BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:06 pm
@RexRed,
You need to get a basic physic book.

First you have the energy needed to change the velocity of a car to a certain speed and then you have a steady state energy requirement to keep it at that speed against friction both rolling wheel friction and wind friction.

Any repeat any likely solar cell array the size of one that would fit on a roof is not going to be able to provide the energy to fight friction and therefore the battery will be drain and almost at the same rate as if the array was not there at all.

As I had posted the energy that such an array could give is less then one horse power and even a very small tiny car have engines in the order of 40 plus horse power.

Hell the leaf had a 107 horse power electric motor for example so if you are running your leaf at 30 percent full power your solar array can only provide three percent of the energy the car is using driving down the highway.

Let put it another way for every hour you would wish to drive your leaf you would need to let it sit in sunlight for 30 plus hours and more likely 45 hours as batteries are far less then a 100 percent efficient.

Or let put it another way if your battery would allow you to travel a 100 miles the solar array under ideal conditions would allow you to drive 103 miles.


RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:14 pm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42848151/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:21 pm
@RexRed,
Have you flown from coast to coast lately and look out at the land going under the plane.

There are countless millions of sq miles of waste land that is not near any water that you could lay railroad tracks to and dump almost any type of waste in a safe manner.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:25 pm
@BillRM,
I did not build every single variable of a car's physics into my matrix. I was aware of that. Also let's say that F is the cars global positioning. Where a solar cell will receive much more density of photons in a location closer to the equator. Also it would be nice if a car could translate heat from the sun into energy also.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-06/uou-asw060107.php

You are quoting stats on poorly funded slip shot releases of electric cars created by manufacturers that could care less if electric cars ever get released. 5 dollars a gallon might make them change their tune and bring out the real technology that they have been sitting on for years with their bought up patents.

This means we can take the heat produced by a microchip, engine, motor, car roof/hood, and convert it back into electricity and then augment it with solar cells. How hot does a car get under direct sunlight for an hour? Again this is the sun providing heat and light photons FREE!
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:34 pm
I would drive this car past a gas station really fast.

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/howstuffworks/178-how-solar-cars-work-video.html

I don't need to go 100 miles per hour so maybe a bucket seat could bring it down to 60mph.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:36 pm
@RexRed,
Look you are going into fantasy land once more and it is a shame that the sun is at it best where few people happen to live and wish to drive a car IE at the equator.

I guess we could all move to Ecuador, Colombia and Brazil.
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:39 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Look you are going into fantasy land once more and it is a shame that the sun is at it best where few people happen to live and wish to drive a car IE at the equator.

I guess we could all move to Ecuador, Colombia and Brazil.

Umm, Brazil has the most most populated city in the world. Consider the collective world carbon footprint.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:43 pm
@RexRed,
Yes that is the kind of "car" I can see doing the family shopping with..
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 May, 2011 11:44 pm
@RexRed,
Quote:
Umm, Brazil has the most most populated city in the world.


Wait until we all show up..............
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 May, 2011 04:04 am
http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2011/04/29/solar-in-data-centers-no-longer-a-novelty/

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/solar-powered-data-centers/
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 01:45 am
http://www.gizmag.com/rechargeable-battery-freshwater-seawater/18565/
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 05:16 am
Wave power
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s3203879.htm

wind power
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s3203927.htm

New generation Solar cells
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s3203925.htm
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 05:36 am
I think Rex would benefit from a review of the energy production (and forecast production) data readily available on the U.S. Department of Energy web site - it shows how relatively little energy is currently produced by wind and solar sources and how little the forecast increase is expected to be over the next decade - despite continuing, very large government subsidies. While we have effective technologies for the storage of surplus wind or solar (or any source actually) power produced in peak periods, the fact is we can get back only about half of the power stored because of natural process & conversion losses.

Moreover all sources of electrical power involve substantial transmission and conversion losses. Just compare the energy consumed in the primary generation of electrical power through coal gas and hydeoelectrical sources with the power actually delivered and consumed - about 1/3rd is lost along the way. This too is readily evident in the DOE data. The result is that less natural gas is consumed directly poweering a vehicle with an internal combustion engine fuelled with CNG than would be consumed by an electric vehicle whose electrical power was generated in a gas turbine generating plant.

The new devices you have bveen touting are very inefficient and produce very little power, but at a very high price. They don't offer a feasible economic solution.

Finally I think you should put in a little effort at understanding the basis laws of thermodynamics - if you wish to be taken seriously
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 05:43 am
GeorgeOB wrote:
They don't offer a feasible economic solution.


They don't, alas!
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 05:48 am
Dare to dream rex.
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 06:15 am
@dadpad,
Some of us are dreaming and trying to make it possible in the labs..
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 07:20 am
@georgeob1,
The green movement core people are as irrational on the subject as any religion cult members.

Hard engineering facts means nothing to them and this had sadly at times had resulted in programs that cost more in energy then they can produce.

The corn alcohol in gas is a break even program energy wise at best with all manners of others bad side effects but it is green so what the hell.

Oh and the farmers love the taxpayers money.

RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 08:48 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

I think Rex would benefit from a review of the energy production (and forecast production) data readily available on the U.S. Department of Energy web site - it shows how relatively little energy is currently produced by wind and solar sources and how little the forecast increase is expected to be over the next decade - despite continuing, very large government subsidies. While we have effective technologies for the storage of surplus wind or solar (or any source actually) power produced in peak periods, the fact is we can get back only about half of the power stored because of natural process & conversion losses.

Moreover all sources of electrical power involve substantial transmission and conversion losses. Just compare the energy consumed in the primary generation of electrical power through coal gas and hydeoelectrical sources with the power actually delivered and consumed - about 1/3rd is lost along the way. This too is readily evident in the DOE data. The result is that less natural gas is consumed directly poweering a vehicle with an internal combustion engine fuelled with CNG than would be consumed by an electric vehicle whose electrical power was generated in a gas turbine generating plant.

The new devices you have bveen touting are very inefficient and produce very little power, but at a very high price. They don't offer a feasible economic solution.

Finally I think you should put in a little effort at understanding the basis laws of thermodynamics - if you wish to be taken seriously
So are you saying I can't power an mp3 player with a few solar cells? It is this, well why bother, attitude that is letting these manufacturers to get away with this negligence. Would people stop telling me I need to get and education in physics and now, thermodynamics, I was studying physics, thermodynamics and entropy over 20 years ago. Sure it is not my number one long suit but I have a cursory understanding of these fields. I was not raised in a tent and I have always been open to whatever learning I could find on the subject. Do you know how insulting that is? Perhaps you should spend some time in the arctic with the polar bears? I am aware of these limitations but that should not stop us from augmenting our power consumption with all of the above. Handhelds with solar cells should be a no brainier. Yet it is skeptics and rank naysayers that are stepping on the hose. Wind farms will kill the birds.. but so will CO2...
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 08:53 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

The green movement core people are as irrational on the subject as any religion cult members.

Hard engineering facts means nothing to them and this had sadly at times had resulted in programs that cost more in energy then they can produce.

The corn alcohol in gas is a break even program energy wise at best with all manners of others bad side effects but it is green so what the hell.

Oh and the farmers love the taxpayers money.


Hard engineering facts??? The sheer number of handhelds without solar arrays that is a daunting and shameful fact too.

All manner of other bad side effects (such as birth defects from formaldehyde?) is that an acceptable long term solution... even if the farmers don't mind? Your solution rhymes with more "pollution". Will the energy utility companies (that are mostly foreign based) pay for the massive cleanup of the earth's atmosphere?

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/section3group4/wind_
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 10:04 pm
Here ya go Rex.

http://www.voltaicsystems.com/img/offgrid-s-large.jpg

http://www.voltaicsystems.com/

A solar case for your tablet computer, cell phone, and accessories!
http://www.eclipsesolargear.com/productcart/pc/catalog/tablet-case-lr_1858_general.jpg
 

Related Topics

Perpetual Motion - Question by magnocrat
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Energy
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 01:28:31