| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Research Forum » Atmospheric/air Refrigeration, Physics 101; Energy in = Ener
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Brad Guth |
 Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 12:23 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I've recently been reading through of some of those comments posted my
nice folks doing what comes so naturally, that of snookering others
into submission, where it seems as though, those nifty laws of physics
can only work if they are being applied politically correct.
For example; the question and/or quest for accommodating refrigeration
from using just the available atmosphere was being rather rudely
treated as though the rest of us are absolute morons. Morons or
perhaps even village idiots maybe, though anything officially
"absolute" is still being judged.
It's true that freons offer an efficient means by which refrigeration
can be accommodated, though efficiency has rather little or nothing to
do with the elected gas, be it R22, R12, CO2 or just plain old
polluted air.
Though technology wise, darn little beats ammonia, however R12 is
certainly still one of the best all around alternatives (far safer
than ammonia), requiring a relatively small compressor and equally
small heat-exchanger as well as relatively compact evaporator, thus
space and/or volume efficiency is certainly at hand. Because of this
compactness, as well as for the thermal conductivity aspects, there's
less overall distance for the R12 to have to travel while offering
greater btu transfer than air per m2 (this is especially true of
nearly anything that liquifies under modus pressure), that goes as
well for the compressor itself having less internal machinery travel
or displacement, thus a purely physical and/or mechanical efficiency
advantage is certainly there to be had.
However, if to be replacing R12 with said "polluted air" is supposedly
so inefficient, at least if we're going by the esteemed knowledge of
those intent upon snookering the rest of us village idiots, then why
was it possible for an automotive application of air conditioning
based solely upon air, being so capable of more than accomplishing the
task?
Perhaps this non-freon engineer was another idiot that simply didn't
know about those politically corrected and/or skewed laws of physics,
whereas his air/air refrigeration seems to function quite nicely,
admittedly at a greater energy consumption (perhaps taking twice but
certainly not four times as much) and of somewhat increased operating
noise. Even though his components were substantially larger than
anything R12, the additional energy requirements seemed somewhat less
related to the refrigeration gas being of plain old air, rather than
of the available space for the necessary heat-exchanger, as I believe
the evaporator portion was merely the expansion into the automotive
interior (thus that phase was nearly 100% efficient), as otherwise
there was ample compressor room under those older automotive engine
hoods, and of way more than sufficient engine to operate it.
If the machinery space and of whatever heat-exchanger/condenser is not
an issue and, if the energy to drive a given compressor is available,
then it seems entirely reasonable to believe (know for a fact) that
even an extremely large scale refrigeration and/or air conditioning
plant can be functioning entirely of atmospheric air, or in the case
of Venus; CO2.
Those advantages of using what's on hand, such as the surrounding
atmosphere, is more than just a good one.
1) Leakage of nearly any amount is almost meaningless.
2) simple/open cycle beats closed loop efficiencies any day of the
week.
3) Open cycle means far less gas transporting, thus less friction
loss.
4) The heat produced by compressing atmosphere can be utilized for
other thermal needy processes, such as for CO2-->CO/O2, thus improving
upon obtaining CO and O2 (gee whiz; I wonder what anyone with half a
brain could possibly do with the likes of CO and O2 ?)
5) If that atmosphere were mostly CO2, as well as already compressed
at 75 bar, a mere 2:1 compression becomes way more than enough,
perhaps even too much, thus the refrigeration compressor becomes
relatively small, as such regaining upon a little more efficiency
(though perhaps still far less efficient than R12, however R12 may not
be worth a squat plug nickel if the ambient is 625°K).
6) if that atmospheric environment happens to be nearly devoid of any
H2O and of damn little free O2, then there's absolutely zero
corrosion. This being where even mild steel can remain polished for
decades.
7) I certainly could go on and on about the atmosphere of Venus but,
that seems rather pointless if your Borg implant is going to impose an
entire neural shutdown (another Windows blue screen of death).
Good grief folks; at least some planets besides Earth have gobs of
natural energy to tap, whereas actually Venus has some rather enormous
energy resources in just their atmospheric pressure and thermal
differentials, not to even mention upon geothermals. As that's part of
the greenhouse problem with Venus; it's got way too damn much natural
energy trapped mostly below those thick clouds. Solar flux input of
2650 w/m2 is another great deal of energy, equalizing between the
season of day as opposed to their season of nighttime, whereas
whatever the sun delivers into the daytime atmosphere is exhaused out
through their nighttime atmosphere, plus a little of the geothermal
leaves the planet along with all of that solar influx.
Careful now, hold onto your hat; it's actually cooler at night, even
eventually somewhat cooler yet if your nighttime is 2900 hours worth
and, damned if it isn't cooler yet if you're situated at 10+km (may
not even require air conditioning if you're one of those Cathar lizard
folk).
Short of this nasty Venus environment exceeding the known tolerance of
various alloys and/or of ceramics, or perhaps of composites like
basalt, as long as there's available energy there'll be an opportunity
for refrigeration, perhaps even lots more than necessary for our
pathetic idea of humanity to survive Venus, although our arrogant
attitudes of superiority will most likely get in the way and, in no
time at all we'll be at odds, as well as at war within days of our
arrival, supposedly justified by looking for more of those invisible
WMDs.
Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA / Discovery of other LIFE on Venus
Besides air/air or CO2/CO2 refrigeration, here's other ongoing LSE
UPDATES:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lse-gpa.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-01.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-edwards-se.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-se-flywheels.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-elevator.htm
If you can't get manage to get an email through, simply include either
phrase:
"gv-bradguth-email" or "bradguth-email"
within one of your own Google post subject line, as perhaps then I'll
find you. This has only become necessary because of the orchestrated
email bashings w/virus that's been tossed at myself from every which
way but lose. If this still doesn't work (in other words your Google
post having the subject "bradguth-email" is mysteriously rejected or
blocked), then simply send a fax: 1-253-8575318 or directly call:
1-253-8576061 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| N. Thornton |
| Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2003 4:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
ieis-brad@juno.com (Brad Guth) wrote in message news:<9f50a7c5.0309291023.2e487ff8@posting.google.com>...
Hi.
Compressed air was used 100 years ago on refrigerated ships. Quite
simply it requires more energy to run it. Its that simple.
Total cost of a fridge = purchase cost + eg 20 years run cost.
With an air based system this is over twice the total cost, at over
twice the energy consumption. Ie not an advantage. Just the same deal
with energy.
I dont think any of your listed advantages are really valid. But you
can build air fridges if you like, no-one'll stopping you.
Regards, NT |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:23 am
|
|