In message
,
harry writes
On Jul 13, 9:37*pm, "dennis@home"
wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...

The boier runs on the exhaust from the engine. Not vice versa.

The boiler heats the fluid input to the engine, the fluid condenses and
heats the CH water.
There is a second stage in the boiler that further heats the CH water.

Make sure you use it for a low temp heating system so the condenser works
well and the boost isn't used much.

You ARE in Lala land Denise.


Hey, I do believe we have a Dense vs Harry bum fight on the cards

--
geoff

In message
,
harry writes
On Jul 14, 1:44*am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





The ratio of heat output to electricity is fixed. *And that is the
problem. *You can't make electricity without heat (loss). *If you can
use this loss to heat the home, well fine, if you can't,it would have
to be dumped. *That is obviously uneconomical.
So it boils down to, in warm weather. you can't/wouldn't want to be
running this device, the heat would have to be dumped somehow.

If you have an industrial situation where lots of hot water is needed
say, then these are the way to go. Eg old fashioned laundries.

The important thing is they are sized on the heat output, not the
electrical output.
Any *electricity surplus can be exported but not heat of course.

So, if you had a well insulated house in Winter you could run this
thing in the evening, watch TV, do baking, heat the house and water &
export electricity by day when you might not be at home.

But in Summer what do you do with the heat?
Ah, you have your solar PV in Summer. *Heh Heh.

So, yours is being installed next week, yes ? * *:-)
As a passive house, my house needs no form of central heating.

Come the ice age, Harry, come the ice age ... * * *d;~}

Arfa- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My house can defeat any level of cold. ( I have 600mm of insulation
and quadruple glazing.)

Wind is another matter,

That's your organic diet Harry


--
geoff

In message , Arfa Daily
writes


My house can defeat any level of cold. ( I have 600mm of insulation
and quadruple glazing.)
Wind is another matter, I still have a few draught issues to attend to
there.


JHC !!! So how thick are the bloody walls then, with 2 foot of
insulation in them? Your window openings must look ridiculous. And any
dwelling that's sealed up so tight against the ingress of fresh,
unprocessed air, can't be healthy. I mean, there's 'doing your bit',
and being just a bit silly about it all ...



Have you not seen his house?

Someone please post the link to that program on the telly with it on


--
geoff

In message , Rod Speed
writes


"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jul 13, 10:49 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,





harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 6:00 pm, GB wrote:
It gets worse...

Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial

likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder
temperatures.

Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted,

furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively

colder and wetter times ahead.

Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?
What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?
What's wrong with hydro power?
TurNiP has dementia. He can't be reasoned with.

Which mountains and valleys did you have in mind, harry boy, for hydro
power?

There are lots of potential sites for micro hydro. Many where
water mills stood in the past. Many are now being utilised.

**** all are in fact.

And there would be NONE if those parasites and thieves
like you weren't being paid terminally stupid FIT tariffs.

We need as much diversity as possible.

Nope. What we actually need is lots of nukes instead.

All of them aimed at a little white house on the welsh borders ...

hold that ...

save a few for Dudley

--
geoff

In message
,
harry writes
On Jul 13, 10:48*pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

*GB wrote:
It gets worse...

Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder
temperatures.

Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.

Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?
What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?

None of these renewables can supply more than 5% or so of our
requirements. Unless you put 3 turbines of every sq mile of the UK,
including cities. Or dedicate the whole of Wales to biofuel crops. Or
damn up some of the larger the Welsh valleys to act as pumped storage.

Good luck with any of these.

Tidal power is the next big one.

Ah - silt collectors



--
geoff

On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:17:37 +0100, geoff wrote:

Tidal power is the next big one.

Ah - silt collectors

Only if you build a barrage. Another possible way to extract power from
the tides are "underwater wind mills". You don't get as much energy but
you don't suffer the silting problems that a barrage does. Lagoons are
another possibilty, you have big sluices on the downstream side that are
normally closed and the water flows out through turbines. When the silt
builds up you open the slucies for a few tidal cycles and flush the
lagoon of silt.

--
Cheers
Dave.

harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 8:22 pm, Andy Burns wrote:
harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 5:32 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 5:08:26 PM UTC+1, Arfa Daily wrote:
http://m.dailymail.co.uk/money/inves...1/MIDAS-Will-f...
Anyone know anything about these, or the technology employed ? I
dunno, but
it feels like one of those "If it seems too good to be true ...
" things. Or
is it just another company jumping on the eco-bollox bandwagon ?
Arfa
How does the bioler generate electricity ?
Well, that's what I was asking, and if you follow the whole thread,
there's been several references to a URL where it is all explained. I
can't be fagged to go and find it for you, but it won't take you long to
look. It's actually a bit backwards thinking of it as a boiler that
makes electricity as a waste heat-recycling byproduct of it's CH / DHW
function. Rather, it's a gas-powered electricity generator, that
produces enough waste and recoverable heat from *that* process, to allow
it to also heat your house. Theoretically, that is. How practical it
would actually be for the many different designs of house, varying
weather conditions around the country, and lots of other modifying
factors, is a bit of an unknown, at this point. Much like solar PVPs, a
lot of the 'savings' that would supposedly be reaped from the
installation of such a device, rely on the subsidised FIT model, and
I'm not sure just how sustainable that is going to be in both the
current economic, as well as political, climates. Add to this that
recent events in the MM global warming world would seem to indicate
that that little bubble may be close to bursting, and scales might start
falling from eyes, and the long-term non-viability of all the green
taxing and subsidising at the tax payers expense, might start to take on
a political life of its own ...
Arfa
It gets worse...
Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder temperatures.
Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.
We have essentially ruined the nation to solve a non-existent problem,
with a technology that didn't work to solve it, anyway...
It doesn't get worse than that. Well apart from harry, who profits by
this disaster.
--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Getting pretty hysterical TurNiP!
Can't understand what's going on in the world?
Ah well, dementia comes to many as they get old.
Most people don't want nuclear.
Most? Not so fast Kimosabe ..

"The YouGov survey [...] found nearly two thirds of Britons (63%) now
back the use of nuclear energy as part of the UKs energy mix"

http://www.edfenergy.com/media-centre/press-news/support-for-nucleur-...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well I saw a recent one said 70% didn't want it.
Depends how you frame the question and who you ask anyway.

There you go. Like the one that said that over 80% of people are in
favour of renewable energy:

- as long as it worked
- as long as someone else paid for it
- as long as it didn't cost them anything
- as long as it as nowhere near THEIR town.

Heavens if it met those criteria I would be in favour of it.
It doesn#t meet any of them, so the survey is irrelevant.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 9:06 pm, John Rumm wrote:
On 13/07/2012 08:54, harry wrote:





On Jul 12, 10:18 pm, geoff wrote:
In message , Arfa Daily
writes
http://m.dailymail.co.uk/money/inves...IDAS-Will-free
-boiler-power-heat-Energetix-shares.html
Anyone know anything about these, or the technology employed ? I dunno,
but it feels like one of those "If it seems too good to be true ... "
things. Or is it just another company jumping on the eco-bollox
bandwagon ?
Effectively getting your electricity for free ?
I don't think so
--
geoff
Tch, You are a dope. Getting electricity for the price of gas.
at ten times the price of gas I think you mean...

at 9kWh of gas per kWh of electricity... it only cost 4 times the price
of gas when you buy it from the national grid.

--
Cheers,

-

Jeez.
The remaining heat is not wasted, it goes to heat your home/hot water.
The problem arises when you have no use for that heat, ie Summer.

Exactly. only for about 6 weeks in winter would a 3:1 heat to
electricity mix suit me.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:48 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

GB wrote:
It gets worse...
Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder temperatures.
Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.
Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?
What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?
None of these renewables can supply more than 5% or so of our
requirements. Unless you put 3 turbines of every sq mile of the UK,
including cities. Or dedicate the whole of Wales to biofuel crops. Or
damn up some of the larger the Welsh valleys to act as pumped storage.

Good luck with any of these.

Tidal power is the next big one.

You mean now that peoplehave got wise to the hydrogen economy scam, rge
hybrid car scam,the biofuel scam and the great wind farm scam followed
by the great solar PV scam we may confidently expect the great tidal scam?


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:49 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,





harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 6:00 pm, GB wrote:
It gets worse...
Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder temperatures.
Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.
Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?
What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?
What's wrong with hydro power?
TurNiP has dementia. He can't be reasoned with.
Which mountains and valleys did you have in mind, harry boy, for hydro
power?

--
Tim

There are lots of potential sites for micro hydro. Many where water
mills stood in the past. Many are now being utilised. We need as much
diversity as possible.

And the total hydro generation of this nation where all these reasonably
good schemes HAVE been implemented is a staggering 0,422GW.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

On Jul 13, 10:49 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,



This space intentionally left blank by harry




harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 6:00 pm, GB wrote:
It gets worse...

Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had
little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial
that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder
temperatures.

Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted,
it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively
in the
colder and wetter times ahead.

Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?
What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?
What's wrong with hydro power?
TurNiP has dementia. He can't be reasoned with.

Which mountains and valleys did you have in mind, harry boy, for hydro
power?

There are lots of potential sites for micro hydro. Many where water
mills stood in the past. Many are now being utilised. We need as much
diversity as possible.

Really? And how much power do these sites provide? A water mill was
low-tech, and low maintenance. The village blacksmith could repair it.
The alternative was - nothing at all - which is why they made sense when
they were put in.

How much power can one of these produce, and what do you propose be done
with it?

you can work it out from the drop - usually 3-4 feet - and the volume of
water.

The short answer is a couple of bhp if you are lucky. say 1.5KW. maybe
enough to keep a single house going. But not to boil a kettle as well.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 11:03:44 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

There are lots of potential sites for micro hydro. Many where water
mills stood in the past.
How much power can one of these produce, ...

Not a lot a few hundred watts at most. Not a big head and fairly low
flow. Say you have a wheel just ove 3m in dia and thus a 3m head and
17l/sec flow (or a tad over one IBC container full per minute) you get
around 300W of electricity...

http://www.reuk.co.uk/Calculation-of-Hydro-Power.htm

and what do you propose be done with it?

Like Haryy does with his PV. Use it your self but also "sell" it to the
grid at 4 times the market price.

10 times the market price..Dave, ten times...


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:50 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:





harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 6:00 pm, GB wrote:
It gets worse...
Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder temperatures.
Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.
Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?
What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?
What's wrong with hydro power?
in the context of te UK, there isnt enough of it and there is noweher to
put any mopre of subnstantial quantoty
TurNiP has dementia. He can't be reasoned with.
No, that's you harry. You actually claim to believe renewable energy can
make a cost effective contribution. That shows you either have zero real
understanding of engineering or physics, or are demented, or are a SPIV
and don't care that it doesn't work is totally antisocial and threatens
the countries future and that of future generations, as well as being an
environmental disaster.
Or, more likely, ISTM, he is just thick as **** in the neck of a bottle.

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You really are dense. Comes from contemplating your navel for too
long.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewab...rgy_in_Germany

And hey don't have a fraction of the potential for tidal and wind
power that we have.



You should know that one of the things the renewable and climate change
lobbies did was to rewrite all of Wikipedia relating to this areas to
basically give the 'on message' message.

If you study that table at the bottom there, you will discover that it
says that the total electricity generated is 121,939 Gwh in 2011.

Dividing that by 24x365 gives you a staggering answer of 13,9GW which is
NOT the total German grid, it is the average contribution of all
'renewables' to the German grid which is far far bigger than that.

Hydro power is 19500 Gwh/yr

dividing that by 24x365.25 gives the average contribution of hydro power
as a measly 2.2GW.

Most of which is generated outside Germany.

Actually we ourselves would be generating a bit more hydro if it wasn't
for the FITS and ROCS schemes Our power stations are deliberately held
back to claim the higher tariff from small hydro installations.

http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/S...Subterfuge.pdf

Finally overall Germany generates more CO2 emissions per unit
electricity generated than we do:

http://carma.org/region/detail/2921044 for germany with an expected
intensity of 636 post nuclear shutdown

versus the UK at an expected intensity of 371

http://carma.org/region/detail/2635167

So we are already far better than Germany emissions wise, and will get
better with more nuclear, whilst germany gets worse with no nuclear and
massively expensive renewables.



--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:
On Jul 14, 1:47 am, "Arfa Daily" wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in ...





Arfa Daily wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 5:08:26 PM UTC+1, Arfa Daily wrote:
http://m.dailymail.co.uk/money/inves...1/MIDAS-Will-f...
Anyone know anything about these, or the technology employed ? I dunno,
but
it feels like one of those "If it seems too good to be true ...
" things. Or
is it just another company jumping on the eco-bollox bandwagon ?
Arfa
How does the bioler generate electricity ?
Well, that's what I was asking, and if you follow the whole thread,
there's been several references to a URL where it is all explained. I
can't be fagged to go and find it for you, but it won't take you long to
look. It's actually a bit backwards thinking of it as a boiler that makes
electricity as a waste heat-recycling byproduct of it's CH / DHW
function. Rather, it's a gas-powered electricity generator, that produces
enough waste and recoverable heat from *that* process, to allow it to
also heat your house. Theoretically, that is. How practical it would
actually be for the many different designs of house, varying weather
conditions around the country, and lots of other modifying factors, is a
bit of an unknown, at this point. Much like solar PVPs, a lot of the
'savings' that would supposedly be reaped from the installation of such a
device, rely on the subsidised FIT model, and I'm not sure just how
sustainable that is going to be in both the current economic, as well as
political, climates. Add to this that recent events in the MM global
warming world would seem to indicate that that little bubble may be close
to bursting, and scales might start falling from eyes, and the long-term
non-viability of all the green taxing and subsidising at the tax payers
expense, might start to take on a political life of its own ...
Arfa
It gets worse...
Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or nothing
to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere statistical
fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is likely to
end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder temperatures.
Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.
We have essentially ruined the nation to solve a non-existent problem,
with a technology that didn't work to solve it, anyway...
It doesn't get worse than that. Well apart from harry, who profits by this
disaster.
--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.
Nicely summarised ...


Joining the half wits brigade?
The thing about renewables is there is no fuel to buy.

Yes there is. Lots and Lots harry.

The fuel required to build the plant - massive plant.
The fuel required to quadruple the grid for the same average demand from
it,.
The fuel required to service the turbines and panels with MTBFs in the
range of weeks.
Most of all the fuel required to keep all the fossil plant idling away
for when the wind drops and the sun goes behind a cloud.


TurNiP has not the faintest idea about economics or energy.

On the contrary, I am very well acquainted with both.
I know you are getting desperate to prove you haven't backed the wrong
horse harry, but blatant lies that can easily be disproved are a bit
desperate even for you.



--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harryagain wrote:
"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
snip


Most people don't want nuclear.
On what do you base that contention ? Any facts, figures ?


So it will be renewables and (shale) gas probably in the future.
Much more expensive so we all have to be efficient.
I make everythiing energywise I need on site.

Maybe *you* do, but you are in a vanishingly small minority of
householders (and businesses) able to do that. As energy prices continue
to soar to the point where it becomes impossible for the average Joe to
keep up, I think that you will find many more people prepared to look
again at just what nuclear could do to address the country's need to
cheapen its energy production, and decouple it from foreign supply chains,
with the potential for disaster which that sorry state of affairs holds
...

Arfa

What makes you think nuclear will be cheap?

The actual facts: nuclear wholesale is profitable in the 6p-8p range.
Governments won figures.

The SUBSIDIES ALONE on renewable energy are more than that.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:50 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:





harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 6:00 pm, GB wrote:
It gets worse...
Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder
temperatures.
Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it
has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in
the
colder and wetter times ahead.
Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?
What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?
What's wrong with hydro power?
in the context of te UK, there isnt enough of it and there is noweher
to
put any mopre of subnstantial quantoty
TurNiP has dementia. He can't be reasoned with.
No, that's you harry. You actually claim to believe renewable energy
can
make a cost effective contribution. That shows you either have zero
real
understanding of engineering or physics, or are demented, or are a SPIV
and don't care that it doesn't work is totally antisocial and threatens
the countries future and that of future generations, as well as being
an
environmental disaster.
Or, more likely, ISTM, he is just thick as **** in the neck of a bottle.

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines
imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You really are dense. Comes from contemplating your navel for too
long.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewab...rgy_in_Germany

And hey don't have a fraction of the potential for tidal and wind
power that we have.



You should know that one of the things the renewable and climate change
lobbies did was to rewrite all of Wikipedia relating to this areas to
basically give the 'on message' message.

If you study that table at the bottom there, you will discover that it
says that the total electricity generated is 121,939 Gwh in 2011.

Dividing that by 24x365 gives you a staggering answer of 13,9GW which is
NOT the total German grid, it is the average contribution of all
'renewables' to the German grid which is far far bigger than that.

Hydro power is 19500 Gwh/yr

dividing that by 24x365.25 gives the average contribution of hydro power
as a measly 2.2GW.

Most of which is generated outside Germany.

Actually we ourselves would be generating a bit more hydro if it wasn't
for the FITS and ROCS schemes Our power stations are deliberately held
back to claim the higher tariff from small hydro installations.

http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/S...Subterfuge.pdf

Finally overall Germany generates more CO2 emissions per unit electricity
generated than we do:

http://carma.org/region/detail/2921044 for germany with an expected
intensity of 636 post nuclear shutdown

versus the UK at an expected intensity of 371

http://carma.org/region/detail/2635167

So we are already far better than Germany emissions wise, and will get
better with more nuclear, whilst germany gets worse with no nuclear and
massively expensive renewables.

And brown coal burners ?

Arfa



--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

On 14/07/2012 09:29, harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 9:47 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 13/07/2012 08:53, harry wrote:

The boier runs on the exhaust from the engine. Not vice versa.

This turns out not to be the case.

http://www.genlec.com/homeowner/how.html

Andy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogeneration

Yes.

"Topping cycle plants primarily produce electricity from a steam
turbine. The exhausted steam is then condensed and the low temperature
heat released from this condensation is utilized for e.g. district
heating or water desalination.

Bottoming cycle plants produce high temperature heat for industrial
processes, then a waste heat recovery boiler feeds an electrical plant.
Bottoming cycle plants are only used when the industrial process
requires very high temperatures such as furnaces for glass and metal
manufacturing, so they are less common."

For reasons that escape me _this_ _particular_ system, as described in
my link, uses a bottoming cycle. That is why I am puzzled.

Andy

On 14/07/2012 15:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
you can work it out from the drop - usually 3-4 feet - and the volume of
water.

The short answer is a couple of bhp if you are lucky. say 1.5KW. maybe
enough to keep a single house going. But not to boil a kettle as well.


That's a bit low. In fact probably by an order of magnitude, or maybe
even two.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-12983559

says the plans for Newbury on the Kennet could give 22kW, and the Kennet
is neither very big nor very steep. I wouldn't be surprised if one on
every lock on the Thames could get as much as a megawatt.

Obviously finding enough such rivers to make 40GW might be hard. :/

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:
On 14/07/2012 15:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
you can work it out from the drop - usually 3-4 feet - and the volume of
water.

The short answer is a couple of bhp if you are lucky. say 1.5KW. maybe
enough to keep a single house going. But not to boil a kettle as well.


That's a bit low. In fact probably by an order of magnitude, or maybe
even two.

I was taking in the context of traditional water wheels.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-12983559

says the plans for Newbury on the Kennet could give 22kW, and the Kennet
is neither very big nor very steep. I wouldn't be surprised if one on
every lock on the Thames could get as much as a megawatt.


For the whole thames perhaps.

Obviously finding enough such rivers to make 40GW might be hard. :/


Andy


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...

For reasons that escape me _this_ _particular_ system, as described in my
link, uses a bottoming cycle. That is why I am puzzled.

Does it?
If its the one in the links with the scroll watsit then it heats fluid in
the boiler, passes through the engine and what heat remains in the fluid is
put through the heat exchanger (they call it a condenser).
It doesn't look like there is any high grade heat left over to me.

The water from the condenser goes to a second boiler bit to be heated to CH
temp.

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:17:37 +0100, geoff wrote:

Tidal power is the next big one.

Ah - silt collectors

Only if you build a barrage. Another possible way to extract power from
the tides are "underwater wind mills". You don't get as much energy but
you don't suffer the silting problems that a barrage does.

You can't say that with certainty, there have been case of unexpected beach
erosion as a result of breakwaters up the coast.
Breakwaters just extract energy like tidal power does.

Lagoons are
another possibilty, you have big sluices on the downstream side that are
normally closed and the water flows out through turbines. When the silt
builds up you open the slucies for a few tidal cycles and flush the
lagoon of silt.

And kill the wildlife?

On 14/07/12 14:18, GB wrote:

I was thinking about the Severn barrage scheme that's been proposed
multiple times. Building it would stimulate the UK economy. It would
provide around 5% of all UK electricity needs for the next 100 years, by
which time it would be nicely silted up, thus providing 100's of square
miles of new agricultural land. The main thing that seems to be holding
it up is that it would disturb some wild-life.

It doesn't need to be justified economically purely on the value of
electricity generated. The point is to stimulate the economy and reduce
unemployment, so some of the money spent will reduce social security
payments, etc.

The way of the weasel: we know it does not really work but this side
effect will make it all worthwhile. For some lobbying special interest
maybe, but somewhere someone pays for all this indirection.

--
djc

GB wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote
GB wrote

It gets worse...

Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder
temperatures.

Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.

Just run that past me again. Are there unlimited oil reserves then?

There may well be. Ther are very large uranium/thorium/deuterium
reserves.

I think we should leave a bit on the plate for coming generations, rather
than greedily gobbing it all ourselves.

Its not even possible to gobble it all for ourselves given
that even the spent fuel can be reprocessed into new fuel
and we have breeders now.

What's wrong with say tidal electricity schemes?

same as is wrong with solar PV and wind. They are expensive ways to
achieve sod all carbon fuel savings.

I was thinking about the Severn barrage scheme that's been proposed
multiple times. Building it would stimulate the UK economy.

Building nukes would stimulate it even more.

It would provide around 5% of all UK electricity needs for the next 100
years,

Dont believe that.

by which time it would be nicely silted up, thus providing 100's of square
miles of new agricultural land. The main thing that seems to be holding it
up is that it would disturb some wild-life.

The main hold up is the cost.

It doesn't need to be justified economically purely on the value of
electricity generated. The point is to stimulate the economy and reduce
unemployment, so some of the money spent will reduce social security
payments, etc.

Sure, but thats just as true of nukes because they provide
cheaper electricity than the other approaches.

On 14/07/2012 09:17, harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 9:06 pm, John Rumm wrote:
On 13/07/2012 08:54, harry wrote:





On Jul 12, 10:18 pm, geoff wrote:
In message , Arfa Daily
writes

http://m.dailymail.co.uk/money/inves...IDAS-Will-free
-boiler-power-heat-Energetix-shares.html

Anyone know anything about these, or the technology employed ? I dunno,
but it feels like one of those "If it seems too good to be true ... "
things. Or is it just another company jumping on the eco-bollox
bandwagon ?

Effectively getting your electricity for free ?

I don't think so

--
geoff

Tch, You are a dope. Getting electricity for the price of gas.

at ten times the price of gas I think you mean...

at 9kWh of gas per kWh of electricity... it only cost 4 times the price
of gas when you buy it from the national grid.

--
Cheers,

-

Jeez.
The remaining heat is not wasted, it goes to heat your home/hot water.

Never said it was wasted, just that the electricity is generated at a
very low efficiency, making it more expensive in extra gas used than it
would cost to buy normally. If the process is 10% efficient, and a
normal condensing boiler is 92% efficient, then that electricity
generation must also be costing you some heating efficiency (in fact
probably getting on for the full 10% given the difficulty of getting the
flue temperature much lower than normal).

The problem arises when you have no use for that heat, ie Summer.

You are looking at it from the point of view of getting the most
effective way of claiming subsidies - i.e. how much overpriced
electricity you can sell to other consumers.

Look at it from the point of view of it being a by product of running
your slightly less efficient boiler, and its not a problem - you still
need hot water in the summer so you run it for that, and the electricity
it generates at the time you can either use or export.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 14/07/2012 11:18, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 01:13:55 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

Tch, You are a dope. Getting electricity for the price of gas.

Yeah - at a very inefficient rate

Tch. You still don't get it?
The remaining heat warms your house. Almost nothing is lost and you
get cheaper electricity.

IIRC this company is looking for investment(*), they install the complex
boiler for free and keep the FiTs. This complex boiler becomes yours
after five years and thus presumably the maintenance of it. There is
likely to be only one company capable of maintaining it, so you can
imagine what that price will be. Five years? They don't have much faith
in the life of their product do they, bear in mind the FiT is 20/25
years.

I wonder if there will be a term in the contract to prevent you going
back after the five years and saying "can I have one of your free
boilers please?"

And what is the efficiency gas - electricity, 10% so 1kWhr of electric
consumes 10kWhr of gas at what 5p/kWhr at current prices so is 50p/kWhr
and you don't even get the 10p/kWhr FiT...

Having looked at how the thing works it doesn't look to me like it's
using "waste" heat but tapping of a proportion as an when the boiler is
running. I'd like to see the gas consumption figures compared against an

Looks like it, yup.

A rated boiler running in condensing mode with both producing the same
amount of heat for heating/HW, over a range of outputs as most boiler
modulate these days.

The best you can hope for is that the total usable energy out is about
on par with a modern condenser. However in this case you take some of it
in electricity, and they claim your subsidy. They also have you tied in
as a dual fuel energy customer for the next five years. In an
established industry where "churn" is a major cost for suppliers, then
this makes good business sense for them.

(*) Note looking for investment not particularly trying to promote
anything "green", this is purely to make *them* money.

Spot on... quite cute really ;-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 14/07/2012 09:15, harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 8:22 pm, Andy Burns wrote:
harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 5:32 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 5:08:26 PM UTC+1, Arfa Daily wrote:
http://m.dailymail.co.uk/money/inves...1/MIDAS-Will-f...

Anyone know anything about these, or the technology employed ? I
dunno, but
it feels like one of those "If it seems too good to be true ...
" things. Or
is it just another company jumping on the eco-bollox bandwagon ?

Arfa

How does the bioler generate electricity ?

Well, that's what I was asking, and if you follow the whole thread,
there's been several references to a URL where it is all explained. I
can't be fagged to go and find it for you, but it won't take you long to
look. It's actually a bit backwards thinking of it as a boiler that
makes electricity as a waste heat-recycling byproduct of it's CH / DHW
function. Rather, it's a gas-powered electricity generator, that
produces enough waste and recoverable heat from *that* process, to allow
it to also heat your house. Theoretically, that is. How practical it
would actually be for the many different designs of house, varying
weather conditions around the country, and lots of other modifying
factors, is a bit of an unknown, at this point. Much like solar PVPs, a
lot of the 'savings' that would supposedly be reaped from the
installation of such a device, rely on the subsidised FIT model, and
I'm not sure just how sustainable that is going to be in both the
current economic, as well as political, climates. Add to this that
recent events in the MM global warming world would seem to indicate
that that little bubble may be close to bursting, and scales might start
falling from eyes, and the long-term non-viability of all the green
taxing and subsidising at the tax payers expense, might start to take on
a political life of its own ...

Arfa

It gets worse...

Consider the proposition that last centuries warming had little or
nothing to do with human activity or CO2 and in fact was mere
statistical fluctuations in a completely normal interglacial that is
likely to end..soon. Plunging us into several degrees colder temperatures.

Not only is every penny then spent on renewable energy wasted, it has
furthermore reduced our ability to run the country effectively in the
colder and wetter times ahead.

We have essentially ruined the nation to solve a non-existent problem,
with a technology that didn't work to solve it, anyway...

It doesn't get worse than that. Well apart from harry, who profits by
this disaster.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Getting pretty hysterical TurNiP!
Can't understand what's going on in the world?
Ah well, dementia comes to many as they get old.

Most people don't want nuclear.

Most? Not so fast Kimosabe ..

"The YouGov survey [...] found nearly two thirds of Britons (63%) now
back the use of nuclear energy as part of the UK’s energy mix"

http://www.edfenergy.com/media-centre/press-news/support-for-nucleur-...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well I saw a recent one said 70% didn't want it.
Depends how you frame the question and who you ask anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 14/07/2012 09:29, harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 9:47 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 13/07/2012 08:53, harry wrote:

The boier runs on the exhaust from the engine. Not vice versa.

This turns out not to be the case.

http://www.genlec.com/homeowner/how.html

Andy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogeneration

Yes.

"Topping cycle plants primarily produce electricity from a steam turbine.
The exhausted steam is then condensed and the low temperature heat
released from this condensation is utilized for e.g. district heating or
water desalination.

Bottoming cycle plants produce high temperature heat for industrial
processes, then a waste heat recovery boiler feeds an electrical plant.
Bottoming cycle plants are only used when the industrial process requires
very high temperatures such as furnaces for glass and metal manufacturing,
so they are less common."

For reasons that escape me _this_ _particular_ system, as described in my
link, uses a bottoming cycle. That is why I am puzzled.

Andy

I think it's to do with the dumping of excess heat when generating
electricity.
Or trying not to.

You can get waste heat recovery boilers that work off the exhaust gases of a
gas turbine (which may be generating electricity.) The exhaust gases are
oxygen rich so the heat availble to the waste heat boiler can be adjusted by
spraying addtional fuel into the exhaust gases. (Like an afterburner in
aircraft.)

I looked into all this once (to run off gas). The problem was the gas needed
to be compressed for the turbine and the compressor would have used a
quarter of the power generated.
So it all fell down by reason of the economics. In Euroland apparently you
can get a high pressure gas supply not available here.

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 14/07/2012 09:29, harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 9:47 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 13/07/2012 08:53, harry wrote:

The boier runs on the exhaust from the engine. Not vice versa.

This turns out not to be the case.

http://www.genlec.com/homeowner/how.html

Andy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogeneration

Yes.

"Topping cycle plants primarily produce electricity from a steam turbine.
The exhausted steam is then condensed and the low temperature heat
released from this condensation is utilized for e.g. district heating or
water desalination.

Bottoming cycle plants produce high temperature heat for industrial
processes, then a waste heat recovery boiler feeds an electrical plant.
Bottoming cycle plants are only used when the industrial process requires
very high temperatures such as furnaces for glass and metal manufacturing,
so they are less common."

For reasons that escape me _this_ _particular_ system, as described in my
link, uses a bottoming cycle. That is why I am puzzled.

Andy
I have been looking at that link you sent. Very interesting.
They seem to be running an "expansion motor" using something like (say
paraffin/refrigerant gas) at low temperatures to utilise a greater % of the
heat to make electricity.
I can't see the point of the green circuit, I would have thought the
evaporator and the heat exchanger could have been one.
But the electricity is generated first before it goes to the heating circuit
as with other CHP.
So they have gone back to original CHP of a hundred years ago but instead of
steam, they are using this "organic fluid/vapour" to drive the generator.
I wonder if the one in the DM is the same?

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 14/07/2012 09:29, harry wrote:
On Jul 13, 9:47 pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 13/07/2012 08:53, harry wrote:

The boier runs on the exhaust from the engine. Not vice versa.

This turns out not to be the case.

http://www.genlec.com/homeowner/how.html

Andy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogeneration

Yes.

"Topping cycle plants primarily produce electricity from a steam turbine.
The exhausted steam is then condensed and the low temperature heat
released from this condensation is utilized for e.g. district heating or
water desalination.

Bottoming cycle plants produce high temperature heat for industrial
processes, then a waste heat recovery boiler feeds an electrical plant.
Bottoming cycle plants are only used when the industrial process requires
very high temperatures such as furnaces for glass and metal manufacturing,
so they are less common."

For reasons that escape me _this_ _particular_ system, as described in my
link, uses a bottoming cycle. That is why I am puzzled.

Andy

I found this which seems to fit the case..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rankine..._Rankine_cycle

"AJH" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 18:43:00 +0100, "dennis@home"
wrote:


If its the one in the links with the scroll watsit then it heats fluid in
the boiler,

It looks like it heats both ch water and low boiling point liquid in
the boiler.

The drawing I saw (and now can't find) shows a split in the boiler, it may
just be to show the two circuits.
However if the liquid condenses at a useful CH temp then the water can go
straight out to the heating without having to go through the boost phase.
I haven't looked for a spec for what temperatures the fluid condenses at.

The lbp liquid evaporates and is expanded through the
scroll turbine, doing work to produce electricity, the low pressure
vapour is then cooled in the condenser by the ch return, effectively
recovering heat, this cooling turns the vapour back to liquid which is
then pumped back to the boiler. This is the same circuit as a
refrigerator uses.

The preheated ch water then passes through the boiler. If this is
still below 56 C then presumably the boiler still works as efficiently
as any condensing boiler.

AJH