Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
RE: nuclear crisis in Japan
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login | |
|
fevictor
Posts: 377
Joined: Nov. 22 2005
From: Quepos / Manuel Antonio, Costa Rica
|
RE: nuclear crisis in Japan (in reply to mezzo)
|
|
|
quote:
A compressed air cannister can be used to power a car with an engine that uses compressed air to travl over 100 km. A pump station can recharge a car with compressed air for $2.00. This is true, but very inefficient. I was very intrigued when I heard about these cars, but there are too many factors that will hold them back. I worked many years as a natural gas conversion technician and then as a compressor fabricator and maintenance tech. One main problem when dealing with a gas (non liquid) is storage space. You can compress the air/gas to about 3500 psi and store it in cylinders specially designed for this purpose. They are bulky, heavy, expensive and take up room. There are light carbon fiber cylinders, but they are quite expensive. At any rate, there is only so much air you can stuff in these cylinders and they wont get you too far - at least not without major infrastructure, ie. an air gas station at every block. As soon as you're out of the city you would be screwed Just like with anything else, it will take a considerable amount of energy to produce the energy. You have to compress the air, and for that you need a massive compressor (assuming you have a lot of vehicles out there wanting to get filled) which requires either an electric motor or gas engine. Solar and wind power in most major cities would never be able to provide enough power to run all of these compressors. And, you would need a lot of compressors. It would be very inefficient to run underground piping for compressed air. every angle would result in a pressure loss and you would need boosting compressors all over the place. I don't think that oil companies are putting the brakes on anything. Finding alternate energy sources is a huge problem. Wave energy is great, but it would require billions and billions of dollars, per city, if they have a coastline, just to build up the infrastructure to harness the energy. We should start by taking all of our garbage and turning into methane...kill two birds with one stone!
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 30 2011 19:44:22
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3437
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
RE: nuclear crisis in Japan (in reply to Ron.M)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ron.M If you de-couple the generator from the steam source, then the source just gets hotter and hotter since there is nothing to take the energy away. Leaving the generators with no-load has the same effect. You cannot shut down a Nuclear reaction in 5 minutes or at the turn of a key. It takes days and that energy has to be dissipated, whether in useful energy of not, otherwise you will get a heat overload and eventual explosion. This is what Pimientito was on about. cheers, Ron But see the following, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following_power_plant "Boiling water reactors Boiling water reactors (BWR) and Advanced Boiling Water Reactors can use a combination of control rods and the speed of recirculation water flow to quickly reduce their power level down to under 60% of rated power, making them useful for overnight load-following. In markets such as Chicago, Illinois where half of the local utility's fleet is BWRs, it is common to load-follow (although less economic to do so). Pressurized water reactors Pressurized water reactors (PWR) use a chemical shim in the moderator/coolant (see nuclear reactor technology) to control power level, and so normally do not load follow. (In most PWRs, control rods are either fully withdrawn or fully inserted - variable control is difficult, partly due to the large bundle sizes.) In France, however, nuclear power plants use load following. French PWRs use "grey" control rods, in order to replace chemical shim, without introducing a large perturbation of the power distribution. These plants have the capability to make power changes between 30% and 100% of rated power, with a slope of 5% of rated power per minute. Their licensing permits them to respond very quickly to the grid requirements." end quote I wonder what the specific technology is at Fukushima? I was wondering why they didn't just shove in the control rods when things started to go bad. Did the sudden power outage disrupt control? Did the earthquake take the emergency batteries off line? At any rate, people (including me) are going to be very skeptical of nuclear plant safety for quite a while. Here's the San Onofre plant in Southern California, sitting on the coast and near a major fault. RNJ
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
Attachment (1)
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 30 2011 20:12:01
|
|
New Messages |
No New Messages |
Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
Locked w/ New Messages |
Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.0625 secs.
|