Franglais:
So to sink a 1,000m x 1m.sq. tube must weigh 1,000ton. 2,000m same cross section long must weigh 2,000ton.
If they weigh less they will float.
How heavy to create just neutral bouyancy ?.That means all of the pipe sections immersed in the water take little to no effort to sink or lift ?.They are effectively weightless ?.
The pipe is only lifted out of the water and then broken down in sections and vice versa ?.So counter weighting only needs to be slightly less than the weight of any sections suspended between the deck and the water and not immersed ?.
The rest is of the immersion and lifting process is effectively a zero effort operation ?.
Franglais:
So to sink a 1,000m x 1m.sq. tube must weigh 1,000ton. 2,000m same cross section long must weigh 2,000ton.
If they weigh less they will float.
How heavy to create just neutral bouyancy ?.That means all of the pipe sections immersed in the water take little to no effort to sink or lift ?.They are effectively weightless ?.
The pipe is only lifted out of the water and then broken down in sections and vice versa ?.So counter weighting only needs to be slightly less than the weight of any sections suspended between the deck and the water and not immersed ?.
The rest is of the immersion and lifting process is effectively a zero effort operation ?.
I can’t resist.
Look at Archimedes.
Now consider when your pipes are being so merged they are “full of air”.
They are buoyant as a steel ship is.
When you have flooded the pipes they are not buoyant because they are merely steel.
So you can balance the construction of a pipe with a sealed base so that it’s weight just enables it to sink, so no effort or work, or energy is expended in sinking it. But it would then require effort/work/energy to raise it.
Is we accept your 500kj of energy in the compressed air from a 1sq.m x 1,000m pipe?
That pipe must weigh 1,000ton to displace 1,000sq.m of water. If this rigid pipe, after air is pushed from it, magically bends over horizontally as soon as it clears the water, we are still pulling up what is under the surface.
The top one metre we raise one metre, the bottom one metre raise 1,000m. Averages out at 500m x 1ton.
Or 500kj. In a perfect machine you have harvested 500kj and expended 500kj.
Carryfast:
How heavy to create just neutral bouyancy ?.That means all of the pipe sections immersed in the water take little to no effort to sink or lift ?.They are effectively weightless ?.
The pipe is only lifted out of the water and then broken down in sections and vice versa ?.So counter weighting only needs to be slightly less than the weight of any sections suspended between the deck and the water and not immersed ?.
The rest is of the immersion and lifting process is effectively a zero effort operation ?.
I can’t resist.
Look at Archimedes.
Now consider when your pipes are being so merged they are “full of air”.
They are buoyant as a steel ship is.
When you have flooded the pipes they are not buoyant because they are merely steel.
So you can balance the construction of a pipe with a sealed base so that it’s weight just enables it to sink, so no effort or work, or energy is expended in sinking it. But it would then require effort/work/energy to raise it.
Is we accept your 500kj of energy in the compressed air from a 1sq.m x 1,000m pipe?
That pipe must weigh 1,000ton to displace 1,000sq.m of water. If this rigid pipe, after air is pushed from it, magically bends over horizontally as soon as it clears the water, we are still pulling up what is under the surface.
The top one metre we raise one metre, the bottom one metre raise 1,000m. Averages out at 500m x 1ton.
Or 500kj. In a perfect machine you have harvested 500kj and expended 500kj.
Agreed the flooded pipe wrecks any use of negative bouyancy being applied to the lifting process.Don’t think anyone will be replacing oil rigs with a hydrogen rig along the lines I’ve suggested anytime soon.Whatever the figures I can see the problem in trying sink the air filled pipe and then trying to lift the flooded pipe.
Having said that deep sea water pressures are a massive potential energy source, especially for producing hydrogen, if we can find a way to utilise them.
the maoster:
^^^ would’ve been easier to simply say “yeah you’re right Franglais, sorry, I admit I was wrong”!
That’s because I’m not saying that counter weighting the lifting and lowering operation has been proven to be totally impossible.
Nor the possibility of using more smaller more manageable diameter pipes like the ones already used for oil drilling instead of fewer large ones.The combined energy provided by them all could actually be more but obviously with less handling problems for each. explainthatstuff.com/how-elevators-work.html
How many charges can the batteries sustain at that rate before they are scrap.
Still at 16p per kwh + road fuel taxes fuelled by burning trees, solar panel dust bowls and nukes.
I’ve just been reading about hgvs planned to be electric by 2040 but it says all new hgvs being sold will be electric. Does this mean some people can continue driving diesel trucks and new trucks have to go electric ?
This would be very beneficial for owner drivers who cannot afford new hgvs that comply with the government’s standards.
i havnt seen any of those electric merc sprinters around recently. Amazon had them in Ipswich and id see them locally mixed in with the trannys doing their job. All i see lately is the diesel ■■■■■■ vans
Bad boy Ben:
I’ve just been reading about hgvs planned to be electric by 2040 but it says all new hgvs being sold will be electric. Does this mean some people can continue driving diesel trucks and new trucks have to go electric ?
This would be very beneficial for owner drivers who cannot afford new hgvs that comply with the government’s standards.
Yes you can still use diesel trucks.
Ok might be taxed more on emmisons etc but as long as it paases an MOT is road legal then yes.
Same with car. all new cars made will be electric in a few years won’t be able to buy a new petrol car .
But nothing stop you using your current petrol one.
Doubt be in our time but over time as cars get older in time petrol cars will fade away and be just electric cars about.
Plus petrol stations will be come less and less as there replaced with plug in points instead
Although keep hearing hydrogen might be way to go
As far as I aware only UK and maybe parts of Europe that are stopping to make petrol cars.
So nothing stop you buying. A petrol one from the states Asia Africa etc and shipping in back over here.
corij:
i havnt seen any of those electric merc sprinters around recently. Amazon had them in Ipswich and id see them locally mixed in with the trannys doing their job. All i see lately is the diesel ■■■■■■ vans
Loads of Amazon depots have the electric vans. And a couple of units in Milton Keynes.
edd1974:
As far as I aware only UK and maybe parts of Europe that are stopping to make petrol cars.
So nothing stop you buying. A petrol one from the states Asia Africa etc and shipping in back over here.
The the EU, NZ, USA, UK, are all banning the sale of new fossil fuel cars from 2035. Some areas (Hainin China) will be even earlier, but Aus seems a little later.
Even if you can buy a new fossil car from some where you wont normally be able to register it for road use nor even import it into those countries. Then as now if a vehicle is too dirty you wont get type approval nor registration for it in the UK.
corij:
i havnt seen any of those electric merc sprinters around recently. Amazon had them in Ipswich and id see them locally mixed in with the trannys doing their job. All i see lately is the diesel ■■■■■■ vans
Loads of Amazon depots have the electric vans. And a couple of units in Milton Keynes.
how are they getting along with them,dyou see em a lot? i USED to see them around Ipswich/Colchester but now i dont
corij:
i havnt seen any of those electric merc sprinters around recently. Amazon had them in Ipswich and id see them locally mixed in with the trannys doing their job. All i see lately is the diesel ■■■■■■ vans
Loads of Amazon depots have the electric vans. And a couple of units in Milton Keynes.
how are they getting along with them,dyou see em a lot? i USED to see them around Ipswich/Colchester but now i dont
I generally just see the vans all being charged over night when I go into the depots. So I’ve no reason to suspect they’re not in use. However, the Daf units are quite often charging or just parked, and I’ve only seen one in use once.
[quote=“Bad boy Ben” I think hydrogen is the way forward, so do you think they will go hydrogen instead?
The tangs would be crying when electric Scanias are all on the road. [/quote]
Hydrogen does seem to be they way forward heard…Toyota make them.
But .most of the developing world seems set on making everything electric . And going solar and wind farms.
Which guess is good for environment but solar panels only last 25 years so in 25 years have scrap them in and replace with new ones.
Yes, hydrogen, definitely the smart choice, once we’ve got the technology up to spec. We’re part way there already bbc.co.uk/news/business-64248564
There are huge issues with electric vehicles, which the various governments are being blind to, either deliberately or naively:
increased demands for the limited supplies of raw materials: Not just lithium, but graphite, cobalt, manganese, copper and nickel
which will lead to sharply increasing costs of both LBs and the vehicles themselves
current very limited options for recycling End-Of-Life batteries: Last time I looked we had just two LB recycling plants in the UK, with a further ten spread across France, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland and Sweden
transporting EOL LBs will of course require more ADR drivers and vehicles. The LBs need to be safely packaged for transport (simple work for those perpetual dole-wallahs perhaps?). This is labour-intensive in a very tedious way, but it needs to be done properly to mitigate…
the inordinate fire-hazard presented by LBs, which when burning produce toxic-acid vapours (of hydroflouric acid) and require specialist fire extinguishers (Lithex or Lithco)
