comments (0) |
Welcome to the Captive Column Web Site. You have just stumbled upon one of the best-kept secrets of the 20th century!
In a nutshell, the Captive Column is a breakthrough in construction technology. It was invented in 1965 by an American and has the following attributes:
It can be used to make just about anything: airplanes, boats, bridges, light poles -- you name it.It is incredibly strong for its weight, regardless of the materials used for its construction (the beam in the photos above was made of balsa wood and fiberglass). This makes it much more efficient than comparable construction techniques.It can be amazingly cheap to make either by hand labor or by machine.It can be made in factories or on site.These are just some of the properties of the Captive Column, so if all this is true, then where has it been for the last 32+ years? Only now, with the rise of the Internet, can you be properly informed about this remarkable invention. Everything in this web site is true, but at this point only the surface of the Captive Column story has been scratched. For example, each event in the Time Line has an extensive story behind it, so this web site will be fleshed out as time permits. Be sure to come back from time to time for updates.
The Captive Column concept has been published many times. Unfortunately, the media has downplayed its potential, and in some cases downright trashed it or refused to publish it at all. For example, the photos you see at the top of this page were taken at one of the first public demonstrations of the Captive Column. They, and many others like them, were always made available to publications prior to a story being written up. In many cases, reporters took their own photos like these at similar demonstrations. Why does the media refuse to publish such unbelievable photo combinations? Take a look at the rest of this web site and decide for yourself.
One Planet One Engine
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 4:30 PM | comments (0) |
How It WorksThe Cyclone Engine is a Rankine Cycle heat regenerative external combustion engine, otherwise known as a “Schoell Cycle” engine. It creates mechanical energy by heating and cooling water in a closed-loop, piston-based engine system. The process looks like this:
HEAT PROCESS
1. Fuel is atomized and injected into the patented centrifugal combustion chamber (shown as lifted off the engine block for better viewing), where a spark ignites the fuel-air mixture into a flame that spins around the heat coils. Thermocouples (not pictured) control the duration of combustion to keep the heat in the combustion chamber at a constant temperature.
2. Water contained in the coils becomes super-heated steam (up to 1200°F) in as little as 5 seconds from start up which is (a) piped to the cylinders, (b) where it enters through a patent-pending valve system (not pictured). Note, valve timing mechanisms regulate how much steam enters the cylinders – the longer the cut-off the greater the torque and acceleration.
MECHANICAL PROCESS
3. Steam enters the six radial-configured cylinders under pressures up to 3200 psi to push the pistons down in sequence. Note, no motor oil is used – water is both the working fluid and engine lubricant. Also, because of the valve design, the engine starts without the need of a starter motor.
4. The rotating action of the pistons connected through a patent-pending spider bearing (not pictured) turns the crank shaft. Note, because the greatest amount of torque occurs at the first rotation, the shaft can be directly connected to a drive train without a transmission.
COOLING PROCESS
5. Steam escapes the cylinders through exhaust ports and (a) enters the patent-pending condensing unit where it turns back into water, and (b) collects in a sealed pan at the bottom of the condenser. Note, this is a closed-loop system – the water does not need to be replaced or topped-off.
6. Blowers spin fresh air around the condenser to speed the cooling process.
REGENERATIVE PROCESS
7. (a) Air which has been pre-heated from the condensing unit, (b) continues up to a second heat exchanger located in the exhaust port of the combustion chamber, further pre-heating the air used for combustion while also cooling the exhaust fumes (to about 320°F).
8. A high pressure pump (not pictured) pipes water from the collecting pan to the heat coils (a) via heat exchangers surrounding each of the cylinders (only one pictured), and then (b) to the center of the coils to start the heat cycle again.
Why It's Better
Reason 1: All-fuel
A traditional gas or diesel powered internal combustion engine ignites fuel under high pressure inside its cylinders – a explosive process that requires precise fuel to air ratios. The Cyclone Engine is dramatically different. It burns its fuel in an external combustion chamber. Heat from this process is used to turn water into steam, which is what powers the engine. (See: How it Works)
Because of the way we burn fuel – in an external combustion chamber under atmospheric pressure -- we have incredible flexibility as to the fuel we use. In combustion tests we have used fuels derived from orange peels, palm oil, cottonseed oil, algae, used motor oil and fryer grease, as well as traditional fossil fuels … none of which required any modification to our engine. We have also burned propane, butane, natural gas and even powdered coal.
What does this mean? Well, imagine having the choice to run your car on gasoline one day and 100% pure biodiesel the next, or even a mixture of the two. The Cyclone Engine can provide consumers with the power to use fuels that are less expensive, more plentiful and locally produced. This is better for our economy, national security and global environment.
Additionally, we have built engines that don’t burn any fuel at all. Instead, we can recycle the heat from other sources such as ovens, furnaces, exhaust pipes or even solar collectors – thermal energy that would otherwise be wasted into the environment. Our Waste Heat Engine harvests this external heat to produce mechanical energy which, in turn, can run an electric generator. For more info
Reason 2: Earth-friendly
Several aspects of the Cyclone make it more eco-friendly than internal combustion engines.
Fuel Choice: The Cyclone Engine can run on 100% biofuels (i.e., it does not require a 15% or less mixture with fossil fuels), and these new sources can provide true carbon-neutral alternatives to fossil fuels. Longer Burn Time: The Cyclone Engine’s patented cyclonic combustion chamber allows for a longer burn time, which means that more carbon particles are incinerated before being exhausted.Lower Burn Temps: The Cyclone Engine burns its fuel at low temperatures (about 2200°F), which is below the temperature at which most harmful NOx gases are created. Cooler Exhaust: Exhausted gases run through a heat exchanger before leaving the engine, lowering the temperature at release to about 350 degrees … hundreds of degrees lower than internal combustion exhaust. No Motor Oil: Water (de-ionized) is the Cyclone Engine’s sole lubricating fluid, which means there is no waste oil to change, dispose or leak into the ground. Quieter Run: Internal combustion engines have an explosion that emits supersonic sound waves out the exhaust valves to the atmosphere, requiring a muffler system. The Cyclone’s exhaust is virtually noise-free. All these benefits are achieved without costly and complicated exhaust-tempering equipment such as catalytic converters. Clean, cool and quiet is the very nature of the Cyclone Engine.
Algae fuel is an attractive choice for the Cyclone engine as it requires little or no refining to burn clean and efficiently compared to other fuels and will be a renewable source of energy for years to come.
Reason 3: High Efficiencies
The Cyclone Engine is a highly efficient external combustion engine, with thermal efficiencies nearing the top diesel engines on the market today. Higher efficiency means less fuel required to produce the same work.
We achieve these high efficiencies through several processes:
Heat Regeneration – The design innovations of the Cyclone Engine significantly reduce the heat losses in a process called heat regeneration. Such innovations include:
Vapor exiting the piston ports is used to pre-heat water entering the main heat exchanger
Combustion intake air is pre-heated in two stages by:
a. Passing over the steam-cooling condenser, and then
b. Passing through the exhaust port heat exchanger
Cylinder with Heat Regeneration: the Cyclone Engine captures otherwise wasted heat from the cylinders to pre-heat the working fluid (water) before returning to the combustion chamber.
In the manner of a business management model where profitability can be increased by trimming costs, the efficiency of the Cyclone Engine is cumulatively increased by actively addressing sources of heat losses through innovative design improvements.
These improvements (among others) differentiate our engine from Rankine Cycle engines of the past; and therefore, we have re-designated and patented it as a Schoell Cycle engine.
Super-Critical Fluid - Pressures in the range of 3200 psi with temperatures of about 1200°F cause super-critical vapor to act as a fluid. Maintaining the super-critical pressure in the centrifuge process eliminates heat spikes that can occur during other less efficient types of super-critical processes. At these higher temperatures and pressures, the super-critical 'fluid' carries more heat energy to the motor it powers.
The Cyclone Engine is a piston engine with a special valve mechanism allowing it to operate at fluid pressures, thereby gaining multi- advantages: greater simplicity, reliability and enhanced power. All supercritical fluid is contained within the system of the engine combustion chamber, which adds to the safety of the engine.
High Compression – High pressures allow the cubic capacity of the engine to be small in relation to the horsepower developed. Gas internal combustion engines generally develop one horsepower per 1.5 cubic inches of displacement, whereas the Cyclone can develop 2.5 horsepower per cubic inch.
Lower Cost
The Cyclone Engine is a one-piece unit that travels without an “entourage” of complicated components. Eliminating these subsystems reduces cost, size and weight, while increasing overall efficiency and reliability of the engine. For instance, the Cyclone Engine needs:
No catalytic converter or muffler
No oil pump or motor oil
No transmission or transmission fluid
Overall, the Cyclone Engine has fewer parts to manufacture, assemble and, ultimately, break-down or wear-out. Its components are made of inexpensive, non-exotic materials. As a result, we expect the cost of manufacturing and maintaining the Cyclone Engine will be less expensive than conventional gasoline or diesel engines of comparable power output.
Yes, we said no transmission.
A 350/lb Cyclone Engine of 38-cu/inch displacement develops over 850ft/lbs of starting torque (which is more than necessary to eliminate the transmission). Transpose the decimal to 380 cu/inches and you will appreciate the implications of this technology when a manufacturer scales the Cyclone to a size suitable for heavy road transport. The starting torque of the Cyclone Engine is higher than an electric motor of comparable size, but similar in respect that neither requires a transmission, just a simple forward neutral and reverse lever is required
Cyclone Power Adds A Modern Twist to the Steam Engine
| Posted by arotmm@gmail.com on April 30, 2012 at 4:25 PM | comments (0) |
Posted in Recycling, Waste-to-Energy
Leave comment »
Rating: advertisement 3
inShare 0printinShare3Cyclone Power Technologies, a Pompano Beach, Florida company, focuses on solving our dependence on fossil fuels with its heat regenerative external combustion engines. In a recent press release Cyclone announced that it has received a patent in South Africa for its waste energy recycling engine called the WHE, or the Waste Heat Engine.
The South African patent issued from the national phase filing of World Intellectual Property Organization International Patent Number WO 2010/062375 A2, entitled “Waste Heat Engine” (‘375 Patent). The ‘375 Patent, in turn, corresponds to U.S. Patent Application No. 2010/0107637 also entitled “Waste Heat Engine”.
The ’375 Patent describes a Rankine Cycle heat regenerative external combustion engine, also known as a Schoell Cycle engine. The engine is basically a modern day, high-tech, steam engine with a radial arrangement of cylinders.
Figure 10, below, represents the Waste Heat Engine (WHE) as shown in the ’375 Patent.
According to the ’375 Patent:
Referring to FIG. 3 [below], each cylinder (20) in the radial arrangement includes a reciprocating piston assembly (50), including piston head (52) that moves in a reciprocating motion within the cylinder (20) through a full piston stroke.
Figure 3
This engine works when steam enters the top of each of the six radially arranged cylinders (20) and pushs the pistons (54) downward in sequence.
The rotating action of the pistons connected through the spyder bearing (60) turns the crank shaft (24) in an orbiting motion around the central longitudinal axis of the crankshaft (24).
Steam escapes the cylinders through exhaust ports and is collected in a condensing unit (not shown) where it is turned back into water.
The engine does not use motor oil as water is both the working fluid and the lubricant. The water system is a closed system, meaning the water does not need to be replaced or topped off.
The engine can run on any source of heat, including waste heat from industrial sources. Industrial sources could include glass melting furnaces, cement kilns, incinerators, boilers, steel furnaces, and engine exhaust.
Captured and reused waste heat puts waste to work, is an emission free substitute for fuels or electricity, and can be incorporated into existing infrastructure.
Cyclone recently announced a Teaming Agreement with Enginuity Energy LLC, an innovator and manufacturer of biomass gasifiers. The agreement describes the companies’ “desire to develop and advance the commercialization of a modular 35kWe to 250kWe biomass-to-power generating system.”
Enginuity’s technology converts biomass into thermal energy that can be used by the WHE to produce electricity.
To view a short video on how the Cyclone WHE works, click here.
Article by David Gibbs, appearing courtesy Green Patent Blog.
Easier way for students to maintain good Grades.
| Posted by markanthony102 on April 30, 2012 at 1:30 AM | comments (0) |
Grademaintenance
is now become very difficult for students due to highly advancedlevel
of education. Nevertheless, it’s not a big deal. SolutionInn took
this matter seriously and developed a platform forglobal students,
where a team of highly Qualified Experts is assisting studentsand
resolving their academic queries.