What is Digg?69 Comments
- CTabuga, on 11/20/2008, -2/+24Here's a job for Joe the plumber
- Anim8tor, on 11/20/2008, -1/+17I love technology like this.
- Someguy101, on 02/19/2009, -0/+13So they take something with a low boiling point let it turn to a gas so that it turns a turbine the same as steam does, then they use deep ocean water to cool the gas back into a liquid. I'm curious what the ratio is between energy generated by this process against the energy it would use to pump deep ocean water up to cool the liquid. Another concern I have is regarding pumping warm water back out into the ocean. Warm water doesn't dissolve oxygen the same way that cold water does and could leave the area hypoxic suffocating the fish and other things in the area... but from the sound of the article it sounds like the temperatures they're talking about probably wouldn't have an affect on this...
It's an interesting idea...I wish there was more info on the specifics of it. - trainer, on 11/20/2008, -0/+9Why push bogus "clean coal" when they should be putting money into R&D for something like this?
- CrimsonBlur, on 11/20/2008, -0/+6Well as far as the temperature of the water going back into the ocean, you could just have a holding area of some kind where the water is left to cool for a while before it is pumped back into the ocean. Even if that's not an option I doubt the overall temperature of the ocean water gets much higher considering the volumes they are dealing with to exchange the heat.
As for the amount of energy used to pump the water, Lockheed Martin wouldn't be wasting money on this project if they didn't already know they would have a net gain of energy significant enough to make that problem null. They are rocket scientists, so I'm sure they've through this through a bit. - briguymaine, on 11/20/2008, -0/+6my though exactly. didn't global warming have everyone in a tizzy because it would change the global currents and throw Europe into another ice age? but now PUMPING 1000 tons of cold water a second into traditionally warm water areas is a good idea? and one more thing, the article says that this has been done before but failed because oil prices went down, aren't we in the situation right now, oil is around $50 a barrel.
- Barackalypse, on 11/20/2008, -0/+6You know all they're doing is taking cold water from the bottom to condense the working fluid back into a saturated liquid and then depositing the slightly warmer water back down below, right? Its not like they're pumping North Atlantic ocean water to the Caribbean or anything.
- swissla, on 11/20/2008, -1/+7OPEC -> OTEC
- pakiranian, on 11/20/2008, -1/+6sold! limitless clean energy? get on it so america can finally be weened off of oil
- theadvinci, on 11/19/2008, -2/+7Stick a pipe in the ocean and you have energy!
- inactive, on 11/20/2008, -3/+8because ***** with the ocean's natural movement of water is a good idea?
then again, every technology, solar included, has some sort of adverse side effect in nature.
***** it lets finish the oceans off, i need electricity to play fallout thanks. - jtscira, on 11/20/2008, -0/+5Man I love it. They fund it by giving them 600,000 dollars. But want to give the jacked up car companies 25,000,000,000. Sometimes you just have to see the zeros to believe it.
And people wonder why clean technology has not made any breakthroughs. - Altotus, on 11/20/2008, -0/+51, no. When it scales to millions, yes. Moreover, even just a few will change the properties of the water column locally, displacing the extant sea life in the area. Not that different sea life won't adopt the new niche. The question is really, would we ever scale this to the point that we squeeze out the existing niche entirely? Maybe not, but it's a question that is wise enough to be mindful of when you start rather than mournful of when you realize that you've screwed up later.
- Altotus, on 11/20/2008, -0/+4That depends mostly on situation. This technology is much simpler, requires far less resources to produce, and is cheaper all around. The caveat is that tying it into the existing power grids and accommodating shipping and other concerns will complicate things. Nobody seems to care if you pave the desert with solar panels, but ruin someone's ocean view, disturb a fishing ground, or get in the way of access to a shipping route and you've got problems -- that and you're not going to find a lot of transformer stations right along the shore, that's expensive real-estate.
- Barackalypse, on 11/20/2008, -1/+5Do you seriously think a 4 meter diameter tube is capable of influencing anything as vast as the amount of thermal energy stored in the ocean?
- nowhereelse, on 11/20/2008, -1/+5This would take heat out of the oceans.
- NSResponder, on 11/20/2008, -2/+5Pumping is only needed to start the flow. Once water is rising in the pipe, convection will drive it as it gains heat from the warmer water around the pipe.
-jcr - Dinsdale77, on 11/20/2008, -1/+4Drill there, drill now.
- inactive, on 11/20/2008, -1/+4if you read the article the idea was actually proposed even before that moron.... Learn to read dumb ass.....
- Grok22, on 11/20/2008, -1/+4unless the gov't was footing the bill.
- SadMartigan, on 11/25/2008, -0/+3Me too.
It makes me hope I live to see a factory ship running off of this and not relying on fossil fuels.
Imagine a ship, with a factory inside, that starts in a country with raw materials, stops off at the next country with maybe a high need of employment, or maybe other materials or parts, and by the time it makes it to the destination country, the factory inside has finished making the products that were ordered.
All while using this type of a system dragging underneath, and solar panels, and wind, and maybe even a huge, jetstream-high kite, all aiding the process, or for redundency. - nowhereelse, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3Efficiency is a key concern. Modern heat pumps have a coefficient of performance (heat moved vs work in) of around 4 but when you generate electricity you have to factor in the efficiency of the turbine too (up to 90%). I'd imagine that there must be potential of a gain otherwise this wouldn't be worth the investment.
I was also curious about what happens with the warmed water but I was thinking the other way around. With enough of these plants running you'd start to take heat out of the oceans and counter the thermal expansion produced by climate change. I have no idea of the number of stations you'd need to get the cooling effect to the same order of magnitude as the warming, though. - gordonj, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3@scubaman
I assume this system will be something similar to a renewable energy system being used in Alaska. It's a geothermal plant, but it runs off water that is too cool to produce steam.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/earth/4245 ... - nowhereelse, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2You're rigtht but your pump only moves heat. This is talking about using the heat to generate electricity. It's a two-stage process whereas your heat pump is a single stage.
- prrudman, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Seems like a lot of their questions have been answered by the oil industry already...
FTA: "You've got a lot of stresses and strains from current, from the movement of platform on the surface - how you are going to anchor it and install it?" asks Bellinger" - take a look at deep sea oil rigs, not only do you have to anchor the rig in place but you also have to keep it from moving enough to break the drill going into the seabed.
FTA: "Heat exchangers will have to be designed in a way that prevents excessive buildup of algae, barnacles and other marine organisms that could clog the system" - Look around at ships, the same build up makes them very inefficient at moving so they use special coatings to reduce the build up. - nowhereelse, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3I hope you missed a comma there. Only a moron would think Tesla was a moron.
- AlexApetrei, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2tubes powering tubes ?
- Altotus, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Tesla was so far ahead of his time...
- ideablob, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Agree with FriedR1ce, Brecourt_Manor, nosecohn. With a title like "Plumbing the oceans could bring limitless clean energy", let's hear more about how clean and green this project actually is. Instead of spending $600,000 to develop it, spend that on researching longterm effects.
- Barackalypse, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2As proposed by Nikola Tesla back in the 1930's.
http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/articles/19311200/page_2 ... - RubineBoy, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2"First, warm surface water heats a fluid with a low boiling point."
I really wonder what they mean by "warm surface water". In my opinion the sea is freezing cold here in Belgium. If this is something that only works in places like Hawai ... Well, I dunno then ... - Brecourt_Manor, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Forcing ammonia gas through a turbine sounds dangerous...
- korvan504521, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Depends on the type of solar. We recently bid on a project to use mirrors as heat exchangers on oil which exchanged into water to create steam. Picture a big mirror aiming at a pipe of oil about 2 feet off the surface, in rows a mile long. Didn't go through though, credit crunch had the owner put the project on hold.
- nowhereelse, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3How many voters are working in the ocean pump project?
- teejaded, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2The liquid refrigerant is heated by the water near the surface of the ocean and cooled by water from deep in the ocean. Since no heat is being artificially added to the system, and we are extracting electricity from the process, the first law of thermodynamics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermody ... states that the overall temperature of the oceans would be reduced.
So another cool aspect of a OTEC power plant is we could probably use the nutrient-rich water from deep in the ocean to stimulate plankton growth and help curb global warming.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12698 - DOCNM, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2it's in teh diagram. They mean about 15C
- nowhereelse, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2It's all relative. They probably should have written 'warmer'.
- dddavid, on 11/20/2008, -2/+4No, the whole point is that it has to get up there quick enough to still be very cold. Also, the hottest water would already be at the top of the loop, and that is where it would stay (by convection).
- sodade, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Solar thermal is simple as hell.
- JeddHampton, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1I did and here is the wikipedia for others: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_thermal_energy.
Turns out, they are solar panels, but the solar panels aren't used commercially, but you were right in assuming that I was thinking of photovoltaic.
According to wikipedia, there are still plans to move forward with this technology. My assumption with the hesitancy of this plan is that the initial cost is large. - nosecohn, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2This sounds promising, but also concerns me. When people started producing cars, nobody imagined that the tiny amounts of gas coming out of the tailpipe would one day, cumulatively, be able to change the environment, causing smog, particulate health problems, and global climate change.
Imagine if we start doing ocean heat transfers on a massive scale. What will that do to the deep sea ecosystems and how will that affect the planet? And how is it a good idea to put pipes perilously long pipes filled with thousands of gallons of ammonium in the middle of our oceans?
I like the potential of technologies like this, but I am concerned when there's no indication that anyone is thinking of the potential dangers, especially when the technology scales up. - sodade, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Solar thermal doesn't mean "panels" - look it up.
- C4Aries, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1I stand corrected.
- pjsk8, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Strange...I feel like I'm a bit better with energy weapons now.
- hiPpymIck, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1same idea powers these robot data collecting drones..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7234544.stm - NSResponder, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1" the whole point is that it has to get up there quick enough to still be very cold"
It's still quite cold enough to be useful when it reaches the surface. Convection only requires that it be gaining heat (and losing density) as it rises, not that it be as warm as the water outside of the pipe.
-jcr - AlexApetrei, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1or mabe this :
http://www.yatzer.com/1123_lilypad,_a_prototype_of ... - nowhereelse, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2So you'd rather research the long term effects than try to get some energy? Is this what was done with oil, coal and nuclear?
- DOCNM, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1had they done it with oil, coal and nuclear, we would probably have GVI/GVII safe breeder reactors and CO2 capture already in place, and much less to worry about.
-
Show 51 - 70 of 70 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 