Hydro turbines have twice the efficiency of Steam/Gas turbines.
550 Celsuis water/gas produces 160 Bar pressure.
160 Bar at one meter>3 equals 16.5 megawatts.
250 Celsius Co2 is 1075 Bar pressure, eleven times that of water.
1075 Bar pressure is 107.5 megawatts.
Near half the global warming.
Near half the coal burnt.
Political radar only shadows cost added techbology with one billion dollar funding.
Reverse technology of gas/ water pressure conversion unit Hydro turbine.
Energy efficient technology is not wanted replacement to coal burnmg.
.
Printer friendly version
Comments
Conservation of energy
DaS Energy compares a claimed 107.5 MW output from a turbine turned by 250deg CO2 with 16.5 MV from a turbine turned by 550 deg steam. Sounds good. But a power station can only put out however much energy was in the fuel to begin with, less the losses due to the intrinsic inefficiency of any 'generation' process. So we need to know how much fuel is being burned to heat and pressurise the CO2 before we can say it is better than water.
If it's truly the same amount of fuel, then it would appear that CO2 turbines allow more energy to be extracted than do steam machines, by an incredibly large factor. If the difference is really 91MW, then it means that today's power plants fail to extract over 80% of the energy present in the fuel. Are they really that bad?
But if they are, before CO2 turbines become compelling, we need to know what is the cost of retrofitting CO2 turbines to today's coal burning plants? I can't imagine it's trivial; the mechanical engineering might mean a lot of dismantling and re-building. Is it possible that the conversion expense might exceed the total cost of what we're going to have to do in any case, sooner of later: get off coal and all fossil fuels and build an entirely new breed of power plant?
Stephen Wilson
www.lockstep.com.au
Cheaper Energy
Dear Steven,
Thank you for your response.
The fuel costs for heating Carbon are known to be lower than for heating Steam, this is based upon the lower thermocline needed to bring Co2 thermaly to the same pressure of Steam. The thermocline of Hydrogen is much less again. Both these gasses can be internaly recycled in a similiar way to which Steam can be heated then recondensed back to water.
The difference in turbine efficieincy is quoted when comparing a Francis hydro turbine +92% efficiency with a Steam/gas turbine -45%efficiency. ( see Web )
Conversion of a gas pressure to water pressure is based uopn, when water in a pipe is subjected to a one end gas pressure, the water exits at the same flow an pressure of the gas applied to it. Mechnanics keep the gas and water seperated so only water passes through the hydro turbine.
Conversion cost to Power Station is an unknown as too are the costs for building new.
NASA Champaine heat pump is one mechanics of heating and lowering the temperature pressure of Co2. (see Web)
Heat absorption pumps as found in gas Fridges etc is another form of mechanics. as Co2 is readily absorpted into ionic liquids, replacing the familiar ammonia/water mix. (see Web )
If hydrogen is used as the drive gas then the hydrogen shall self boil off and recycle itself back into liquid so long the liquid pool is maintained. ( courtiousy USS ship moored of missouri )
The failure of such new energy provision to market emerge may be because of that type of energy supression written about in Government report ABARE September 2007. (see Web )