Select to expand quote

Mr Milk said..
We could obviously convert this energy back into mass.

Easy to be out by a factor of 1000. i do it all the time. But when the numbers are that big it doesn't really upset the argument.

I went to google for converting energy to mass. Not all that easy apparently. Raw sunlight won't do it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation

"To create an electron-positron pair, the total energy of the photons, in the rest frame, must be at least 2mec2 = 2 ? 0.511 MeV = 1.022 MeV "

"The creation of a much more massive pair, like a proton and antiproton, requires photons with energy of more than 1.88 GeV (hard gamma ray photons)."


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_gamma_ray
"Ultra-high-energy gamma rays interact with magnetic fields to produce positron-electron pairs. In the Earth's magnetic field, a 10^21 eV photon is expected to interact about 5000 km above the earth's surface. The high-energy particles then go on to produce more lower energy photons that can suffer the same fate. "

And here's sunlight. Most of it's between 0.4 and 40 eV A long way short of 1.88 GeV needed to get a proton.

And then you've got the disposal problem of all the antiprotons. Where do you dump them?

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..
...-I could supplement solar with batteries to have constant flow 24h a day....

If the bores at the top of the range could deliver any meaningful water 24 hours a day then that's where all the irrigated crops and market gardens would be.

But they are not.

They are down in the valley at Gatton.


Carantoc's prediction : That bore will never deliver more water than it did the day before the perfectly good windmill was taken down.

Select to expand quote

Ian K said..

Mr Milk said..
We could obviously convert this energy back into mass.

Easy to be out by a factor of 1000. i do it all the time. But when the numbers are that big it doesn't really upset the argument.

I went to google for converting energy to mass. Not all that easy apparently. Raw sunlight won't do it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation

"To create an electron-positron pair, the total energy of the photons, in the rest frame, must be at least 2mec2 = 2 ? 0.511 MeV = 1.022 MeV "

"The creation of a much more massive pair, like a proton and antiproton, requires photons with energy of more than 1.88 GeV (hard gamma ray photons)."


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_gamma_ray
"Ultra-high-energy gamma rays interact with magnetic fields to produce positron-electron pairs. In the Earth's magnetic field, a 10^21 eV photon is expected to interact about 5000 km above the earth's surface. The high-energy particles then go on to produce more lower energy photons that can suffer the same fate. "

And here's sunlight. Most of it's between 0.4 and 40 eV A long way short of 1.88 GeV needed to get a proton.

And then you've got the disposal problem of all the antiprotons. Where do you dump them?

OK we have now all data needed to create our teleporting hub.
We could recreate complete human being using laser beam, let it be Gamma laser beam.
Now for lay down farmer like me, we need to find our how many kwh of energy we need to get solid 75kg
individual plus one extra kilo for clothing. We don't need to arrive naked every time like Swarceneger do.

As to anti matter we could use to create another individual exact copy, and send instantly trough worm hole
to distant world, to avoid problem when in case those two meeting .

We could dump into dark matter clump. It seems possible because nobody knows anyway anything about it.


I still need bigger calculator to work our how many Swarcenegers we could teleport using 100% to Sun energy manufactured p.a.
BTW proposed 75kg allowance may not be sufficient.
Also to clarify example of solar panel covering Sun - I did use the shortcut to illustrate proper solid Dyson sphere capturing all Sun energy, 100% ,
Since Sun emits all sort of energy in the form of waves and particles, limiting our calculation to visible light only, then calculating efficiency to 20% could be misleading. Lets assume we could capture and utilize the lot.
PS Looking at your calculations, I could not find numbers for neutron creation. Those neutrons do worry me recently a lot. Because of their short life, hard to store. Then manipulation also a bit tricky. I proposed one day neutrons as good battery energy storage - only to realize that keeping them together is not as easy as first thought.
So couldn't sleep even last night , wondering if CERN is or will be able to create neutron accelerator ? If not , then how to make one? Fast neutrons are very handy, but artificial source beside nuclear reactors are rare to find.
But that is completely different story , for completely different thread on SB -What is more practical - Look , search for gold , or make your own in your garage ?

Select to expand quote

Carantoc said..

Macroscien said..
...-I could supplement solar with batteries to have constant flow 24h a day....

If the bores at the top of the range could deliver any meaningful water 24 hours a day then that's where all the irrigated crops and market gardens would be.

But they are not.

They are down in the valley at Gatton.


Carantoc's prediction : That bore will never deliver more water than it did the day before the perfectly good windmill was taken down.

To be fair the bore and windmill served always to provide drinking water for animals.
Not for crops.
In such case even cheap Chinese pump will do, if not they could walk to drink from my dam, pond.
Irrigation and watering grass or crops is my another idea.
I have been thinking about creating even watered properly plots to grow corn/ maze for animal feed.
But after some conversation with oldery farmer I may try another thing.
He said that has thousands of bananas plants, Grow them for 30 years, Cattle eat happily. Never need to water them!
Should I try to grow banana plants for feedstock?
Sounds nice for me too. I could nip some for my personal consumption
I just trying to learn on YouTube how efficiently propagate bananas plants....

Select to expand quote

Carantoc said..

Macroscien said..
...-I could supplement solar with batteries to have constant flow 24h a day....

If the bores at the top of the range could deliver any meaningful water 24 hours a day then that's where all the irrigated crops and market gardens would be.

But they are not.

They are down in the valley at Gatton.


Carantoc's prediction : That bore will never deliver more water than it did the day before the perfectly good windmill was taken down.

You are being very negative. Now, we only support people with positive ideas. You should be making the list twice, but it appears something is wrong with the list controller (solar powered?)

I suggest a horizontal drilling operation to get to the water down the valley, which is only justified.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
You are being very negative. Now, we only support people with positive ideas. You should be making the list twice, but it appears something is wrong with the list controller (solar powered?)

I suggest a horizontal drilling operation to get to the water down the valley, which is only justified.

Haven't you worked it out yet ?

Jeeze, and to think I thought you thought you were smarty smart.

Here - I'll let you in on a secret I have discovered, but don't tell anyone :


Criticise Macro's dumb ideas during the day and you will be required to kneel beneath the wrath of the sword of eternal covfefe

But do the same thing at night - and you have total immunity.

I am not sure if it is a solar power issue with the mechanism or if the CCP only work 9 to 5 Beijing time.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said...
....I suggest a horizontal drilling operation to get to the water down the valley, which is only justified.

Mr Milk and Ian K have already done the numbers and calculated that Macro's ideas are not even within a 1,000 factor of sanity.

Personally I feel that Mr Milk and Ian K are being a little pedantic toying in the region of 1,000s and I'd suggest that it matters not if you use the US or European definition of billion, you still get the result that : Macro idea to grow tropical banana plant for cattle feed in region with not much water / 1 billion = still stooopid.

Select to expand quote

Carantoc said..

Mr Milk and Ian K have already done the numbers and calculated that Macro's ideas are not even within a 1,000 factor of sanity.

Personally I feel that Mr Milk and Ian K are being a little pedantic toying in the region of 1,000s and I'd suggest that it matters not if you use the US or European definition of billion, you still get the result that : Macro idea to grow tropical banana plant for cattle feed in region with not much water / 1 billion = still stooopid.

Why do I know that this comment will be remembered as attributable to FN, and only positive support for Sir Carantoc?

You sound like you live in similar areas? Are you sure you are not the same person and one of you is getting fed after midnight? Which one? I am not sure.

For the record, and to try and be removed from the list, I think bananas are a great idea and everyone should go there. It can surely only lead to saving time in the production chain when you are selling banana flavoured Moove, which is problematic if you prefer strawberry or chocolate.

Select to expand quote

Carantoc said..

Haven't you worked it out yet ?

Jeeze, and to think I thought you thought you were smarty smart.

Here - I'll let you in on a secret I have discovered, but don't tell anyone :


Criticise Macro's dumb ideas during the day and you will be required to kneel beneath the wrath of the sword of eternal covfefe

But do the same thing at night - and you have total immunity.

I am not sure if it is a solar power issue with the mechanism or if the CCP only work 9 to 5 Beijing time.

Do you think its a time zone thing? Here in the west it is still day time, 1940.

We even still have windmills... dotted all around the area. I think some were bought on Gumtree, but it may only be a rumour.

Would it be simpler if Macro just changed the heading of each list from 'bad' to 'good'? I find it difficult to be even more pissitive, but I will keep trying.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..

Carantoc said..

Haven't you worked it out yet ?

Jeeze, and to think I thought you thought you were smarty smart.

Here - I'll let you in on a secret I have discovered, but don't tell anyone :


Criticise Macro's dumb ideas during the day and you will be required to kneel beneath the wrath of the sword of eternal covfefe

But do the same thing at night - and you have total immunity.

I am not sure if it is a solar power issue with the mechanism or if the CCP only work 9 to 5 Beijing time.

Do you think its a time zone thing? Here in the west it is still day time, 1940.

We even still have windmills... dotted all around the area. I think some were bought on Gumtree, but it may only be a rumour.

Would it be simpler if Macro just changed the heading of each list from 'bad' to 'good'? I find it difficult to be even more pissitive, but I will keep trying.

It is extremally difficult to satisfy you all on such different levels
K/Milk vs FN/Cranatalk/.
But bananas seems to fill the gap.
When I talk bananas :
K/Milk think antimatter instantly
but
FN/Cranatalk see something green becoming yellow. Must be Chinese obviously.

www.symmetrymagazine.org/2009/07/23/antimatter-from-bananas

When I talk bananas decay:
FN/Cranatalk see only brown poo like
K/Milk will calculate diminishing mass of the bananas after instant positron annihilations.
So our bananas getting maybe more energetic every 70 seconds but also a bit lighter.

So by growing bananas on my farm I could kill two ducks with one stone at once.
Have positrons generator handy
and something to eat for me and my cattle.

Joking aside, aren't bananas meant to be a tropical crop?

Everywhere I have seen them, its warm and tropical, and you are saying that your farm has little water? Are you going to grow them at your house and take the cows there one by one to eat them?

I would have thought 'grass' was the obvious crop that requires little water and can be grown easily.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said.

I suggest a horizontal drilling operation to get to the water down the valley, which is only justified.

I can not believe of this FN transformation recently! He pop up suddenly and stealing my own ideas !! Now how do I look when propose this exact "suggestion/ idea/invention" to Harrow for consideration ?!!

Harrow being high voltage specialist my be the only one able to answer this:

What is the cost difference between over land high voltage transmission line
versus
underground tunnel ??

We are going to build electric transmission line to Snowy2 hydro that going to cost us several billions dollars for 250 km link.
I wonder if making tunneling machinery or ( renting one from Elon's drilling company) and laying 1 meter diameter tunnel 20 meters below ground ( or more) will not be cheaper option??
I imagine that most costs associated with new and every other high voltage transmission line across Australia will be related to :
-land owner rights
-greenis objection
-environmental analysis and considerations
-public consolations
-litigations
that will possibly cover 90% of all cost and remaining 10 serve for material and labor to build the thing.

Even if initial cost of drilling and tunneling is a bit higher all those quarrel doesn't apply to something deep underground.

I could foresee already the greatest invention of 21 century will be tunneling rig for all underground utilities: water, gas, electricity and communication. I could earth worm machine that eat the dirt and clad ready to go tunnel 1 diameter.

www.afr.com/companies/energy/electricity-consumers-will-pay-the-hidden-bill-for-snowy-2-0-20210907-p58pmq


So Harrow the question is : Will you be happy to make 250 km underground line and get paid 5 bln dollars for the job done?
and save us another 5 on taxpayer money?
well, we still needs to pay FN 1 bln in royalties for invention and proposal of horizonal drilling utilizations on works on public utilities. patent pending...

Perhaps underground HV line could be water cooled, and the waste heat applied to growing greenhouse bananas in Canberra

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
Joking aside, aren't bananas meant to be a tropical crop?

Everywhere I have seen them, its warm and tropical, and you are saying that your farm has little water? Are you going to grow them at your house and take the cows there one by one to eat them?

I would have thought 'grass' was the obvious crop that requires little water and can be grown easily.

If you don't trust me, you need to trust Peter the farmer from NSW that told me so.
He didn't need to water plants , never in 30 years!
He was a bit concern when we compared our soils. His black and rich against mine shallow gravel on the rock base.

The funny stuff, is that for 3 months already rain is pouring heavily.
Grass is growing like crazy. Mine two remaining beasts hardly could do any damage to green carpet that could feed 300-500 now.

So I did plant 3 bananas plants near the permanent water pond, fenced off with barbed wire, For extra safety each plant secured with metal mesh from gurus. Bananas plants were growing happily, reaching 2 meter already,
all till last week.

When I found that all 3 are eaten to the ground!! Not by gurus , but my jumping fences Anguses. Big poo near serve as culprit.
No worries for me, Bananas will regrow,
electric fence around each plant 5,000V should keep them safe now.

Select to expand quote

Ian K said..

Mr Milk said..
We could obviously convert this energy back into mass.

Easy to be out by a factor of 1000. i do it all the time. But when the numbers are that big it doesn't really upset the argument.

I went to google for converting energy to mass. Not all that easy apparently. Raw sunlight won't do it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation

"To create an electron-positron pair, the total energy of the photons, in the rest frame, must be at least 2mec2 = 2 ? 0.511 MeV = 1.022 MeV "

"The creation of a much more massive pair, like a proton and antiproton, requires photons with energy of more than 1.88 GeV (hard gamma ray photons)."


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_gamma_ray
"Ultra-high-energy gamma rays interact with magnetic fields to produce positron-electron pairs. In the Earth's magnetic field, a 10^21 eV photon is expected to interact about 5000 km above the earth's surface. The high-energy particles then go on to produce more lower energy photons that can suffer the same fate. "

And here's sunlight. Most of it's between 0.4 and 40 eV A long way short of 1.88 GeV needed to get a proton.

And then you've got the disposal problem of all the antiprotons. Where do you dump them?

What about neutrinos? Google tells me that their wavelength is right down into the FM/microwave band

Select to expand quote

Mr Milk said..

Ian K said..

Mr Milk said..
We could obviously convert this energy back into mass.

Easy to be out by a factor of 1000. i do it all the time. But when the numbers are that big it doesn't really upset the argument.

I went to google for converting energy to mass. Not all that easy apparently. Raw sunlight won't do it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation

"To create an electron-positron pair, the total energy of the photons, in the rest frame, must be at least 2mec2 = 2 ? 0.511 MeV = 1.022 MeV "

"The creation of a much more massive pair, like a proton and antiproton, requires photons with energy of more than 1.88 GeV (hard gamma ray photons)."


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_gamma_ray
"Ultra-high-energy gamma rays interact with magnetic fields to produce positron-electron pairs. In the Earth's magnetic field, a 10^21 eV photon is expected to interact about 5000 km above the earth's surface. The high-energy particles then go on to produce more lower energy photons that can suffer the same fate. "

And here's sunlight. Most of it's between 0.4 and 40 eV A long way short of 1.88 GeV needed to get a proton.

And then you've got the disposal problem of all the antiprotons. Where do you dump them?

What about neutrinos? Google tells me that their wavelength is right down into the FM/microwave band

we could wait for K expertise
but my own suspicion is that whole trick is to initiate conversion the over way
from energy into particle, not the opposite.
Even for energetic gamma rays , special additional conditions are required for conversion to happen.
If conversion was limited by energy level alone then our every kitchen microwave will be cooking dishes with neutrinos.


now to calculate density of neutrinos required to cook the meal could exceed my calculator zeeros level.

Select to expand quote

Mr Milk said..
Perhaps underground HV line could be water cooled, and the waste heat applied to growing greenhouse bananas in Canberra

we are going to build under ... water HV line, indeed to the Singapore.
But will not heat the ocean too much , because unlike ours this one will not be AC but DC
with very low loses on transmission. I am guessing that comparing cost of those two : Snowy2 to Singapore1
our cost more by a factor of 2 ? 10 ? 100? per every km

suncable.sg/

there was even quarrel between me and Harrow, why we could not to build DC lines here in Australia??

Yep, that could be answer to my question:
How many people we could teleport utilizing our Sun energy?



Now is the hard part.
to divide
4.26 mln tones by 75kg of human beings

Lets do it
4.26 mln tones = 4,260,000,000kg

4,260,000,000 / 75kg = 56,800,000 people per second

and per whole year

1,791,244,800,000,000

Which means that advanced civilization could use teleportation on every occasion instead of bicycles and buses. Save a lot on building rockets to get us to the Mars and back. And save the time on the travel too.


phys.org/news/2015-12-sun-energy.html

PS. I found now aswer to K question what to do with extra anti created? Use those to anihilate teleporting original of course !
we don't need to have 2 copies of the same individual . Well. then excess energy released could complicated my calculations above couse that anihiltaion energy when recovered nagate need to using sun energy at all, travel could be for free everybody

Select to expand quote

Mr Milk said..

Ian K said..

Mr Milk said..
We could obviously convert this energy back into mass.

Easy to be out by a factor of 1000. i do it all the time. But when the numbers are that big it doesn't really upset the argument.

I went to google for converting energy to mass. Not all that easy apparently. Raw sunlight won't do it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation

"To create an electron-positron pair, the total energy of the photons, in the rest frame, must be at least 2mec2 = 2 ? 0.511 MeV = 1.022 MeV "

"The creation of a much more massive pair, like a proton and antiproton, requires photons with energy of more than 1.88 GeV (hard gamma ray photons)."


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_gamma_ray
"Ultra-high-energy gamma rays interact with magnetic fields to produce positron-electron pairs. In the Earth's magnetic field, a 10^21 eV photon is expected to interact about 5000 km above the earth's surface. The high-energy particles then go on to produce more lower energy photons that can suffer the same fate. "

And here's sunlight. Most of it's between 0.4 and 40 eV A long way short of 1.88 GeV needed to get a proton.

And then you've got the disposal problem of all the antiprotons. Where do you dump them?

What about neutrinos? Google tells me that their wavelength is right down into the FM/microwave band

It's too late to comprehend much when googling neutrinos this late in the evening. 1% of the sun's energy is released as neutrinos. Each one can be pretty energetic and there's lots of them. That doesn't seem to add up. Do you reckon we can convert them to a more useful mass, lithium maybe? And use them to create the car batteries for carbon zero? I've got no idea. What do you reckon Macro?

www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/12/14/8-facts-about-the-suns-most-ghostly-particle-the-neutrino/?sh=e19efee15d0e

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..
Harrow being high voltage specialist my be the only one able to answer this:
What is the cost difference between over land high voltage transmission line versus underground tunnel ??

Cost differential between EHV overhead line and underground cable used to be roughly a factor of twenty. Might be a bit lower now with XLPE cables and the high cost of land easements for overhead lines.

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..
there was even quarrel between me and Harrow, why we could not to build DC lines here in Australia??

No quarrel, just simple fact that we already have and do when it is the most economical option. The Tasmania to Victoria undersea cable (Basslink) is a 400 kV DC monopole and was the longest cable of its type in the world at the time of construction. The short underground cable connections between NSW and QLD (Directlink) and VIC to SA (Murraylink), both built by private consortiums to arbitrage the wholesale pool price differential between state regions, are also DC operating at +/- 80 kV and +/-150 kV respectively.

One of the reasons that the new EHV lines being constructed at the moment aren't DC is that they pass through good renewable energy resource locations, and to connect a wind or solar farm to a passing HVDC line requires a new converter station to be built at a cost of tens of millions of dollars.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

May be using more and more but CO2 emissions from the countries enacting ever stricter limits have been falling for decades, before this particular revolution of climate alarmism came back around....

When Asia stops burning off the paddy fields and powering everything with two stroke motors, I might worry a bit more about it.

I find the war on CO2 interesting. The physics on it's effects are well understood and it can only be responsible for a small amount of warming. The models relies heavily on theroetical positive feedbacks to ratchet up the effect, but then all other potential forcings, many the same or greater are ignored. Reduction in cloud % has recently been found to have a greater effect than CO2.What is interesting is the complete non attention to urban heat island and land use effects on land temperatures. Tell me a factory roof or an asphalt carpark does not significantly increase local temps over the trees that were there.

The planet is also in a much better state now than it was 50 years ago. Apart from plastic pollution in the ocean, which is a massive problem. Air pollution is significantly lower, globally forest coverage is higher due to the use of coal instead of trees for cooking, species extintions have slowed dramatically due to conservations efforts, the Great Barrier Reef was just measured at it's greatest extent ever recorded. Deaths due to global climate disasters are way down, plant and crop yields have exploded due to the additional CO2 with significant increases in global measured greenery, especially in fringe desert areas as the additional CO2 means less water is needed for plants to survive.

There is so much positive news that is not talked about, because "the models".

Select to expand quote

Ian K said..

Mr Milk said..

Ian K said..

Mr Milk said..
We could obviously convert this energy back into mass.

Easy to be out by a factor of 1000. i do it all the time. But when the numbers are that big it doesn't really upset the argument.

I went to google for converting energy to mass. Not all that easy apparently. Raw sunlight won't do it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation

"To create an electron-positron pair, the total energy of the photons, in the rest frame, must be at least 2mec2 = 2 ? 0.511 MeV = 1.022 MeV "

"The creation of a much more massive pair, like a proton and antiproton, requires photons with energy of more than 1.88 GeV (hard gamma ray photons)."


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_gamma_ray
"Ultra-high-energy gamma rays interact with magnetic fields to produce positron-electron pairs. In the Earth's magnetic field, a 10^21 eV photon is expected to interact about 5000 km above the earth's surface. The high-energy particles then go on to produce more lower energy photons that can suffer the same fate. "

And here's sunlight. Most of it's between 0.4 and 40 eV A long way short of 1.88 GeV needed to get a proton.

And then you've got the disposal problem of all the antiprotons. Where do you dump them?

What about neutrinos? Google tells me that their wavelength is right down into the FM/microwave band

It's too late to comprehend much when googling neutrinos this late in the evening. 1% of the sun's energy is released as neutrinos. Each one can be pretty energetic and there's lots of them. That doesn't seem to add up. Do you reckon we can convert them to a more useful mass, lithium maybe? And use them to create the car batteries for carbon zero? I've got no idea. What do you reckon Macro?

www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/12/14/8-facts-about-the-suns-most-ghostly-particle-the-neutrino/?sh=e19efee15d0e

Yep, when I was, wondering yesterday about neutron particle accelerator I found out that nobody invented and build any so far.
So it took me good 30 min to imagine how it may works and design principles.
Pure neutrons accelerator.
So we could have nice source of any kinetic energy , fast neutrons.
Could be very handy , because neutron are building blocks that you could use to assemble anything, or disintegrate on another hand.
The closest comparison comes, to mind is philosophical stone, ingredient that could turn everything it touches, into gold.

The problem is that neutron lack of electric charge that we utilize to propel proton or electrons in particle accelerators.
They undergo only weak gravitational force, and that is what we are going to use, in our SB neutron accelerator.
Easy.
Mini neutron star here on Earth or anywhere not bigger then wrist watch.
Without going into details it is more like a specifically design crystal.
When assembled and working properly we should be able to assemble any
element on Mendeleyew table from hydrogen alone.
or maybe even made Neutronium that could make battery to power everything from GPS logger to electric car or plane.
Lets imagine: GPS logger that you don't need to reload every second day, or mobile phone that last forever !

Now using neutron accelerator will be much cheaper to run then gamma ray laser converter. We don't need to create new particle from energy alone. We use existing blocks and only add tiny amount of energy to accelerate them. So it make as energy saving by factor 10 to ?? 4 ? 6 ? 10

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutronium

Yep, usual critics here on SB could claim that mine neutron accelerator is nothing new , and was already build ( in the future, used by Doomsday machine)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doomsday_Machine_(Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series)

Yep agree, but look at the size! Enormous!
Because I did imagined yesterday already few path, principles how neutron accelerator works, mine could be grain of salt big,
although few other paths, design may vary ,Some I call static crystal design and others dynamic.

Select to expand quote

Paradox said..




I find the war on CO2 interesting. The physics on it's effects are well understood and it can only be responsible for a small amount of warming. The models relies heavily on theroetical positive feedbacks to ratchet up the effect, but then all other potential forcings, many the same or greater are ignored. Reduction in cloud % has recently been found to have a greater effect than CO2.What is interesting is the complete non attention to urban heat island and land use effects on land temperatures. Tell me a factory roof or an asphalt carpark does not significantly increase local temps over the trees that were there.

The planet is also in a much better state now than it was 50 years ago. Apart from plastic pollution in the ocean, which is a massive problem. Air pollution is significantly lower, globally forest coverage is higher due to the use of coal instead of trees for cooking, species extintions have slowed dramatically due to conservations efforts, the Great Barrier Reef was just measured at it's greatest extent ever recorded. Deaths due to global climate disasters are way down, plant and crop yields have exploded due to the additional CO2 with significant increases in global measured greenery, especially in fringe desert areas as the additional CO2 means less water is needed for plants to survive.

There is so much positive news that is not talked about, because "the models".

Yes it's interesting all right. Lucky you're not a climate scientist Paradox. You wouldn't last long trying to take that line of investigation. About the only thing we know about with any certainty is that CO2 has steadily risen from 270 ppm to 416ppm over a couple of hundred years.

Scomo's "we'll solve it with a wish and a prayer" spray at COP26 wasn't a smart move.... But in the long run he may turn out to be ...... who knows?

Select to expand quote

Ian K said..

Paradox said..




I find the war on CO2 interesting. The physics on it's effects are well understood and it can only be responsible for a small amount of warming. The models relies heavily on theroetical positive feedbacks to ratchet up the effect, but then all other potential forcings, many the same or greater are ignored. Reduction in cloud % has recently been found to have a greater effect than CO2.What is interesting is the complete non attention to urban heat island and land use effects on land temperatures. Tell me a factory roof or an asphalt carpark does not significantly increase local temps over the trees that were there.

The planet is also in a much better state now than it was 50 years ago. Apart from plastic pollution in the ocean, which is a massive problem. Air pollution is significantly lower, globally forest coverage is higher due to the use of coal instead of trees for cooking, species extintions have slowed dramatically due to conservations efforts, the Great Barrier Reef was just measured at it's greatest extent ever recorded. Deaths due to global climate disasters are way down, plant and crop yields have exploded due to the additional CO2 with significant increases in global measured greenery, especially in fringe desert areas as the additional CO2 means less water is needed for plants to survive.

There is so much positive news that is not talked about, because "the models".

Yes it's interesting all right. Lucky you're not a climate scientist Paradox. You wouldn't last long trying to take that line of investigation. About the only thing we know about with any certainty is that CO2 has steadily risen from 270 ppm to 416ppm over a couple of hundred years.

Scomo's "we'll solve it with a wish and a prayer" spray at COP26 wasn't a smart move.... But in the long run he may turn out to be ...... who knows?

What is interesting , we have now two alternative paths to deal with CO2 in atmosphere.

1> 100 mln dollars sponsored challenge to find the way to remove CO2 from atmosphere. (where concentration is 416ppm as per K)

2> Remove where it is manufactured - chimneys most likely. Concentration -Generally, the CO2 in flue gas is diluted (8-15% CO2)

The first can be done only due to publicity, and taxes, sponsors and COP like events. Because concentration is so low , we could expect that effectives - captured CO2 per $$ will be very low,. But programs are going ahead anyway.

The second option means that manufacturing plants , power plants needs to install CO2 scrubbing device and send CO2 directly into ground for safe keeping. That approach directly effect effectives of manufacturing plants by small % , increase their costs.
Because owner of those power plants and mills own also politicians that decide about law,-this path is never going to happen.

Although effectiveness of removing CO2 at the source could be much higher then scrubbing from atmosphere.





Our team in Australia is lucky winner in first category


www.xprize.org/prizes/elonmusk

Growing algae is nothing new, but prize commission maybe wasn't aware about latest discovery. Plants do really eat CO2!

stockhead.com.au/energy/musk-foundation-awards-three-australian-student-led-teams-funding-for-carbon-capture-removal-tech/

Select to expand quote

Harrow said..

Macroscien said..
Harrow being high voltage specialist my be the only one able to answer this:
What is the cost difference between over land high voltage transmission line versus underground tunnel ??

Cost differential between EHV overhead line and underground cable used to be roughly a factor of twenty. Might be a bit lower now with XLPE cables and the high cost of land easements for overhead lines.

Macroscien said..
there was even quarrel between me and Harrow, why we could not to build DC lines here in Australia??

No quarrel, just simple fact that we already have and do when it is the most economical option. The Tasmania to Victoria undersea cable (Basslink) is a 400 kV DC monopole and was the longest cable of its type in the world at the time of construction. The short underground cable connections between NSW and QLD (Directlink) and VIC to SA (Murraylink), both built by private consortiums to arbitrage the wholesale pool price differential between state regions, are also DC operating at +/- 80 kV and +/-150 kV respectively.

One of the reasons that the new EHV lines being constructed at the moment aren't DC is that they pass through good renewable energy resource locations, and to connect a wind or solar farm to a passing HVDC line requires a new converter station to be built at a cost of tens of millions of dollars.

Lets assume that Snow2 link will cost us 10 bln approx.
divided by 250 km
that will be about $40,00 per meter !!

Lets take this as entry to national completion.

Any team within Australia could bid to build a tunnel underground at price starting $40,000 per meter, ( that will include some piece of copper line)

What is legal requirement for undergrounds cable?

Is 10 meters depth enough to void claims owners of the ground above?
What size internal diameter tunnel could be required for our HVDV line?

If 1 meter is enough? Lets assume that we use this same tunnel with future upgrades to 1 MV or even superconducting cable when time comes. so our tunnel once build will be future proof.
Expert advice will be needed to decide the depth, so we could minimize risk be accidental post hole augers perforating our tunnels maybe 100 m depth could not much more costly once proper technology appear.

I could imagine multiple teams bidding for digging horizonal tunnels, designing and building machinery.
Access points could be created temporary every 1 km or so to the surface to remove dirt , supply materials and power.

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..
Lets assume that Snow2 link will cost us 10 bln approx.
divided by 250 km
that will be about $40,00 per meter !!

Lets take this as entry to national completion.

Any team within Australia could bid to build a tunnel underground at price starting $40,000 per meter, ( that will include some piece of copper line)

What is legal requirement for undergrounds cable?

Is 10 meters depth enough to void claims owners of the ground above?
What size internal diameter tunnel could be required for our HVDV line?

If 1 meter is enough? Lets assume that we use this same tunnel with future upgrades to 1 MV or even superconducting cable when time comes. so our tunnel once build will be future proof.
Expert advice will be needed to decide the depth, so we could minimize risk be accidental post hole augers perforating our tunnels maybe 100 m depth could not much more costly once proper technology appear.

I could imagine multiple teams bidding for digging horizonal tunnels, designing and building machinery.
Access points could be created temporary every 1 km or so to the surface to remove dirt , supply materials and power.

Eeek, you want to put this cable of yours in a tunnel? Forget the 20x cost factor, it's gonna be a lot more than that!!!

Unless you're going under a city CBD, you just direct bury it in a trench about a meter or so deep. Where you're digging in suburban streets, install conduits so that it's easy to repair or replace in future without needing to dig up the road a second time.

What is this fascination with cables anyway? There are two places you'd want to use a cable for an EHV circuit.... to get into the middle of a city where you can't build an EHV transmission line, or using an undersea cable to cross a large body of water. Anywhere else is just pouring a lot of money down the drain unnecessarily.

I think, as Harrow mentions, that a consideration with HVDC is the need to rectify it and convert it at each end. AC already lets you go each way and use transformers without any (more) expensive equipment. So you need to take into account that additional cost and maintenance to the overall cost of the link.

Select to expand quote

Ian K said..

Yes it's interesting all right. Lucky you're not a climate scientist Paradox. You wouldn't last long trying to take that line of investigation.

I have spent a lot of time during COVID reading journals and papers and opinions of actual scientists. I can't find many that actually disagree with that line of reasoning. It's not the scientists running the narritive, its the politicians, activists and media. And the academic institutions that come down hard on anyone verbalising opinions not in alignment with the narrative.

What ScoMo says at COP 26 pretty much doesn't matter anyway, (except for the reputation it might give us). Development of renewable generation in Australia continues at break neck speed and it's only going to accelerate even more as the death knell for coal generation rings loud to due to simple economics. Most of the change in Australian electricity generation is driven by state policy anyway, such as the VRET, etc., with some states enacting their own laws to circumvent the RIT-T process prescribed in the National Electricity Rules, allowing them to augment their HV networks in a more timely fashion to enable the ocean of renewable generation connection applications they have received.

www.energy.vic.gov.au/renewable-energy/renewable-energy-zones
www.energy.nsw.gov.au/renewables/renewable-energy-zones

The banana benders are dragging the chain a little since they have the youngest fleet of coal generators and a coal industry tugging firmly on their labor government's pigtails.

Select to expand quote

Harrow said..

Macroscien said..
Lets assume that Snow2 link will cost us 10 bln approx.
divided by 250 km
that will be about $40,00 per meter !!

Lets take this as entry to national completion.

Any team within Australia could bid to build a tunnel underground at price starting $40,000 per meter, ( that will include some piece of copper line)

What is legal requirement for undergrounds cable?

Is 10 meters depth enough to void claims owners of the ground above?
What size internal diameter tunnel could be required for our HVDV line?

If 1 meter is enough? Lets assume that we use this same tunnel with future upgrades to 1 MV or even superconducting cable when time comes. so our tunnel once build will be future proof.
Expert advice will be needed to decide the depth, so we could minimize risk be accidental post hole augers perforating our tunnels maybe 100 m depth could not much more costly once proper technology appear.

I could imagine multiple teams bidding for digging horizonal tunnels, designing and building machinery.
Access points could be created temporary every 1 km or so to the surface to remove dirt , supply materials and power.

Eeek, you want to put this cable of yours in a tunnel? Forget the 20 times cost factor, it's gonna be a heck of a lot more than that!!!

Unless you're going under a city CBD, you just direct bury it in trench about a meter deep. Where you're digging in suburban streets, install conduits so that it's easy to repair or replace in future without needing to dig up the road a second time.

What is this fascination with cables anyway? There are two places you'd want to use a cable for an EHV circuit.... to get into the middle of a city where you can't build an EHV transmission line, or using an undersea cable to cross a large body of water. Anywhere else is just pouring a lot of money down the drain unnecessarily.

Elon is building tunnels under cities for this reason.
If tunnel is so expensive to build it means that we are lacking the proper machinery and technology.
Matter of time only for somebody to come with solution,
English channel drilling rigs is not what we want.
We need automated earth worm like machine small diameter that will:
-chew on rock, material,
-remove it to surface\
-clad the walls of funnel ( cement>? Fiberglass? waste recycled plastic? )

If we think long term _ underground tunnels are the only way for Australia alone.
Hurricane, forest fires, etc.

Obviously we could wait for :
Elon tunneling company to come with solution- but he is after bigger diameter tunnel to accommodate his vehicles
-Chinese that need to span hype voltage lines across globe to rich all time zones, and tighten belts below roads
-POMs are smart to invent machinery, but never got funds and patience to build something
-we could fund our Universities students to come with design and sponsor builders to implement

I am guessing the equivalent of one only nuclear submarine should be enough to convince Perth steel workers to build earh worm machine.

-our mulita billionaires could also sponsor development , but they are rather interested in building tax heaven islands
( one exemption seems to be ambitious Forest, but I don't know much about him anyway)



can we scale this down?

Look, If you talk few years ago about batteries powering whole world,
business people will laugh on you loudly.
Now they all rushing with Trillions of dollars to build terawatts storage batteries.

But if we compare those two -
Battery vs Efficient transmission network (?)
there is only one winner !! hands down!!
battery don't produce anything, effect is still localized.
With efficient superconducting transmission network you don't need any storage and you could
use / utilize energy where now available anywhere in the world.
Anytime.
There is always sun shinning somewhere! There is always a wind blowing somewhere!

We are ( as a nation) going to miss- spend another billons on Hydrogen- generations, ports and transport ships.
Completely missed investment if solid transmission line to Japan could do the same more efficiently.

You are Harrow at right place, that have the greatest future! We just need to build that future smartly!