Alternative Energy Production - Tidal / Wave etc.

[islandhopper]

Structural fatigue/failure excepted of course.

Wasn't there a song in the early 1970s: .... Rocket(ed) man ... or so ... growing older I forget about the band ...

[Ghostrider]

^^^ That would have been Elton John.

 

Maybe it is a very good thing this prototype is being constructed "a very long way" away.

[greenheatman]

^^^ Unless your ticket is for a Space Shuttle trip, anyplace else is a mere hop, skip and jump these days.

 

What a witty retort!

 

Structural fatigue/failure excepted of course.

 

Carbon fibre laminates will be included with the ceramic ones.

[Malachy]

So this is where he's gone

 

http://www.stuff.co.nz/northland/4079320a1927.html

[sheepshagger]

This is just a conceptual picture.

 

Which generally translates in to plain English as "a rough sketch of the general idea". How about you let folks see the final draft version?

 

I'm not saying it's impossible to design, construct and install a barge that will withstand the worst Shetland's weather and tide can throw at you, and come through unscated time and time again. However, I don't envy you the task you've set yourself in creating such. I do hope you are in a position to finance it's construction and installation privately yourself, and you don't expect to be able to insure it against damage or loss, as no commercial lender or insurer is likely to give you the time of day.

 

Having observed wind and tide move the immovable more times than I care to recall, you will have to forgive me if I reserve having faith in your claims until I can witness them being proven in situ for myself.

 

I've seen quite a few salmon feed barges around shetland, back of oxna is just one that comes to mind it has ridden out a good few storms without any damage, and I guess they have insurance. so I'll pledge £50 and greenheatman can even get a few pints and a plate o mince an tatties on the boat. lets give the guy a chance, the council have blown a lot more money on schemes with a lot less chance of working than this one and thrown money away for no good reason £5 million arguing ower a bridge £10 million on S.O.E.S. only to give it away to a foriegn company And a proposed £500 million on windmills to mention a few what have we got to lose. and as far as 75 bar at 300degC no problems there I regularly work with corrosive liquids at 1000bar and 350degC

[humptygrumpty]

If there was indeed any substance to this Venturi idea , Dont you think someone would have bought it from him by now or someone else would have thought it up / produced / sold it ?

[greenheatman]

If there was indeed any substance to this Venturi idea , Dont you think someone would have bought it from him by now or someone else would have thought it up / produced / sold it ?

 

Gv is not for sale because it is my gift to the planet. The reason why nobody else has thought of it is demonstrated by 'tidal energy expert' Alan Owen of RGU who wrote the following p**h when invited to evaluate my idea

 

The Gentec Proposal

Referring to Figure 1, which is a plot taken from the Gentec spreadsheet, the area under the magenta coloured line represents the power available in the 12.4 hours of one semi-diurnal, simplified UK flood/ebb cycle, and the lower boxed red line represents the power extractable by a 1 Megawatt (MW) rated device over a total period of about 7 hours. The Gentec proposal is that by sequentially configuring turbines and generators to respond to the various levels or bandwidths of flow velocity, then all of the power under the magenta-coloured sine wave is theoretically available for exploitation, as opposed to the relatively small part taken by the 1MW rated device, which is essentially correct.

Tidal Power Generation

The Gentec turbines are stacked into a single support structure, and are serially capable of harvesting all of the energy available up to the peak flow velocity. Assuming that each turbine can take over in sequence and generate over a band of say, 1.5 MW more than its predecessor, the proposal will require 4 x 1.5MW + the initial 1MW to reach 7 MW, which is marginally under the 8MW that the idea proposes can be taken. The first 1MW rated device generates until the red boxed line and stops, whereupon the next turbine rated at 2.5MW takes over and achieves 2.5 MW over about 2.5 hours, the 4MW rated turbine takes over and generates for 0.5 hours, peaking at 3.5 MW for the ebb component of the cycle. Subsequently (for the flood component) the 5.5MW operates for 0.5 hour, and 7MW for 1 hour. The timing is due to the fact that as each turbines predecessor goes offline its successor takes over, resulting in the generation pattern as shown in table 1.

 

 

Figure 1

 

For costing purposes, we will assume that the MCT Seagen turbine, as an installed unit, will cost about £3 million, so for the purpose of simplicity it can be assumed that the initial cost is about £3/Watt (W) installed. On the basis that about half of the installed cost is the support structure, then it is assumed that extra generation equipment can be installed for a very cheap £1.50/W, in which we also include annual service and maintenance costs.

Additionally, it is assumed that the device runs unperturbed for 10 years, by which time it will have generated power for about 700 x 10 of the cycles illustrated in Figure 1.

 

The Gentec Proposal

Referring to Figure 1, which is a plot taken from the Gentec spreadsheet, the area under the magenta coloured line represents the power available in the 12.4 hours of one semi-diurnal, simplified UK flood/ebb cycle, and the lower boxed red line represents the power extractable by a 1 Megawatt (MW) rated device over a total period of about 7 hours. The Gentec proposal is that by sequentially configuring turbines and generators to respond to the various levels or bandwidths of flow velocity, then all of the power under the magenta-coloured sine wave is theoretically available for exploitation, as opposed to the relatively small part taken by the 1MW rated device, which is essentially correct.

Tidal Power Generation

The Gentec turbines are stacked into a single support structure, and are serially capable of harvesting all of the energy available up to the peak flow velocity. Assuming that each turbine can take over in sequence and generate over a band of say, 1.5 MW more than its predecessor, the proposal will require 4 x 1.5MW + the initial 1MW to reach 7 MW, which is marginally under the 8MW that the idea proposes can be taken. The first 1MW rated device generates until the red boxed line and stops, whereupon the next turbine rated at 2.5MW takes over and achieves 2.5 MW over about 2.5 hours, the 4MW rated turbine takes over and generates for 0.5 hours, peaking at 3.5 MW for the ebb component of the cycle. Subsequently (for the flood component) the 5.5MW operates for 0.5 hour, and 7MW for 1 hour. The timing is due to the fact that as each turbines predecessor goes offline its successor takes over, resulting in the generation pattern as shown in table 1.

 

 

Figure 1

 

For costing purposes, we will assume that the MCT Seagen turbine, as an installed unit, will cost about £3 million, so for the purpose of simplicity it can be assumed that the initial cost is about £3/Watt (W) installed. On the basis that about half of the installed cost is the support structure, then it is assumed that extra generation equipment can be installed for a very cheap £1.50/W, in which we also include annual service and maintenance costs.

Additionally, it is assumed that the device runs unperturbed for 10 years, by which time it will have generated power for about 700 x 10 of the cycles illustrated in Figure 1.

 

 

Sounds pretty persuasive stuff but every assumption made is erroneous. There is just one generator that operates in fresh air not 5 separate underwater generators similar to MCT machines costing £3million for each MW!

 

Also look at this link http://www.rgu.ac.uk/cree/general/page.cfm?pge=10780

 

So HIE 'selected' this expert on tidal energy who is working on a non-intermittent tidal stream system that uses the rather naff idea of using hydrogen as a storaqe medium - no conflict of interest there then!

[Ghostrider]

How's that prototype GENTEC venturi being constructed at that undisclosed location coming along?

 

Sceptics of the quoted figures for thermal loss from the stores to the heating of seawater to steam process, and of the quoted durability/longevity of the stores themselves would like to be proved wrong.

 

It is all going well - I will be flying out on 1st November - it's a very long way!

 

Construction still proceeding apace, to your satisfaction and on schedule? Four months, and counting.

[greenheatman]

I am flying out to NZ in October to discuss build issues so nothing has come off the drawing board yet.

[ArabiaTerra]

This is an interesting story:

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071126104418.htm

 

Perhaps we should be importing other people's CO2 and injecting it into the empty oil fields? We do have most of the infrastructure in place already.

[Carlos]

I'd like to see more movement on those kind of practical options while we develop, argue about and ignore the changes that'll have to come in the end.

[greenheatman]

It has just been announced that we are now going to cover the sea with thousand of silly windmills - onshore developments are just so out of date. Looks like Viking/SIC has backed the wrong horse - again!

 

The only way forward with renewables is non-intermittent production from the tidal stream system, Gentec venturi.

 

 

http://www.greenheating.com/index.html

 

(*** Mod - Merged ***)

[DamnSaxon]

On Radio 4 as I write, repeated 3pm tomorrow or on Listen Again for the next week - "Costing the Earth", about how crappy the UK is in this field. Shetland gets an honourable mention

[greenheatman]

Why? For following like a flock of near dead sheep and building obsolete windmills all over Shetland that contribute negatively to saving the planet!

[TeeAyBee]

Why? For following like a flock of near dead sheep and building obsolete windmills all over Shetland that contribute negatively to saving the planet!

 

This quite frankly is why green energy never comes to effective fruition. Different camps spend more of their time slagging each other off rather than actually facing the problems and as a result NOBODY saves the bloody planet.

 

Greenheatman, when your product is actually in production and working and delivering what you claim then perhaps you'll be taken more seriously. Comments like yours above are not exactly going to endear anyone into supporting you which means that however right you are (and I openly admit that I'm not qualified to speak about your technology), you'll remain on the lunatic fringe rather than saving us with your 'gift'.