Alternative Offshore Hydroelectric Plant

It seems like an ok idea, if the purpose of the design is to produce peak power, or more continuous power, than sperratic wind power. However, the use of windmills for pumping will lower the efficiency of the design, especially if they are electrical generators, as every change from energy medium reduces efficiency.

If the purpose however is not for energy storage, and simply for energy generation to feed into the grid, it would be better just to have the windmills offshore, without the hydro component.

However, using this method offshore in areas of high tidal fluctuation could use tidal energy to fill an internal reservoir, and at low tide, could use the turbines. However, it is unlikely that the height required for turbine generation could be reached using this method.

It would be interesting to investigate the efficiencys of mechanical pumps and windmills vs generator windmills, as this method may result in an increase in efficiency of the wind turbines on the market.

I've added Stirling Solar units. In the background, on top of the new capacitor, I've put 50 rows of seating plus a large area about 150 feet wide, that can be used as park land, (pure water right underneath, and sturdy enough to support soil) or if I continue with the stadium concept, it could be a way of earning more income by holding large venue presentations, or some variation on the theme.

With almost a 3 mile circumference, it could be a great velodrome too, or alternative energy vehicle testing track. Underneath the seating will be storage units and mechanical operations equipment, control stations, etc.

I think the place should house 1000 people. The system should cost 5 billion to build, so thats about 5 million per resident... a bit too high for a house.. but the business aspects should help. given that they would be buying into a a business with many Megawatts of power, and millions of gallons of pure water, then I think that it would be a tremendous opportunity. The business will run for a long time I think, once its built, and payback should be at least equivalent to other hydroelectric generating stations as a ratio.

With the capability to grow most of your food, you would only need income to buy consumer products. I think that beds, chairs, tables, cabinets, counters, etc. could be simply cast in concrete. This would simplify living. Residents would provide/import mattresses, cushions, paint, arts, etc. and all other personal belongings.

I was thinking the facility could easily house an engineering university, and then part of an student's degree would be learning all about energy systems (at least), partly by operating the systems in their practicum. (there could be organic agricultural food and nutrition studies too, as well as marine biology.. the list goes on) Therefore, students would have subsidized (at least partially) schooling, and the facility could turn out a thousand engineers/scientists every four years...

The more I think about it, the more I think an offshore habitat like this is a really great living. Don't even need a car. stress free living. independence from the world economy. (the place provides all the essentials of life) I can't help but think it would be an extremely positive environment. at least for adults...maybe for kids too.

I also think that the "Super Critical Water Oxidation" (SCWO) technology could be used at this facility for the processing of organic waste, as there is access to high pressure (seawater), plus an abundance of energy, and that can be used to hydrolyze water to create Oxygen, which will be used to combust the organic substances. If it can be perfected and industrialized, it has the potential to solve all the waste processing for the 1000 residents, and possible thousands of visitors to events.

Chris

Zounds!

Chrisg288 that's a great concept! It jogged my mind to pull one of my own foggy ideas out of buried mode and share it here, too.

I've been fooling around with a horizontal wind turbine toy mounted on the roof. It's made of a fairly long commercial heat/cool blower axle with three "squirrel cage" hubs mounted in tandem on the single shaft. It's got a cogged auto belt pulley hooked to an alternator (Pulley speed is increased 1 to 8 by size of the turbine sheave to generator sheave) with a standard auto regulator to massage the juice. It puts its 14 vdc electricity into all of my battery powered tools in a tool-shed in the backyard. It's an almost silent free source of power for my wireless tools. I'm considering mounting a coupler to an A/C generator once I figure out how to sync it to my homes grid through a controller and going back to the old way of charging the tool batteries.

More to the Point:

The turbine is not bothered by the turbulence induced by nearby trees or the pitch of the house like screw propeller turbines are prone to; nor does it care which way the wind blows or how strongly it blows. It makes juice beginning at 3 mph and does not increase speed any further when the wind is stronger than 22 mph; it just dumps the excess. I once slipped and fell against the turbine blade when there was a spanking wind blowing and got a bruise from blunt force impact for my trouble, but was not cut or otherwise hurt by this low rpm generator system. It's relatively safe for bumbling humans and other critters, too.

Your floating reinforced concrete dam idea. My idea borrows from yours, which is much more elegant than mine. Your idea forced the arc in my mind that solves the problem of the destructive forces from turbulence or collisions in ocean and river course generation systems, most of which never get further than science project studies or prototypes, because of their Achilles heal; Unproven design, cost, safety and environmental impact.

Why not a pile driven anchored, reinforced horizontal cylindrical shape concrete inner casing of say 1/3 diameter of the outer horizontal "squirrel cage" vanes which would be turned by ocean currents or river currents. The generators would of course be located at the bottom of the hollow caisson, sealed from water; accessible from above by your spiral stairs and one would imagine a pulley lift from a light industrial crane could also be mounted at the top, under a roof. River or ocean beds up to 100 feet deep with vanes of say 90 feet in diameter driving low rpm generators would make for some SERIOUS electrical outputs, don't you think? No fancy tethers for planning screw type generators. No worries about vessel turbulence from wakes damaging the vanes.. Or serious danger to food fish or whales from direct strikes or screw noise. A whole series of these could be set along the Pacific and the Atlantic seaboard, well within the heavy sea lanes used by marine interests and easily linked to the grid onshore, too. All the rivers that empty into the Great Lakes could power the whole or Canada, come to that. The Missisipi River could probably could do the same for the U.S! What do you think?

Thank you Tinker65, my compliments on your construction. sorry for causing you to have an 'arc' or short circuit..

I've been obsessed with this for the last 4 days.. and you aren't helping.. lol (I'm supposed to be looking for a job..lol.) I like the idea of horizontal turbines too. even those little whirligigs for advertising. (if you've seen one) I have to work out some of the math for it soon.. but there is sooo many possibilities that can be integrated.. I'm starting to call it Ringworld. (have to acknowledge the contribution of Larry Niven to this engineering fantasy)

Note: I haven't really thought of this as floating, except for positioning (the smaller first version) and definitely not the big one. I have envisioned it as sitting on the seabed, and possibly attached with piles driven into the bedrock.

As to your question, yes, I think small installations of horizontal turbines, pile driven to the sea bed is quite reasonable. basically a fence across a tidal bay, or a river outlet as you say.. and the cable running between them.. On the same pole can be a wind turbine.. although down there in Mississippi, they would have to be protected from over-rotation during hurricane season.

I was thinking of a new type of bladed wind generator that had hydraulic telescoping blades, so that as the rotation speeds up, at a certain setpoint, the blades contract, which (while temporarily speeding things up) will decrease the swept area, and thrust on the blades, resulting in a lower rotation (after friction slows the existing inertial energy) it is also a safe system for hurricane zones. It is more complicated for sure..requiring a control system of sorts.. but maybe worth it..

you should send your email address to cwarner7_11, and he can give you his tidal/wave energy documents.. they are very informative. you will like them.

As for the crane system I thought of a railroad track around the top, and a gantry being able to rotate on that.. but you'd have to have a freight platform accessible to the gantry for it to work properly. (on the small column).. I don't know how it would work on the large facility. but again.. so many possibilities.

Chris.

Dang!

I'm sitting here late at night running a fever the latest flu running around and I just can't stop cognitions coming to mind from this thread! lol A rancher friend a mile or so away, that lets me ride his horses to keep them from being coral soured, has a year round flowing stream along his property. I'm thinking that the prototype gizmo's I waxed on about will become a working portable pump in a few days from now; made from a squirrel cage turbine, and an auto water pump and an old tire rim to mount them on and weight down. Get the picture? This idea is for a third world water pump for irrigation. Cheap, portable only three things needed. Running stream of water, portable, self-contained, horizontal squirrel cage pump, some hose to run up the bank and over to an arable field.

My point? You guys do not need a big grant or project to start up your operation! which you surely must start up because it sure as heck is never going to happen if you are waiting for a venture capitalist or mega engineering outfit to sign you up. I can tell you that just starting off small with JUNK from the back yards of professional service shops was my only source of FREE prototype hardware and now I've got a nice little post-retirement income I don't need, from cobbling together copies of toys my neighbors have seen and told others about - no selling or advertising just look, palaver, place a deposit and I build 'em.

Give it a try my young friend - you'll have a ball, trust me. I'm retired and working just as hard as I ever did all of my career. Do what you love and you can't go wrong. Make some small scale working USEFULL prototypes and they'll come.

That's why my handle is Tinker65. I had to retire to find that out - boy talk about a slow learner :-) You say you're looking for a job? Surely you have some small scale working mock ups you can put to good use? No? well what's holding you back? Seems to me a rain barrel, a gravity powered pump and mini science water powered generator and a light bulb rigged up for a demo rig would do for starters. Rig a small dynamo to one of those wind sock turbine toys you told me about onto a tall pole you can swing around if there is no wind, coble a wire down the handle to and run the mini pump to pump out water to a bucket on top for your gravity source, hmmm? Your neighbors, your countrymen, your world, NEEDS this new way of using nature to make our energy. It just FEELS right, you know? It IS as simple as that guys - complexity is an illusion that those who got, dangle to blind those who don't got. whew... you can even use my third world water pump for your mock up to pump water up the bank of your own stream into a holding tank (barrel) and then gravity flow back through a small water powered dynamo just for grins

I think you have got the right idea. While I might think Chris's ideas are wonderful, if I gave him all of my yearly income, he might be able to get a small boat that would get him to his location. But to the big money people, his ideas are just not something that are worth is money. But build a small scale working model, now you can sell your idea.

My intention at this stage was to validate the basic ideas, and do some brainstorming to synthesize other green energy ideas together to make a powerful concert of engineering, based on solid proven or proveable ideas, and then proceed trying to put it together... (not done yet)

but thank you for the encouragement. When the issues have been clarified enough, then I will begin to prototype. There are certain aspects that have to be calculated mathematically I think.. like buoyancy.. but there are enough mathematicians here to help I think. I just have to get their attention..lol

As far fetched as this can seem.. I am trying to be pragmatic about it.. It is only fantasy till someone builds it right? I don't own this idea concept anymore.. I gave it up to the world.. but I'm still contributing, so I'm not the only one who could experiment with it either. If someone else takes it and builds it.. I won't be upset. I just want to see the pictures.

My brain is a flurry of ideas about this.. so when that settles down, I'll be able to test out some parts of it more.

Chris

Update on the water turbine project.

I braced my rancher friend with the stream powered water pump idea. He says, "Hold up there pard, gotta talk to the bureau of land management - this is public land and that creek is owned by land management, see?"

A bureaucrat shows up at my shop a couple weeks later - notices my demo turbine in the back. It's being artificially powered by an electric motor turning a v-belt demo of my anti-grav bearings mounted horizontal turbine - the one I'm trying to get to Not shake a roof to pieces if mounted on a peaked roof... well his face gets real grave and serious. (I don't think he understood that it was a test bed mock up for a wind turbine, you see.).

He gets in my face and tells me that he hears from <my friend> that I want to put a water pump, powered by stream force to irrigate my friends' pasture land. Is that about right? I tell him, "Yep." He gets all red in the face and says that is why he came to see me in person. The land is leased by my rancher friend from the land management outfit. The stream's water is not for irrigation but watershed maintenance. No irrigation is allowed (except for wells ranged along its course that are grandfathered in from before the beginning of recorded history.). For anyone to artificially take water out of it would violate a bunch of provisions and rules and regulations, etc.

Oil well. That was the end of a prototype water powered irrigation system made from recycled junk parts.

time for a rain dance...

sorry to hear

chris

Hi Tinker65,

Unfortunately that >>bureaucrat<< is right and You are wrong :-((

It was not oil wells he was refering to, it was water wells........

Taking water from creek would disrupt water supply downcreek, if any significant quantities of water are diverted for irigation, and people could be left without water beside liquidation of whole ecosystem connected to creek.

Obviously they dont think You can bore new well(s) either. But if that would not be the case and new wells could be bored on edge of this pasture, then You would be able to use creek to produce electricity (that would not disrupt anything) and use electricity to pump the water from new wells. Since this water is from underground, it would be mostly returned there after pasture irigation.

You have one other option, if they let You use creek for electricity production, and this is to install water condensation device(s) and use this water for irigation. This is also good use of electricity produced by wind and solar power stations.

But catch is that this is government land and perhaps they would not let such instalationd to be built and installed......

I think I have idea for water condensation that would use just temperature provided by sun and general environment, but I need CFD software to test idea if it work or not.

Did You ever heard of >>water Ram<<? That is way for water to pump itself for irigation, and there are no moving parts nor any externall energy is spent.....

If that would be private land, one way to irigate that pasture would be to make serpentine channel trough pasture and divert creek from its normall course, but at end return it to same creek bed downstream, perhaps just below point where it was diverted, but that would depend on land configuration. That way there would be slow but continous irigation of pasture and not much water would be lost, could even help to drain surplus water after strong rains, but that depend on climate which I am not familiar with. From Your intention to irigate pasture, I would say You dont have enough rain, or not frequently enough.......

Anyhow, whatever You try to do, think of consequences first. Once You take care of consequences, the rest would take care of itself......

Believe it or not, not all rules and regulations are senseless, even if comming from government :-))

Regards,

Marijan Pollak

My serendipity moment for an idea similar to yours happened in the bathtub. Taking a plastic margarine container, I pushed it downward into the water until it flooded evenly on all sides and quickly filled up. And just like the shampooing instructions say, this was repeated over and over again. Then the container was pushed upside down into the water with an air pocket trapped inside. As I was holding the container down, I thought about what would happen if a straw was punctured through the top. We all know that the force of the water pressure from underneath the container would instantly, with great force, push all of the air up the straw, with a small, but significant, amount of water, to follow. Having played in ditches and creeks all my life, with the occasional day on the beach, I started to wonder if water could be made to flow downward through the straw at a force greater than the force pushing the air out. And you are correct, it can't be done, not at this scale and not with this configuration. But what about on the size of a large scale hydroelectric power plant ? So if you were to build a room at the bottom of your structure that does not have a bottom and is connected to the surrounding seas, would the velocity of the falling water in a penstock be great enough to prevent the air from inside from escaping back up ? Is the kinetic energy of the falling water greater than the pressure being exerted from below on the air trapped in the room ? Imagine, if you will, your idea as a bottomless pit, one that could never be filled.

Nope,

Sorry - "economies of scale" still will not overcome the laws of conservation of energy. Bigger won't make what a smaller version would not do because the forces of the energy in opposition are equal at any scale or size. In fact to get any flow down into the room you describe would take some amount greater than that wanting to explode up in order to create downward flow - it would take even more energy than you'd make due to inefficiency and loses to balance the energy equation. Fun brain teaser anyway. Bet you were never bored taking a bath lol

Thank you Onthebeach,

I get some of my best ideas in the tub... but i don't understand the bottomless pit part. clarify?

Chris

This same method could be used onshore to store wind power in a gravity/Hydro form. Imagine Using solar heat, wind power and solar cells to store water in a Gravity battery as a source of of clean power to our grid. All with existing Technology. Build a conical structure shaped like a Volcano if required. Grow timber on the unsunlit slope. Or use existing natural structures such as valleys. As the globe warms the ecologies will change. The Pine Beetle loves this warm climate :( There will be more wind energy available due to a higher base level of energy in the atmospheric system. Might as well use it.

Dear synchronicityengineering,

I agree with you that there are applications for reverse pumping onshore. Kilgore Trout posted this link, which discusses a current application where pumped storage is used, which gives this link too.

Let us hope that in the change of ecologies, we are not lemmings, doomed to run off the cliff.

I'm largely of the camp that thinks our trends can't conclusively be tied to manmade issues, but that the changes that we see may be part of the 10,000 year iceage cycle... regardless, our actions should be the same. clean up our act. get off the money treadmill, and into value creation instead.

Ciao

Chris

Thinking about a previous post, regarding the straw in the bath, then expanding that into your concept, I come up with following. As your columns are hollow, they can be used as oscillating water columns, the columns can be used as pairs, one to have and inlet "B", with an oscillating water column "C", the compressed air discharging through valve "H" into bus "F" and the suction bus "G" letting air back in through valve "I". The compressed air is then fed into the adjoining column, when the water level falls in the oscillating column, the compressed air forces the water from the adjoining column out through pipe "E', there would be a non return valve in the line. And as sea level "A" falls, air would be drawn in through valve "I"' creating a vacuum in bus "G". This would then draw water in to the adjoining column through "D", and no return valve "K", The reason for doing it this way is to minimising marine growth, one envisions that the water in the enclosed area would be fed from a nearby river, so that when the water pumped out through the adjoining column would increase the fresh water content thereby minimising marine growth, this would help keep maintenance to a minimum, (Ones hopes). Just some thoughts on pumping with minimum moving parts involved.

Regards JD.

Dear JDRetired,

Thank you for the creative application.. but... I have to admit that I can not understand it with the pictures as shown. I understand the compressed air system link readily enough. Would it be possible for you to create a schematic of the system using please? I applaud you on your diagrams.. but I can't seem to see the function in my head.. sorry. maybe a couple of versions of the same image would work, showing the different cycles in color for compression and vacuum pressures, and or flow arrows, to help out us simpler types. Is this an existing circuit somewhere else? Help.

Chris

Your diplomatically correct, it does not work, I have not allowed for differential head pressures, a bit obsessed with marine growth contamination. I'll think about it in the shower, don't know if thats any better than in the bath.

Regards JD.

I wasn't saying it wouldn't work.. there are pneumatic engines out there.. but I think I need to see the different states.. you know, like they show the cycles of an internal combustion engine. I have a good imagination, but when it is not my idea, sometimes it doesn't always make a picture in my head right away.. I have to see the action, which is harder. In your diagram, the water levels at the different states need to be shown more clearly I think. Don't give up.

and if you have free compressed air available, here is a concept that can use it. (although the total value of the system is questionable, as direct airmotor/generator systems would probably be better) still some form of it may have some application somewhere.. so I'll throw it out there.

Cycles:

1) starting at the top, water is permitted to enter the water fill valve, and air is permitted to leave through the purge valve. This increases the average density of the entire assembly, and causes it to sink. all valves close. (should have check valves installed to direct the flow)

2) As the unit moves through the water, the turbines will turn, and electricity generated, and transmitted by rolling or sliding contact to a storage system, or grid.

3) Upon reaching the bottom, the unit latches to station, and compressed air is permitted to enter the air tank, forcing the water out the purge valve.(opened) This decreases the average density of the assembly, and upon the release of the latch, allows the entire assembly to rise buoyantly. (I'm not sure how to do this without stopping and latching the unit, unless the compressed air source stays connected all the time..)

4) As the unit moves through the water, the turbines will turn, and electricity generated, and transmitted by rolling or sliding contact to a storage system, or grid.

5) Upon reaching the top,the unit will open the water fill, and purge valves, and the cycle repeats.

The problem is that the density can not be changed without adding energy (compressed air) and typically it takes electricity to create that. and so it would be pointless to use electricity to make electricity. If the compressed air can come from some alternative energy source, then it might be usable. anothe problem is that the energy output is somewhat intermittent (top and bottom) and not uniform.

If you wish to put it into 100 feet of water, you need to overcome 60 psi water pressure.

1000 feet, you need to overcome 455 psi (seawater)

The following is a number of sketches,to try and get a working system, the object being to have a system without any moving parts, or if moving parts are necessary they are readily accessible for replacement or maintenance, and working parts kept away from the corrosive action of salt water. I think this might work.

Sketch 1, the easy bit, is one of the surge columns alternatively spaced around the perimeter, of the lagoon? With normal wave action causing a level surge within the column, the surge action in turn discharging the entrapped air into a pressure bus, and being refreshed from the atmosphere, the system being controlled with non return valves. The pressure bus would be common to all the other surge columns.

Sketch 2, shows the moment that the air pressure being fed into the discharge column is great enough to over come the differential head difference between it and the sea level, and as this pressure may not be achieved by surge action alone, consideration may have to be given to constructing a common pressure bus running along side the main pressure bus, this bus would then be the main bus feeding the discharge columns, and it in turn would be designed to attain the necessary pressure by the lower pressure main bus driving a differential compressor system, through different size pistons, thereby enabling the system to work. When the air pressure in the discharge column is high enough to discharge water through the bottom non return valve over coming the head pressure, a discharge sensor would lift until such time that flow ceases.

Sketch 3, the moment that the discharge sensor has closes, a signal is sent to the discharge sensor actuator, this would open the pressure release valve, lock the inlet valve, thus allowing the pressure in the discharge column to fall the atmospheric pressure, when this has been achieved normal head pressure difference between the lagoon and column level will by means of gravity equalise. Thereafter the system start all over again.

Regards JD.

Thank you JDretired.. Nice drawings.. I saw more of the picture.. but... I tried to understand the cycles.. and in the process, had to make my own sketch to figure it out.. and when I couldn't make that work in my mind.. I tried a few variations and came up with the following.. I never did understand what you were talking about with differential compressors, sensors, etc.. Does the following make any sense to you? Chris

Very similar, but has a few problems, first as the reservoir level falls the volume of entrapped air increases, this will interfere with the compression and suction cycle, if there is no make up air.. Second, the difference in head height between the reservoir surface and sea surface, requires that the oscillating wave air pressure is high enough to force the water out.

It's these two problems that I have tried to deal with, the first part of the cycle forces air into the area above the reservoir through a non return valve, (green on your drawing), but on the suction half of the cycle the sea side, (dark blue), draws air in from the atmosphere, this causes air pressure to accumulate on the reservoir side, (light blue), some time in the cycle when the air pressure is high enough to over come the head pressure difference between the reservoir level and sea level water will flow through ball valve "3". When this occurs a sensor on the discharge registers that flow has occurred, when this flow ceases, the sensor releases the air pressure on the reservoir side and shut off the air coming from the wave action, this allows the pressure in the reservoir side to drop to atmospheric pressure, and water will naturally flow in through non return valve "2", under the force of gravity. When the levels are even the vent to atmosphere shuts off and air from the sea oscillations start the cycle again.

To deal with the second problem, if the pressure generated by the oscillating wave action is not enough to over come the head difference between the reservoir and sea level then a method will be necessary to overcome this. Instead of the air being delivered directly into the reservoir area, the pressure is used to operate a compressor, something similar to a boiler steam operated feed pump, the steam acts on a large piston area, which in turn transfers its motion to a small piston in area to produce a pressure greater than the steam pressure driving it. Thus we can have a lower air pressure raised to a higher pressure just like in a multi staged compressor. This is long winded but I hope it helps explain the cycle.

Regards JD.

Just to add an extra note regarding the ability of the oscillating wave to produce enough pressure to over come head pressure differential between reservoir and sea level. It can be seen as reservoir level drops the air volume increases, while the wave stroke remains the same. Therefore while the volume above the reservoir level increases the compression ratio drops and it will continue to do so until it cant displace any water from the reservoir side, hence the need to step up the pressure.

Regards JD.

JD.. unless we can show that there is still some benefit to be had, I think that if we ultimately have to use the wave to turn a turbine, we would go ahead and do that with all the chambers, and avoid the cost of the control system. Ultimately it is the difference between reservoir level and sea level that we are trying to over come anyway.. but it still isn't functioning in my head. chris

I did perform some simple inquiry into the first problem of the Aspect Ratio of the basic cylinder.

Premise 1. Deeper is better, for converting water pressure to electricity.

Premise 2. Wider is better, for stability in water, for buoyant devices

So what I did was to experiment with some ceramic baking dishes in a tub of water. I have a set of dishes that appears to be a series of small to large. I placed each to float in the water. I noted the waterline of buoyancy. I then filled each with water to find out how much each would hold before sinking.

They are all made of the same material, so presumably equal in density. (not average density)

The large dish was decidedly more stable. It wasn't the widest aspect ratio of the 3, but as best as I can figure it, has an aspect ratio approaching 2:1. This suggests to me that 2:1 is the best. If you go taller, it tends to flop over more quickly. If shallower, then it doesn't hold as much water, or reach as great a depth, and sinks more quicky in a wave action.

The experiment showed something else.. the wall thickness on each of the dishes was not consistent. The middle dish appeared to have a heavier wall, or if it was the same as the large dish, then it was thinner by ratio. the small dish was somewhat thinner, but probably equal by ratio to the middle dish.

This may have been the reason for the differences in waterline, but regardless, the large dish with the aspect ratio approaching 2:1, and the least wall thickness was the most stable, and reached the greatest depth. Therefore, I conclude that this ratio should be employed in reaching any desired depth. (100 feet or a 1000 feet)

Previously it was a guess when I switched the narrow cylinder to the wide variety in my renderings, but now I think it to be well founded. I can't really find any supporting information on google? Any comments?

Just one more try to show that it is functional, as to whether it's efficient is another story? done away with expensive control system and have three rotary valves that operate when the air tank reaches operating pressure, as you can see the wave surge drives a rotary vane motor on both exhaust and suction cycle, this then drive a compressor that has a 1:10 ratio increase, so if the wave surge is around approximately 10 psi, then the working air pressure is around 100 psi, enough to handle 231ft head. also when the pump column exhausts it does so though the vane motor recovering some of the energy. I have posted this in case anyone may be interested? and wont push it any further. It is an outside the box idea, and I don't think there is a working example of it, so maybe its not functional.

Regards JD.

Dear JDretired,

I applaud your extra effort, but I think there is an over-unity problem with the rotary vane motor and compressor. The input energy you are using to run it is 10 times less energy than the output, plus it is also discharging to the reservoir that is already charged to the same pressure as the motor input. I don't think that works. I think you need a slightly greater amount of energy in to make it work. Maybe I'm not understanding it correctly. If you can do it, for sure it will cost you more than ten times the volume of input air to comressed air. don't give up. remember edision took 1000 tries to make the light bulb.

Chris

Here's an old image I found in a book, that seems able to produce a force to move water from a second vessel, by pressure from a first vessel, above the level of the first vessel. what do you think? might work with wave generating pressure.

Thank you it is interesting, but this is your post and your doing a good job of it. Stick in there.

Regards JD.

Chris, this seems to be amazing. According to the text, this is a well-proven, demonstrated principle, and it seems to be what we'd call perpetual motion, or better than that, perpetual over-unity. If it truly produces a constant flow, no matter how small, it can be scaled up and made to generate more power.

Bravo. Really an interesting concept. I might just build one for the hell of it, but I've never heard of this before.

Replying to my own post because Wikipedia describes this in detail. It's only temporary, and therefore not perpetual motion (what a surprise!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero%27s_fountain

No way! It could work for limited time, but only till basin from which >>fountain<< is taking water is not exhausted. after this it has to be overturned so that water from bottom go to that reservoir to fill it up, and air must be refilled so pressure would be present for next cycle. Flow is limited by nozzle opening, which limit quantity of water that spring out, and it would take some time until that basin is exhausted to bottom when compressed air would escape as well.

Dear Chris,

Though not directly contributing to your very interesting and most informative discussion I continue to follow same with great interest. Some of the ideas are brilliant as are the presentations and I congratulate you.

As earlier indicated , to achieve acceptance and importantly the benefits which come from proving your concepts is the hard part. No one will advance you the funds without a patent or prototype. Whilst I recognize the generosity which you have as a guiding principle i.e. giving your work to the world, the reality is that even when there is ( or I should say : was) abundant funds available for research , every avenue I tested required, above all : a patent or a recognition which has financial rewards and or prospects. Do not forget that Einstein on being asked what would he want to do if he returned on earth , answered : " I would want to be a plumber " ! There is no reason to believe that all he wanted was to get his hands dirty !

There are in Australia some worthwhile ocean engineering Companies see www.carnegie in WA. with their Ceto submerged wave harnessing concept (it pumps a lot of water and is visually and ecologically unobtrusive).They have managed to obtain substantial financial support from large International Energy Groups (later followed by : Government grants )Theirs are simple devices which can be mass produced. The financial risk linked to what you have in mind ( in some ways mine are in the same scope ) , inevitably must fall into the financial region of : NASA and other large Government Funded prospects.

Best of luck and courage,

Labor Omnia Vincit

I hadn't given up on this.. I just spent some time thinking about how to actually go about building such a humongous structure, in the water..etc.. I have seen the Hibernia pictures for the gravity base, started in dry-dock basically.. and so that got the following picture going..

but another idea got spawned. extruding/excreting the structure something in the manner of a spiral sea shell creature (chambered Nautilus)

But I think that for extrusion to work, then the spiral would have to be uniform.

this way you could deliver barges of to the structure, starting small, and keep going as long as there is money. If it is a money generating structure, then it can keep going.. There are many improvements over the monolithic bowl. I don't think it will float.. but has better safety control over catastrophic failure, building space... I am still convinced that the idea of an offshore hydroelectric dam is a good one. I think that internal isolation barriers (at least one) will have to be built, and can effectively create chambers within the spiral, but the could be like large Locks having large gate doors. (not shown)

I've been watching all kinds of documentaries on dams, and the construction problems (like heat), and the environmental damage they do.. and I become more convinced that this is a valid concept with a lot of possibilities. Also, there has been significant development in the last century of being able to pour concrete underwater, (if necessary) and have it be strong enough. just google "underwater concrete" and you will see what I mean. It can be done.

Chris

some supporting ideas.. to get an idea what it would be like to build this.

a large water gate..

what it might feel like to be in a similar space in the spiral

concrete delivery by barge

this is a huge slipformed LNG tank idea someone had.

offshore construction...

large scale concrete slipforming.. I know the CN tower in Toronto was built that way.

large segmented construction (stadium)

http://advantageaustria.org/gb/news/local/2008-09-02-zaha-hadid--rieder.en.jsp

I wish I could post pdf files directly, and then you would be able to see this.. but basically, after sleeping on the extruder idea, I felt that if the wall section was 50 to 200 feet high, or more, then you would not be able to pour concrete like that. and it would have to be layered horizontally. So this idea is an extruder that is basically a barge, with an enclosed area underneath. It would fill up with water, but it would be still water, which is all you need for pouring underwater concrete. Its like a large set of stairs (each step is 5' high, by 10' deep, and narrowing in width) and 3 faces of the cube are not there. (this allows it to extrude) and so must be poured on top of a structure to form the bottom and rear face of each step. After each section is set, the barge unit is shifted 10 feet, and the process starts again. Each section would have holes in the step face, to allow interconnecting rebar to be inserted and linked prior to each pour.. so maybe the barges could carry large spools or lengths of reinforcing material (oilfield coil-tubing and injector system?) Of course this is all to work in conjunction with other barges delivering concrete and materials.

I know that this barge has issues, as it obviously won't do tight radius curves in a helix, but its a start. I just wanted to explore the construction methods. PS. the pouring of concrete underwater would be able to be faster due to the inherent cooling, which slows down the pouring process on land. In the Hoover, Grand Coolee, and other large constructions, they actually refrigerate the concrete to speed it up. (according to videos I've watched)

this extruder barge as shown could extrude a solid tapered wall 150 feet high. (it probably doesn't need to be solid..probably only need 10-20 feet thick concrete and could maybe extrude living space in the top 20 feet.

Chris

Goldmine!

How high do you think that you want to store the water? I remembered reading about a place with a very large tidal rise. Now I have found this.

In the Bay of Fundy, between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, the difference between high and low tides (the tidal range) may be as great as 46 feet (14 meters).

I am not sure if that is once, or twice a day, but that energy potential is great. If you discount the first and last ten feet of rise, you are left with a 26 foot rise that must be taking place at a fast rate. Is a 110 foot water difference sufficient to turn a water generator?

This would seem to be a good place to test your project.

I've vacationed around the Bay of Fundy. It is a beautiful and pristine area. I would not like to see any hydro instillation there. Most of it is a Provincial Park anyway.

It's amazing to see a fishing boat tied to a dock, then come back several hours and see that boat resting in the mud 40 ft below you.

http://www.bayoffundytourism.com/tides/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Fundy#Tidal_electrical_power_generation

However, a plan such as Chris's, far off shore, would probably not impact the beauty of the bay.

I remember vacationing in Cape Cod very fondly, and would not want to diminish the charms of these beautiful places. Now for the hard part, harnessing that power while preserving the beauty of the area.

I'm still focusing on the idea of 'offshore' facilities.. so that locations can not be tied to the geography, except the depth of the water.. If a floating version is possible, then its just a matter of being able to transmit energy to a grid, if desired. On the beauty side.. I'm one of those people that likes dams and hydro projects (masses of concrete) but I don't like the idea of moving a million people out of their homes, or flooding historical places, or killing off natural green space.

Although I've not given much input, (because I don't know a dam thing about any of this stuff), I've followed it with interest.

At first, I thought is was a whacky idea, but after some thinking, and listening, I now think it's a great idea, that could actually work, on several levels. It could also be a tourist destination, like a stationary cruse ship. I would like to see botanical gardens, like at Kew. And even a circular golf course.

Then, I thought it could be somehow combined with bcmarshall's Idea:

www.marshallsystem.com

The ironic thing about this idea, is that we could build scores of these things with the money we're giving to corrupt bankers.

Marshall system: thats a very interesting proposition.. While there is obviously a huge amount of energy there, I feel quite concerned about the environmental damage. hmmm.. I'll have to think about that one..but he gets top marks for graphics.

I love the idea of offshore botanical gardens.. but I owe most of my concept to Marshall T Savage, and his book "The Millennial Project". (in which he accretes a concrete like substance right out of the seawater, onto electrified metal mesh forms)

I like the spiral idea better, as it clearly allows for more (complete) construction on top. and so golf courses, at least a 9-hole..

Chris.

Thanks for the kind words, Bricktop.

I responded to the original suggestion already, voicing my extreme skepticism of the viability of the concept, even if I admire its audacity. I don't think the physics are there to make it work well enough to justify the cost.

There was also one other obvious issue that I missed commenting on. There's a buoyancy issue. If this cylinder is sealed at the bottom, and is full of air, it is going to float. While it's possible to engineer around this, it must be considered.

You posted a link to my website, www.marshallsystem.com, in which I describe the first vehicle to unlock the awesome potential of hydrothermal vents. I truly believe that it can offer one solid solution for countries lucky enough to have this amazing resource close enough to their shores for use.

I hope you'll all take a peek. I may open a discussion thread on it.

I came to the forum in response to a wind power thread, and I've enjoyed it. It seems that most of you think outside the box, and are not afraid to explore new ideas and concepts. Bravo!

I don't think the concept will work. It's a novel idea, but the physics of it don't work.

The only way it could work is if there were a constant flow of water through the turbines. To gain as much head (gravity drop) as possible, the turbines would have to be located at the bottom of the structure. However, the bottom is also what would fill up first.

In other words, a small amount of flow would fill the bottom of the structure and submerge the generators. While this problem could be mitigated by putting the generators say, halfway down the structure, leaving room at the bottom for water to fill up, you have also limited the head height, and therefore the energy output of the system.

It would have to be sealed at the bottom as well, because otherwise it is a cylinder open at both ends If that were the case, of course atmospheric pressure would cause the levels inside and outside the structure to equalize immediately.

If your concept is to allow the ingress of water from the bottom up, passing through turbines that are below water level as the cylinder fills, you don't have the force of gravity working for you, but against you. Any water above the turbine level would slow the flow through the turbines, and the turbines themselves would actually be trying to spin under water.

This seems to be a relatively simple system to model with scaled water tanks and the like. I hate to rain on your parade here, but I don't think the physics support the concept.

Dear bcmarshall,

Welcome to the CR4 site. Congratulations on your invention! you are certainly right about the energy available. Hope it gets going soon.

As for my idea.. you are obviously right there too, on buoyancy, and the flow gradient. However, I think that the situation can be addressed technologically to be able to make the system pay. The one fundamental factor is that the turbines/generators are to be designed to match the pumping capacity of all the other alternative free energy systems combined. (wind, solar, wave, tidal, ocean/ geothermal, etc) It is this pumping volume in Gallons per Minute that will drive the design, and therefore, the level inside the reservoir will stay at a designed low level.

In addition to that, there are other factors that make this a value creating operation, such as energy storage, water purification, food growing/harvesting capacity, and green nonpolluting stress-free living space. This changes the paradigm from a strictly electrical generating equation, to a life sustaining equation. In addition, as Bricktop pointed out, it could be located at the site of a hydrothermal vent, which would add tremendously to the pumping capacity, and allow the development of a larger structure. More specifically the spiral structure, with the vent in the centre could permit the development of other forms of energy conversion from the vent... but you are the expert there. think about it.

As for buoyancy, yes I think that it needs a base. I'm working on that, and other basic calculations. (To be presented eventually... it takes a while)

Chris.

As I've said, I admire your audacity!

I do see serious problems with what you've described, though. If "the turbines/generators are to be designed to match the pumping capacity of all the other alternative free energy systems combined. (wind, solar, wave, tidal, ocean/ geothermal, etc)", as you stated, then you get nothing for all your efforts. Energy in is always greater than energy out.

Again, I don't like to sound discouraging, but I just can't see how this will win anything for you.

Hi bcmarshall

here are some calculations, based on this calculator

This is how I envision this working.

1. A turbine system permits flow into the reservoir. As it does so, it turns a generator, creating electricity. Its power is based on flow.

2. I've selected a 12" venturi type orifice, as an example for the flow calculations. With this K factor, it will at least be in the ballpark of the turbine. If anyone knows the K factor of a turbine.. let me know and I will recalculate.

3. The pumps that are operated by alternative energy sources will pump water out of the reservoir. The amount of water they can pump, on average, should be equal to the flow rate through the inlet orifice, so the level of the reservoir is low and fluctuates between certain designed low levels, between day and night. (storage)

4. By using an array of alternative energy systems, combined with the energy storage features of the system, it should be able to create energy on a continous basis. (at night too) Even if we have to use batteries, capacitors, ice, springs, compressed air, whatever.. to store the daylight energy, thats how it works.

As far as you offending me, you won't, unless you are trying to. If you are critiquing the technical performance of the system, that is what I want you to do. thats why I'm here. As much as this might seem like Sci-Fi, I do want to figure out ways to make it work..and if it won't.. thats okay too. I am objective about it, enthusiastic, but objective. I want to be corrected (gently) if I am wrong.

Thank you,

Chris

Ok, I have an idea for you. Suppose you didn't have to pump the water out of the reservoir at all!

Imagine the revolving door from a department store, essentially an X configuration tightly fitted within a cylinder which allows the person to enter, it rotates and seals the person inside, and then allows the person to exit at the other side.

Supposing a similar door system were installed at the bottom, simply pushing the water out at the level where it falls. There is no need to pump it. The electrical/mechanical energy needed to rotate the gate would be far less than any pumping configuration would require. It's just pushed out below sea level.

You'd need a scraping mechanism or an air bladder within each compartment of the revolving door in order to empty the compartment on the ocean side which would then return to normal to allow the space for water to enter on the reservoir side.

Using such a system might allow a continuous flow of water because you're not working within the catch 22 of having to pump out all that falls.

If you patent it you better name me too!

bcmarshall,

I think you will still have to add energy to pump up the bladders, or purge the area on the water (returning) side. The external pressure that would push on one side of the door will also push on the other external side of the door, and it won't revolve. the forces will be in equilibrium.

In my system, we have to add energy to remove the incoming flow, and it is only economical if that energy is free.

thank you for think of the idea.. the door idea would work if we figure out how to get the free energies (solar, wave, etc) to purge the water from the returning side.

chris

Is there a simple formula to use to compare flow rate to kw output?

Joules = weight of water over distance moved (head) * 9.81

Watts = joules / (time for head of water to drop to zero.(flow rate))

I'm getting rusty so other may correct. Head pressure is a variable and central to the problem, and how that head pressure is handled is an efficiency problem. In MHO a intergrated system is going to be necessary to make it work.

Regards JD.

Now I am no math scholar, so I may be way off base here, but,seems that in your formula, once you have determined the joules, the longer the flow remains, the lower the watts will be.

I agree with that. The longer the flow lasts , the less head pressure, the heart of the problem, also a certain amount of water will first need to be removed to arrive at a acceptable working head differential. Hence the need for the other systems, electricity produce by wind, solar and waves etc. I think the best way of thinking of the system is as a battery. You charge it up by creating head pressure, and as that head pressure reduces it acting like a flat battery, and needs recharging.

Regards JD.

Jewelry helps. A new car should help. Try flowers. Take her out to a nice secluded restaurant. Whisper in her ear.

If that does not work, buy a hooker.

Maybe its the units that is the problem. perhaps we should just have "Inches of Head" instead of Feet, so there isn't performance anxiety.

There was a person here running for some smaller office. Her name was Morehead. Who could refuse to vote for Morehead?

roflmao

What if head pressure was maintained by tidal action? 46 ft of tidal rise should allow a usable 30 ft. A hollow structure open at the top, and fitted with two hydro generators connected to ports in the bottom of the structure.

Seal the ports at low tide. Wait till there is 10 ft of tide rise, open the ports to allow the generators to run. If the ports and structure are sized correctly, the generators should run till the rising tide slows down near the end of the rising tide. Close the ports at high tide. When the tide has dropped 10 ft, allow the water to run past the generators in the opposite direction. This should be good until near low tide again .

Now your getting close to my original idea a few years back. There would be a vertical structure like a mine shaft, and the generators at the bottom in an adjoining area, the discharge from the generators fed off out to the open ocean, where the head in the vertical structure could be maintained by some tidal pumps and the generator load adjusted to suit. There would also be a larger tunnel running below the discharge tunnel that would take the excess flow during peak demand, and pumped out during off peak. Depends if you can get enough head? The idea to be thought of as a battery type system for nuclear power stations at places where you don't get large tidal variation. And I think that some time in the future these system are going to have to be looked at?

Regards JD.

Bob- The problem with using just the rising and falling tides is the slack times one encounters. By combining the dam concept with an "in stream" style generator that relies on free-flowing water during high flow periods, and the dam system being used only during slack tide periods, one gets nearly constant power supply...

Perhaps a second reservoir that is held in reservoir until the first reservoir has become nearly the same hight as the sea water. The second reservoir would now be full when the first is empty. That should be sized sufficiently to allow it to produce power until the tide changes, and the primary reservoir starts to fill again.

For more land based application (lakes, rivers), lets consider the following scenarios. Suppose you have a river bed you wish to exploit for hydroelectric power, irrigation, etc, as in the image below. You are choosing this site for several reasons, including projected ROI, availability of construction materials, labour, etc.

Tradionally, you get one kick at the cat (sorry Del) for hydro power. However, there is no reason you can't build a "Pumped Reservoir" installation in the same to-be-flooded area, which can be adequately anchored with piles into the ground before it is flooded. It would be based on the same "Reverse Reservoir" notion that is inherent in this thread. (evacuation of the reservoir to create generating capacity) Then you can use available solar, wind, wave energy to produce supplementary electricity, plus have local hydro storage to balance out the cost of grid energy at peak demand.

As in the image below (showing depths as color), very likely you can use existing terrain features to build up the basis of the reservoir(s). (The red areas are the shallow points in the lake.)

Secondly, for installations that have existing hydroelectric dams with manmade lakes behind them, why can we not go ahead and create more pumped storage hydroelectric installations in the same lake, to offset peak demand, and make good use of the alternative energy mix in the given region?

Since I came up with this idea, I considered that lakes and rivers would be alternative sites for an installation, but there could be a good justification made for building at the locations where existing dams are, or new ones are proposed.

Lastly, how many islands are there just offshore that could support large cylindrical holes being bored into the ground, without seriously affecting the locals. If energy storage, and alternative energy production is the product, I think there might be lots that go for it. The excavated material might be used to extend living space by building structures such as those palm tree things built in Dubai.

Chris

An amazing amount of design input for a useful,buckminster fuller type possibility..Not to throw a hammer into the works but this Thursday past i had occassion to tour a facility that is intimately involved in power generation both fossil fuel and nuclear...They,as well as their global competitors are designing,in earnest,small scale nuclear generating facilities as we speak...Small scale being in the 25 MEGAWATT range..These units would be relatively portable and is in other threads re -nuclear i say with some trepidation good.Nuclear has power capability and durability....One of the negatives of nuclear energy is that corporate cooperation globally(in other industries the intense concentration of operations to a handful at best organizations would be considered a cartel and massive fines would/should be administered to get some taxpayer money back)is pretty tight and governments would not enjoy further oversight of this dangerous but fabulous technology if smaller firms began to manufacture/maintain these smaller nuclear energy based portable (much like sea based systems could be i guess) systems..Power loses due to transmission would definitely drop resulting in less need for grid enhancement/gigantic power facilities etc......

RE offshore project once the scale of the idea was introduced i was taken aback...Its gargantuan...much like current huge power generating conglomerates...Interesting to follow....Dreamy in its scale...There must be a way to utilize the up and downing of the reservoir system directly ..Turbines turn at a fixed rate filling and turbines turning at a fixed rate while emptying..Perhaps parrallel systems one for filling up and one for falling down in concert with the tides...

Regards...Marty W.

dreamy... yep. I like that.

but there are dam projects in the world like Three Gorges, that are monstrous. (2336 metres in length, 100 metres high, ~39 billion USD$)

Of course it would have to be done small to start...to prove the concept. I just expanded it, as in my imagination.. if it works, it would go there. The first dams were not that big.. but as technology evolved, construction methods improved, more benefits were realized, then the size grew. a natural progression.

so my focus is to throw ideas in this arena until it becomes a valid concept, or dies. no harm no foul. its just creative brainstorming. feel free to expand on your parallel column idea please.

Chris

for example... an idea I had for wind turbines

Here's another large concrete underwater project that I found to be massive in scale, yet accomplished. Its called the Oresund Fixed Link, which is part bridge, part tunnel. The cool thing is that much of it was done with precast concrete. I found it originally in a Scientific American publication called Extreme Engineering 1999.

truly amazing stuff.

Chris

Just wondering but why not just grab some silt/sediment/ heavier than water stuff, stick it in a big bag and lift/lower it on a winch below a floating object. if you secure the floating platform to the sea floor with cables you then have an energy storage system with no expensive dam-like concrete structure. I think it would be more cost effective.

Yes you are certainly right, that efforts at economy would be needed to provide for the sheer mass of the installation, if a fixed installation is the final design. If a movable system was desired, based on the Hibernia gravity base prototype, then suction methods or other anchoring methods would have to be employed similarly, in order to overcome the huge buoyancy factor.

The question is, at this point, can enough energy be harvested and stored to make such a construction worthwhile. I have absolutely no doubt it could be built, and that wave/wind/solar/geo energy can run it, but it will be expensive to build and operate.

Is it worth it?

Chris

Dear Chris,

It is good that You are with me at least in dreaming up great things, and that You are busy working again!

I am sorry that You did not read texts that I have sent together with pictures, as there is written that generator sits on the ground vertically oriented and that my turbine is fixed in also vertical (upright) position on its axle. The rest of construction is unconnected with this and one pipe provide air flow for turbine. Since turbine and generator below are in center of rotation of structure above, so structure rotates around center (in case of active models or >>Windcatchers<< as I cal them) when it position itself to be aimed into Wind flow with forward opening.

Geo dome structure is perhaps too massive like it is pictured (that is why I need industrial engineer to calculate how much would be enough) but it carry weight of construction that catch wind, and has to be able to stand push of wind as well, because I use hydraulic pressure instead of straight wind flow, and construction act as Venturi pipe, compressing and speeding up Wind.

What is not shown is that this frame is closed on sides and open only in front, because I had to submit simple drawings to Patent Office.........

Geo dome lies on big but simple roll bearing, and wind is turning it against itself by pushing on tail and eccentrically mounted pointed end with pipe leading air from back down to turbine, which together act as lever for turning opening of windcatcher against wind flow.

There should be another pipe leading >>exhausted<< air out in tail direction and parallel to pipe that supply compressed and speeded up air to turbine, providing at least some reactive force that would fight against push of wind from front side.

Also my system of one way doors that would be in front and on top side are not shown because I am not so good at drawing in 3D like You (that is why I need Your help), and because those doors are special kind in themselves, depending on another invention of mine that would reuse plastic bottles instead of recycling them.

Anyhow, doors in front are in horizontal rows and would open only to inside, and they have ability to close airtight when pressure inside become equal or greater than pressure of wind flow, thus catching and buffering intermittent wind blows. In case of Laminar wind flow, always strongest wind layer is used automatically, because inner pressure on lower levels of doors become stronger than pressure of weaker layers of wind from outside, thus closing doors from inside and letting only most energy rich layer to enter windcatcher.

So problem that is damaging to contemporary HAWT installations is turned to advantage :-))

Construction is protected from strong wind by doors of same kind that are covering top side of windcatcher, but those doors are in function opposite as they open to outside only and are closed by their own weight, or gravity force.

When air pressure inside Windcatcher become too strong, it pushes topmost doors up and so surplus pressure goes out in downwind direction without causing harm to construction as whole.

Even if whole thing may look heavy, it is made from pipes and those could be made from carbon fiber reinforced plastic to be light and strong, or even just milled bamboo sticks could be used and sides could be closed by sailcloth, which are both cheap materials, specially in countries where Bamboo grows naturally.

I have in fact idea for Windcatcher that would use just few bamboo trunks and big sailcloth bag that would be automatically opened in weak wind and closed in strong wind, lowering upper edge of sailcloth bag groundward by use of parachute pushed by wind in downwind direction, which action would pull up weights that would normally hold up upper edge of sailcloth bag, so bamboo stick fixed on this edge would pull it down by its weight.

That Windcatcher would be still cheaper to build, therefore producing still cheaper electricity......... Easy to make and install also!

Tail of active models may look massive, but in reality it is enough to have frame covered by sailcloth that would function on same principle as sail, just pushing whole construction using lever principle into wind when it would have position parallel to wind flow and therefore present no obstacle and producing no drag force......

As Wind change direction, it would turn Windcatcher automatically by pushing on its tail, and to prevent problems in case when wind would start blowing exactly 180 degrees from previous direction (maybe after some period without wind), tail has to have freedom of horizontal movement of 120 degrees (that is 60 degrees to each side), so slightest variation in wind direction from straight 180 degrees would push tail on one or other side and present obstacle to wind that would push it and so turn Windcatcher around 180 degrees.........

So now You can look again at same Windcatcher with better understanding.

Geo dome would be covered with plates of transparent recycled plastic, as would be bottom side of Windcatcher air compressor, and with front and top doors made from transparent plastic also, geo dome could serve as big greenhouse, protecting crops from strong wind and rain, hail, snow and so on....... It could be heated in winter by electricity produced also, and UV light could be supplied, so much more vegetables could be grown in such place, even during the winter.......

Therefore, land footprint is minimized, and even given new quality, specially because even infertile ground could be turned to fertile by adding layer of composted material made from agricultural waste, or some good land can be taken otherwhere and brought here for use.

Alternatively, Geo dome can contain another geo dome like structure that is fixed and this can be used as storage space, reservoir for water, hospital, school, factory, office space, garage and so on, where only limitation is that entrance must be below big roll bearing level, and this can be solved by making circular wall and putting Windcatcher on top of it. Same way Windcatchers could be put on top of factories, hospitals, schools, skyscrapers and so on to supply additional electricity generated from wind.

But my passive Windpower stations are still better as they require no roll bearing and have no moving parts, specially since they could be combined with equally passive Solar concentrator units that would use same space two ways at same time......

They have added advantage of not being limited in size, and they can be connected to each other in groups of three, six, or seven, where each can have one, three, six or seven turbines inside that are activated by wind strength automatically, so it enable Windtrap to use whole scale of wind speeds up to installed capacity, where surplus is discarded by system that allow vertical movement of turbine which is situated on top if construction in this case.....

Same kind of doors are used to catch the wind, and only ones perpendicular to current wind flow would open to inside while all others would be closed shut by internal air pressure. With wind direction change, just different doors would be opened and previously used doors would be closed by gravity force (since they hang upside down) and internal pressure of windtrap. Here also lower part could be used for greenhouse as all doors would be made of transparent plastic and bottom of windtrap could be also covered by transparent plastic. In addition to system that enable turbine to regulate its air flow, additional doors could be situated on top side opening to outside, on slopes of conical structure in which turbine is situated, for letting surplus pressure to be vented out and incidentally lifting turbine higher up at same time.

So, that is what I was talking about when I told You that your creation could be turned into one giant windtrap to feed turbines that would produce electricity, and such doors and some pipes or passages for air behind could be built in the outside walls, thus enlarging wind reception area while lowering pressure of wind on structure itself. Doors could be in pairs, light ones on top and opening inside and heavier ones underneath opening on outside, thus providing outlets for orkanic wind strength. This system could also be used for internal ventilation of structure, providing fresh air trough regulable outlets in the rooms and passages, working without any energy expenditure (unless air flow would be electronically monitored and automatically made constant, and if heating system would not be electrically powered and supplied trough same airflow system as well....

Otherwise, outside buttresses You have drawn would present obstacles to wind that would better be on inside of structure to lower drag and wear of structure by presenting round surface, unless they could serve as harbours and wind scooping structures.

I am sorry that I was not able to expose my ideas until I would register them, but now that this is done, everybody can have they say if they notice something I forgot or if they think come concept applied would not work.......

Here is one model of Windtrap showing doors used, and you can see three doors hanging on the right and three in open position on the left. This model can have turbine underneath, with only doors on top regulating internal pressure, as there would standard turbine be used.

As You can see, turbine can have two, three or more air chambers and same number of nozzles like one that could be seen on left, two chambers model, and consist of just big pipe with segments of smaller pipes welded inside one to another and to axle and sides, very simple but also strong and impossible to break, so if made of plastic or noncorrosive metal like stainless steer or aluminium, I would say they can last indefinately......... Such turbines would also create their own air cushion to sit on and center their rotation, so even ball bearings would not be necessary, except for centering rotation at start, but would not be taxed and therefore could last long time also.

All I need right now is to find applicable formulas that would enable me to find diameter of turbine and size of nozzles, together with speed of air flow that would produce 1800 or 250 or 3600 Rpm required by generator unit, to produce target output of electricity generated, which would be 10KW for scaled down prototype.

If anybody is willing to help with formulas, please do!

I shall acknowledge that person as author of formulas used, and he or she would be remembered in ranks with Betz, Bernoulli and other great names......

If nobody want to try, I shall do it myself, just it would take some more time, specially since I am working on my new kind of Solarpower Station invention registration papers........

Regards, Marijan Pollak

g'day chriss,I had the same idea and found your theory on google.

my idea runs on the same principle that a tall cylinder is anchored to the sea at around 300mtres it is built in sections and assembled. A pipe from the bottom runs the turbine.. the method of pumping the water out can be done a few different ways..1 the pressure itself is possible to pump itself out at a lower pressure outlet near the top of the cylinder also a ram pump method could be used in mass proportion as many as it takes... Im interested in finding out if the sea pressure at any deepth can be enough to manipulate through jets and pipes to releave itself out of the structure....pressurising the structure can also give new phisics to the idea.......look up this engine that is a heater ..it works by turning a wheel inside a cylinder that cause a mammer afect on the water and heats it ...30%power in 70%out..its on utube under " water rams " that could run a steam turbine to pump water from the main hydro sea pressure turbine...

chriss, picture an empty silo at sea wich doesnt hold water at all .. a pipe near the sea floor runs into the silo where the turbine and generator is housed the structure can be pressurised or not ....the water coming out of the turbine can be runed out through a smaller pipe to the surface using the existing pressure...also remember to look at the water heater that works from the hammering effect... it is instant heat and almost unbeleivable breaking the law of inuinity....