Is this free energy ?

Ok so I've been looking at geothermal energy systems a bit like this , so if I'm following this bit :-

.. a ground-source heat pump is 300% to 400% efficient ..

Then once I've paid out for installation, every £ at todays prices I put in I'll get at least £3 worth of free ? & all I need is space to drill or dig a hole ?

Estimates on pay back for install cost seem to range from 10-20 years .

& thinking on a commercial scale, there must be a way to generate electricity from this ground heated energy ?


Or have I been hoodwinked by Green propaganda ?

I don't have problem with Nuclear energy but if we are going to use it we really need to focus on better disposal procedures.

Geothermal energy would be great to but can that be done anywhere? Where I live you can't dig down more than 5 feet without hitting water.

That link says 150ft deep - but I've seen trench systems shown in as little as 6ft, on some installers sites - it depends on the local gound temperatures I think .. so I'm guessing it'll be feasable most places with houses, except maybe for the guys who post from alaska :D !

we have a number of those around here and the initial cost is the biggest obstacle..in areas where there is a lot of groundwater they are not quite as efficient, but they do work

Too bad you don't live Iceland.

http://www.energy.rochester.edu/is/reyk/

yeah..not as bad here as there, but the lowest here in winter is 45 below with an average of 3-4 ft of snow..

You folks that have Heatpumps air to air, Have defrost cycles, and when you are defrosting ,your electric strips are on. Also when the temp outside is 10
degrees your air to air heatpump is struggling to heat your house and
depending how many banks of electric strips you got will help heat. They
say there is heat until the temp reaches -460 degrees. With the above
explanation about air to air. Geothermal DO NOT HAVE DEFROST cycles.
they do not need large banks of electric strips. Below frost line and where
heat can conduct. Water is great heat conducter with a closed loop
system. When you talk refrigeration That is what I do. N.A.T.E certified :thumbs:

No, this is free energy. What a mistake to try to reduce rather than harness it.
http://agnews.tamu.edu/stories/ANSC/methane.htm

Go on then, I'll agree that's free but wasted energy :thumbs:

However now we want ... practical notions for catching cow farts please ! :thumbs2:

Its a great idea but they need to learn to harness it better an dmake it available to all without loss of productivity.

Uh, this is a bit of a joke. There really are efforts to recover and use methane emissions from livestock feces as fuel, but I think efforts to utilize bovine flatulence as an energy source may just be dreams blowing in the wind. To date the most successful effort has been in the Good Old U. S. of A. We call it the Federal Government, and everybody knows how that works!

Still, I think -ed is right! We need a thread on practical recovery methods for LiMES (Livestock Methane Emissions)! Heck, Bill Gates made a fortune by selling an operating system he didn't even own to IBM! Can we do worse? I smell change in the air.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slgrieb

.. I smell change in the air.

---

With all those cow farts still on the loose, I'm not surprised ! :eek2: :thumbs2:

So I guess that now requires a public service broadcast from the folks in Wisconsin

('Ed's summary of the method: - collect all the pooh in a tank, & then use a fart powered generator to make electricity ! :D)

Now if you could train cows to use a toilet, this'd get much more efficient ! :rolleyes: :p :eek2: :thumbs2:

Excellent -ed! I think you are really onto something here! Once in a while it really helps to think outside the corral. The process of methane recovery from the solid wastes isn't so hard, but energy recovery from Bovine Flatulence has been the real challenge. I think the turbine idea shows real promise.

I have a vision of a tube attached by straps to the relevant portion of the cow's anatomy. Solid matter and gas would both spin a turbine which would in turn charge a battery. Perhaps a series of baffles downstream from the turbine could slow passage of emissions long enough for vents to direct the methane into something like a balloon where the gas could be collected for burning. Should work equally well for sheep, but goats would likely eat the lot.

"Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?"

I remember when a light switch had a sign"turn off when not in use.Toyotas new gas powered electric car gets 60mpg.If you use A/C or Defrost it gets 22mpg.I guess it would be amazing in about 1% of the earth.Hybris are great!!!

Hybrids are better!!than hybris

Street, I think you are too rational to be posting responses to this thread, given it's current theme. Snort some whiskey, drink some cocaine, and call us in the morning. BTW, if you just can't clear your head of intelligent thought, a couple of moderately-hard hammer blows may help. A less painful alternative may be trying to have a converstion with your wife.

I think I may well need to snort some whiskey & drink some cocaine ! .. somehow or other the 'glow in the dark' option is in the lead on my obviously not rigged well enough poll ! :rolleyes: .. :D

-ed, you have to realise that the possiblities for nuclear accidents and poorly planned waste disposal schemes are limitless. Right after Chernobyl I tried to get some friends to invest in a company to manufacture cookware from the debris. Gosh, it seemed like a no brainer. Energy costs were high, and what could be better that a line of cookware that needed no external energy source to cook your food. The radiation even sterilized your food (well, OK, perhaps you and your family as well) and so your leftovers could be safely stored for extended periods.

I even storyboarded our first commercial and shot a home video quality demo.

Imagine if you will a 20-something blonde with big hair and big, uh, talent is in her kitchen almost on the verge of tears. "Oh, my!" she says. "I overslept in the hot tub after my massage! How will I ever have dinner ready on time?"

Flash of light like the Enterprise going into warp. You know, the original Enterprise. From the original Star Trek and all.

Our Harried Homemaker turns to her right and exclaims, "It's the Mutant King!"

The Mutant King looks a lot like the Burger King King, except he has six fingers on his left hand, tentacles for fingers on his right hand, and a 3rd eye in the middle of his forehead.

"Never fear! my lady!" quoths he, "With Cernobyl cookware, you can prepare dinner for your Lord and Pages in half the time of ordinary cookware!"

Cut to scene of Homemaker and King in the kitchen surrounded by a sumptuous 6 course spread.

"Oh, Mutant King, how can I ever thank you?'

"Just remember fair lady, why make your meals ordinary when you can make them "Cher-NOBLE!" Fade to black.

If the Russians hadn't been in denial about the event and refused to sell us debris, I think I would be a millionaire today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slgrieb

..Imagine if you will a 20-something blonde with big hair and big, uh...

---

Hell .. that's a whole better topic than mine ! :thumbs2:

I guess that's the (w)hole problem ? Holes in the ground are insufficiently 'sexy' compared to Nuclear technology, I'd never even heard of geothermal systems until somebody else said to me that they are the most viable renewable energy source we have, as we've mastered the technology to use it long since, I just wish we'd mastered the technology behind Nuclear power stations half as well as all the politicians who like to promote that as 'clean' seem to think we have ..

Okay, okay. If we just must be serious for a moment, I think nuclear power at the current state of the art is not a good idea. Plants cost too much to build (only if we want them to be safe, you know), maintenence is costly, and decommissioning a plant is hellacious. And of course, there is that little problem of waste "disposal", which actually means storage.

My last up close and personal experience with nuclear power was 1988 or so when Austin, TX was buying into the South Texas Nuclear project. Houston Power and Lighting pitched this as super cheap power. yeah. Huge cost over-runs, construction delays. Austin (with a 25% share) stayed in mostly because the costs of getting out (in litigation, costs of replacing generating capacity with other sources, and so on) were higher than just biting the bullet. The city did indeed sell some of its shares in the nuke (currently 16% ownership), and became a major investor in the Fayette Coal Plant along with the Lower Colorado River Authority.

Tiresome to read perhaps, but more tiresome for me to remember. Hang in there.

My bottom line on nuclear is I don't like it, but I might as well get ready for more of it. The entire housing and building industry is centered around centrally supplied electric power. Special designs like subterranean homes are tremendously energy efficient, but aren't likely to be mass produced in the near future. Geothermal heating/cooling systems and wind generators cost a bit to retrofit and have long payoffs. Unfortunately, all these better alternatives aren't expedient for the masses

So, while Nuclear sucks, it sucks less in terms of environmental issues (greenhouse gasses, etc) in the short term, and individuals don't have to spend their own money to be energy efficient. Unfortunately that's all that matters to most folk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slgrieb

..My bottom line on nuclear is I don't like it, but I might as well get ready for more of it..

---

That sums it up beautifully .. :thumbs:

Now take me back to that blonde again ! :eek2: .. :D