You know how a liquid can be drawn up a tiny tube or sponge, capillary action? well you could have hundreds (possibly nano) of these pulling tiny amounts of water against mavity up to a height, then some kind of shaped form to collect it and drop it back down a tube with a generator in line, thoughts?
Just had a 'free' energy idea...
- Thread starter Radiation
- Start date
Small scale, locational, self sustaining, the water would go in a cycle, free energy with no moving parts except the generator, sounds cheap and useful for low power production.
It could even be possible to increase pressure on a hot day and generate more energy?
The amount of tiny tubes you would need would be prohibitively expensive to produce and would generate tiny amounts of energy as the amount of water actually drawn up would be miniscule.
Per Wikipedia, following the relevant formula...
Thus for a 2 m (6.6 ft) diameter tube, the water would rise an unnoticeable 0.014 mm (0.00055 in). However, for a 2 cm (0.79 in) diameter tube, the water would rise 1.4 mm (0.055 in), and for a 0.2 mm (0.0079 in) diameter tube, the water would rise 140 mm (5.5 in).
So, assuming you could produce a tube 0.2mm in diameter, you could expect a column of water 14cm high. I don't know how quickly the water would rise, but I'm guessing pretty slowly, so you're looking at a tiny cross sectional area of water rising a tiny height. The mass of the water will be tiny, so the GPE that could be recovered by letting the water fall back to earth would also be tiny. You'd be lucky to overcome friction in the generator.
Build a hydroelectric dam.
Per Wikipedia, following the relevant formula...
Thus for a 2 m (6.6 ft) diameter tube, the water would rise an unnoticeable 0.014 mm (0.00055 in). However, for a 2 cm (0.79 in) diameter tube, the water would rise 1.4 mm (0.055 in), and for a 0.2 mm (0.0079 in) diameter tube, the water would rise 140 mm (5.5 in).
So, assuming you could produce a tube 0.2mm in diameter, you could expect a column of water 14cm high. I don't know how quickly the water would rise, but I'm guessing pretty slowly, so you're looking at a tiny cross sectional area of water rising a tiny height. The mass of the water will be tiny, so the GPE that could be recovered by letting the water fall back to earth would also be tiny. You'd be lucky to overcome friction in the generator.
Build a hydroelectric dam.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,593
- Location
- Warwickshire
Tidal / wave mother*******.
I think the fact it violates the first law of thermodynamics is enough to rule it out
I think the fact it violates the first law of thermodynamics is enough to rule it out
Well, you're not the one pushing the water up the tubes, in the same way you're not the one pushing the water through a hydroelectric dam, so the first law isn't too much of a concern.
Which right is that?
That did cross my mind. You'd need to have the tubes open at the top, in some way, order to let the water spill out of the top and onto your generator.
Rig an extention socket to a street lamp....
Not far off it, seen a few places where people have merely spliced into the stair well lighting circuit - ie the councils electricity bill.
Where there is a will there is a way!
I had a similar(ish) idea where tiny turbines could be placed throughout the waste water pipes in people's homes, all wired up to a large battery to supplement the mains electrics. You could even put them inside taps and roof guttering systems.
Probably wouldn't work though
Probably wouldn't work though
I had a similar(ish) idea where tiny turbines could be placed throughout the waste water pipes in people's homes, all wired up to a large battery to supplement the mains electrics.
Probably wouldn't work though
I can see an instant problem with that.
Big massive craps.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 6,439
- Location
- SE England
Am I dreaming or didn't we have a free energy thread last night!