New use for old Coal Mines

 
User avatar
gaw
Member
Posts: 4437
Joined: Fri. Jan. 26, 2007 2:51 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Stoker Coal Boiler: Keystoker KA-6
Coal Size/Type: Rice from Schuylkill County

Post by gaw » Mon. Feb. 19, 2018 8:50 pm

I think the one shaft neer here was 1200' but like mentioned before it is probably 1000' of water now.
If they can make it work and be profitable without government subsidies go for it, if not...


 
KLook
Member
Posts: 5791
Joined: Sun. Feb. 17, 2008 1:08 pm
Location: Harrison, Tenn
Other Heating: Wishing it was cold enough for coal here....not really

Post by KLook » Mon. Feb. 19, 2018 10:16 pm

Raccoon Mountain south of Chattanooga is another example of this. I would question the cost effectiveness based on the amount of money to build such a system. I questioned a TVA guy I play ball with, I play with several, about the cost versus return of the system. There is no perpetual motion machine, and the cost to build, maintain, and operate this system is not a gain. Only if you look at the, We pumped at this cost and sold at this cost lie. It does not take into account the massive expense of the system. ALL of them told me the same thing....typical of Gov employees protecting their jobs. Changing the rates of electricity is just a shell game for the uniformed.

Kevin

 
User avatar
Lightning
Site Moderator
Posts: 14659
Joined: Wed. Nov. 16, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Olean, NY
Stoker Coal Boiler: Modified AA 130
Coal Size/Type: Pea Size - Anthracite

Post by Lightning » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 5:47 am

I don't have night/day rates, but suppose you could store electricity at night when it's cheap and use it during the day. Beat them at their own game lol.

 
User avatar
windyhill4.2
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Fri. Nov. 22, 2013 2:17 pm
Location: Jonestown,Pa.17038
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1960 EFM520 installed in truck box
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Crane 404 with variable blower
Coal Size/Type: 404-nut, 520 rice ,anthracite for both

Post by windyhill4.2 » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 8:48 am

There is absolutely no way to make that system pay,no amount of playing with off peak rates will get it profitable...

"They" claim a 50 yr life to the system,where was the 50 yr test done ?

It is mind boggling when i see so many that i thought were sensible folk ... now they are going go-ga over some wild untested dream that is nothing more than a scheme to milk money out of the gullible folks once again.

 
User avatar
BigBarney
Member
Posts: 1853
Joined: Wed. Feb. 08, 2006 2:48 pm

Post by BigBarney » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 12:22 pm

Flywheels are only practical in a vacuum where you can eliminate ( partly ) the

drag of the air around it , and the friction of the bearings. You have to spin at high

speed to store much energy > 25,000 rpm with a very heavy and large sized

flywheel.

FF: 2,675 MW is the largest in NYS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stati ... n_New_York

BigBarney

 
User avatar
windyhill4.2
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Fri. Nov. 22, 2013 2:17 pm
Location: Jonestown,Pa.17038
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1960 EFM520 installed in truck box
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Crane 404 with variable blower
Coal Size/Type: 404-nut, 520 rice ,anthracite for both

Post by windyhill4.2 » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 1:19 pm

BB, you are worried about the "vacuum " around a flywheel ....

Someone better start worrying about all the power wasted to lift 3,000 tons back to the surface of the earth..

Of course, this is just another of those PLANS that have already received taxpayer funding (in UK) But the system has never been tested yet. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 
User avatar
BigBarney
Member
Posts: 1853
Joined: Wed. Feb. 08, 2006 2:48 pm

Post by BigBarney » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 2:02 pm

Remember when you lift that big weight up , when you let it

down you recover most of the energy to lift it up , and you do that

at peak demand for power , and are rewarded with about 2 to 8

times your cost to lift it. 200% -800% profit is not bad!!!! You know

it works , look at a cuckoo clock , been around for hundreds of years ,

and still does the same job flawlessly , with simple weights.

Bigbarney


 
User avatar
BigBarney
Member
Posts: 1853
Joined: Wed. Feb. 08, 2006 2:48 pm

Post by BigBarney » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 2:22 pm

Hot off the news wire......

https://www.cnet.com/news/jeff-bezos-shares-video ... k-project/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_of_the_Long_Now

"Many options were considered for the power source of the clock, but most were rejected due to their inability to meet the requirements. For example, nuclear power and solar power systems would violate the principles of transparency and longevity. In the end, Hillis decided to require regular human winding of a falling weight design for updating the clock face because the clock design already assumes regular human maintenance."


BigBarney

 
User avatar
Lightning
Site Moderator
Posts: 14659
Joined: Wed. Nov. 16, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Olean, NY
Stoker Coal Boiler: Modified AA 130
Coal Size/Type: Pea Size - Anthracite

Post by Lightning » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 2:56 pm

windyhill4.2 wrote:
Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 1:19 pm
Someone better start worrying about all the power wasted to lift 3,000 tons back to the surface of the earth.
Do you really understand what is happening here? Extra power that is generated above and beyond the demand is used to lift the weight. The weight becomes potential energy that can be used anytime there is a deficit for power. It's like a gravity battery. I think it's pretty innovative.

 
User avatar
windyhill4.2
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Fri. Nov. 22, 2013 2:17 pm
Location: Jonestown,Pa.17038
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1960 EFM520 installed in truck box
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Crane 404 with variable blower
Coal Size/Type: 404-nut, 520 rice ,anthracite for both

Post by windyhill4.2 » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 4:21 pm

Lightning wrote:
Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 2:56 pm
Do you really understand what is happening here? Extra power that is generated above and beyond the demand is used to lift the weight. The weight becomes potential energy that can be used anytime there is a deficit for power. It's like a gravity battery. I think it's pretty innovative.
Some folks fall for anything,no matter how bizarre.
Yes, i do understand what the PLAN is,but it will not work out economically,not even close.

They have yet to test, it is still only a tax payer funded pipe dream.

Have you stopped to think how much it will cost to constantly pump water out of that deep hole ???
Have you really considered the MASSIVE amount of money that will be needed to build a top -of -the -hole support/retainer that will withstand 3000 tons going down & then back up ???
Have you considered the very costly maintenance on that system ????

 
Pacowy
Member
Posts: 3555
Joined: Tue. Sep. 04, 2007 10:14 pm
Location: Dalton, MA
Stoker Coal Boiler: H.B. Smith 350 Mills boiler/EFM 85R stoker
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/anthracite

Post by Pacowy » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 4:25 pm

Maybe it would help the folks who are hung up on this thing as a perpetual motion machine (which it is not, and does not claim to be) if they thought of it as more of a time machine. The weight is raised with cheap baseload power during off-peak hours, and when it is lowered (during the peak) it produces less than the quantity of power that was used to raise it, but is replacing power that otherwise would need to be provided by much more expensive methods. Private sector, investor-owned utilities have done this type of thing for decades, mainly in the form of pumped storage. The principle is economically sound and rational; it remains to be seen how the technology works with the mineshaft thing.

Mike

 
User avatar
windyhill4.2
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Fri. Nov. 22, 2013 2:17 pm
Location: Jonestown,Pa.17038
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1960 EFM520 installed in truck box
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Crane 404 with variable blower
Coal Size/Type: 404-nut, 520 rice ,anthracite for both

Post by windyhill4.2 » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 4:33 pm

Pacowy wrote:
Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 4:25 pm
Maybe it would help the folks who are hung up on this thing as a perpetual motion machine (which it is not, and does not claim to be) if they thought of it as more of a time machine. The weight is raised with cheap baseload power during off-peak hours, and when it is lowered (during the peak) it produces less than the quantity of power that was used to raise it, but is replacing power that otherwise would need to be provided by much more expensive methods. Private sector, investor-owned utilities have done this type of thing for decades, mainly in the form of pumped storage. The principle is economically sound and rational; it remains to be seen how the technology works with the mineshaft thing.

Mike
I am not looking at it in direct comparison to perpetual motion....
This PLAN still falls in the worthless idea group with the perpetual motion...

 
User avatar
Lightning
Site Moderator
Posts: 14659
Joined: Wed. Nov. 16, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Olean, NY
Stoker Coal Boiler: Modified AA 130
Coal Size/Type: Pea Size - Anthracite

Post by Lightning » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 4:38 pm

windyhill4.2 wrote:
Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 4:21 pm
Have you stopped to think how much it will cost to constantly pump water out of that deep hole ???
Would it be essential that water NOT be in the hole? It's not like the weight used would have much buoyancy and if the shaft is big enough it wouldn't present much friction with a mass that just creeps up and down the shaft over the period of hours or days.

 
Pacowy
Member
Posts: 3555
Joined: Tue. Sep. 04, 2007 10:14 pm
Location: Dalton, MA
Stoker Coal Boiler: H.B. Smith 350 Mills boiler/EFM 85R stoker
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/anthracite

Post by Pacowy » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 5:59 pm

windyhill4.2 wrote:
Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 4:33 pm
I am not looking at it in direct comparison to perpetual motion....
This PLAN still falls in the worthless idea group with the perpetual motion...
I would disagree, and say it is in the same "idea group" as pumped storage (which has been shown to be technically and economically viable) and flywheels (I don't have a clue how much they are being used). It may or may not be workable, but how can you conclude it's not worth pursuing?

Mike

 
User avatar
windyhill4.2
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Fri. Nov. 22, 2013 2:17 pm
Location: Jonestown,Pa.17038
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1960 EFM520 installed in truck box
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Crane 404 with variable blower
Coal Size/Type: 404-nut, 520 rice ,anthracite for both

Post by windyhill4.2 » Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 7:44 pm

Pacowy wrote:
Tue. Feb. 20, 2018 5:59 pm
I would disagree, and say it is in the same "idea group" as pumped storage (which has been shown to be technically and economically viable) and flywheels (I don't have a clue how much they are being used). It may or may not be workable, but how can you conclude it's not worth pursuing?

Mike
1 good sign is the fact that there is no current system in operation,so it is only a pipe dream .. unfortunately it has been painted with bright colors & folks that hand out the tax payers money have been blinded to reality.


Post Reply

Return to “Coal News & General Coal Discussions”