can use Stirling or steam engine directly to run a car when the sun is shining, then when you stop in an open parking lot area just let the engine continue generating electricity which can be stored in batteries and run car using electric engine at night or when sun isnt powerful enough to run the car directly. or use the sunlight to crank a hand operated 50 ton hydraulic bottle jack to compress a ratchet gear spring on a powerful spring driven motor. motors can be scaled up & use for VTOL also.
If ur gonna do that test again get a spare mamod steam boiler. It goes upto about 30psi but if you change the spiring (which isnt reccomended) you can get twice that.
Dude your failure points are; * brown bottle - beer bottles are brown or green generally because UV light kills the flavour, use a clear bottle and it'll boil faster * the leak sucks!!!
AWESOME experiment though, found it while considering building a test myself :)
Clear does not boil at all. In fact clear glass and water will only reach 140 f . Brow (or any dark material) absorbs the light. The only way you can use clear is like this:
brown bottles produce more steam/quicker because they retain the heat better. thats why if you see solar water heaters (look for the video by green power science) you'll notice they use black hose,black pipes everything back. Ive even seen painted bottles on one side with reflective paint that had a black backing to reflect light but not let it pass out of the bottle as easily
Instead of a bear bottle, use a steel sealed container, like a pressure cooker. Gotta go, The Sarah Conner Chronicles is comming on. Cheers my friends...
Because it's still the cheapest energy source...that includes the fact that we already have the engines, refineries, infrastructure, and know-how to use it. Even with $140 a barrel oil (I know, it's come down), it's really not that expensive...especially when that price is adjusted for inflation.
Oil is not as cheap as it was, but it's still cheaper than any other alternative (if you include research, development, and infrastructure costs for alternatives...we already know how to use oil.
Not true. Think of power generation. With oil you have to do the following: find the oil, build the rig, drill, ship the oil, then refine it into fuel. You could build one hydroelectric dam for about the same cost as getting your first drop of fuel. You don't need any fuel, only rain, and it is free. Some dams are already 80 years old and have produced 0 emissions and have 0 fuel costs. With oil and coal plants the fuel costs alone are $100's of millions per year. How cheap is that?
You're only talking about fuel costs. Hydroelectric dams are pretty big capital development projects, and there's only a limited number of sites to build dams (less so with environmental regulation), and most of them are already developed. If the terrain doesn't favor dam construction, it won't be economical. Unlike a coal or nuclear power plant, a hydroelectric dam can't be built just anywhere.
You can't simply build a power plant anywhere. Most power plants use a resivoir for cooling water. If you can build a dam to create a lake, then you can just skip the nuke or coal burner and stick some generators in the dam. I'm fortunate to live in a country where 99% of the power is hydroelectric. The other 1% is offshore wind power. You dont need to build the Hoover dam for every place that you want to use hydro power. Most dams here are only 5-10 meters high with lakes of a few acres.
As for nuclear power startup cost vs hydro vs vs solar. A new 966MW nuke in North Carolina cost $10B. The 22,500MW Three Gorges Dam in China cost $15.5B. You would need 23 Nukes to match this one dam. That is about $230B. A 64MW Solar plant in NV cost $262M. You would need 351 of these to match the dam at a cost of $92.1B. Hydro is still cheapest and has no major operating cost. Solar has a higher initial cost but isn't affected by drought and also has very lost operating costs.
You originally said oil was cheaper because we already have the infrastructure, the engines, the refineries, and the knowledge. If half the people in the world switched to electric cars and charged them from renewable sources there would be a higher demand for that. Higher demand, and hence higher production, leads to improved technology. Oil is already losing out. The rest of the technology has already gained momentum. My apologies for the long winded comment-
Hey,no need to apologize. I like your style, and the fact that you back up what you say with facts. Good work. :)
I can agree with you on renewables being cheaper in the long run. It's just a shame so much is invested in oil infrastructure. When crude prices get high enough, though, the world will be forced to switch to alternative energy.
The other nice thing about hydro is that output can be adjusted to demand, within reason (except, like you said, if there's a drought) more so than solar or wind. Wind is probably pretty reliable near the coast, and solar is good in places the American southwest which get almost no cloud cover, but solar doesn't produce anything at night (electrical demand is generally lower at night, though).
"nuke".. yes.. not funny.. think Chernobyl. As for the displacement and loss of land, I was just making a comparison of the actual construction cost to power generated. The environmental impact of displacement is a smaller area than that of a coal or oil plant, and much less than that of a possible nuclear leak. With a very large resivior you can reduce flooding downstream and slightly increase rainfall downwind. Two good things in a place with dry summers and monsoon winters.
The true cost involves displacing 1.5 or more (I've seen up to 4) million people, destruction of endangered species habitat, flooding 1300 known archaeological sites, sewage and industrial pollutant backup, the Yangtze silt issue which requires more dams upstream, 1 of which is in an earthquake risk area...
3 Gorges power is more costly, far dirtier and more dangerous than it looks.
Actually, many thermal plants are along rivers, not necessarily reservoirs.
The cool thing about hydro is it's basically stored indirect solar energy (the sun evaporates water and it rises in into clouds, then rains), and you're right..once you've built the dam, there's not much else to do except minor maintenance, and dams are much simpler devices than a thermal power plant.
Nice solar powered "grenade", that leak was actually buying you some time. Going with a metal boiler tank would be a lot better. Having a pressure gauge, throttle valve and relief valve might not be a bad idea either. That way you could keep the boiler pressure in a safe zone and actually control the steam engine on it.
I sure hope he had on safety glasses...could you imagine that cap coming off when he's standing near it...or the bottle exploding? It wouldn't be much fun getting broken glass or a bottle cap in the eye (or anywhere else, for that matter).
No one solution will fix the problem but the solutions will probably come from some inventors garage because the oil companys are going to make as much money on current technology and ony convert when it cuts into THEIR proffit margin.
This is already done with a steam turbine but they heat sulfur to a heat exchange to create the steam. Your experiment is good I like it but turbines are far more efficient. Your experiment is entertaining and fun.
AGREED ON THE TURBINE. I have an air engine that I have converted to steam power. It actually can turn stiff with power. Still working on it but will have a video shortly.
try a stirling engine instead of a steam engine. No need for exploding glass bottles, stirling engines don't need pressure tanks. They work on the gas sealed inside the engine.
I beg to differ- Bush gave 20 billion last year and again the yr before to the oil industry to explore alt-energy. now how many wind terbines and solar pannels will 40 plus dollars buy? This is when oil indust made 10's of billions proffits per quarter.
Sorry- Look at the numbers, solar can not provide the needs of the US. Systems life span is near equal to capital improvments. Major (MAJOR) improvments in efficency is required to make the ROI 1/2 or less of the initial cost. All for seeing it happen, but it will take decades. Giving money for RESEACH is not the same as giving money to install the current "state of the art" systems.
very Nice!!! i saw Roy Mackallister with a parabolic mirror that activate a stirling engine concentring the sun of liht but I Think that big fresnel works better.Try to put Hydrogen inside the bottle
Great video! The bottle got so hot, it broke! Amazing.
HarleyHummer65 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thax for your clip but the cam movement completely on the nerve and also you need a pipe from the engine get back to the water.
Alshayesteh 10 months ago
thax for your clip but the cam movement completely on the nerve and also you need a pipe from the engine get back to the water.
Alshayesteh 10 months ago
lÖl_ï_sîgned_ûp_àt_füll_tílt_pòker
_úsïñg_rèfèrrâl_cõdè:_YOU600_ánd_gôt_ä_600_dôllar_böñüs
28twilaDeen28 10 months ago
Did all the shaking and shivering come about as a result of drinking the contents of the green and brown bottles?
bbcisrubbish 10 months ago
See if you can get it to run off of Diet Coke and Mentos.
Elmware 11 months ago
Dude why'd you hang up on me?
Cowcharge 1 year ago
Pyrex bottle?
scotsmanlerxt 1 year ago
a steam engine can not start on it own, the trap door seals inside the motor will not open. awesome video but! i love your magnifying glass :O
TheAfricanSoul 1 year ago
can use Stirling or steam engine directly to run a car when the sun is shining, then when you stop in an open parking lot area just let the engine continue generating electricity which can be stored in batteries and run car using electric engine at night or when sun isnt powerful enough to run the car directly. or use the sunlight to crank a hand operated 50 ton hydraulic bottle jack to compress a ratchet gear spring on a powerful spring driven motor. motors can be scaled up & use for VTOL also.
jcfdillon 1 year ago
Nice demonstration. Nicer lens.
jmar1371 1 year ago
If ur gonna do that test again get a spare mamod steam boiler. It goes upto about 30psi but if you change the spiring (which isnt reccomended) you can get twice that.
Mclaren1O 1 year ago
Use a black matte copper boiler. Much more efficient and much safer.
TheStubbleking 2 years ago
Comment removed
TheStubbleking 2 years ago
congratulations, you may have just ruined a meat themometer, awesome vid though
Danzarr 2 years ago
am very interested in this sort of thing...
walter0bz 2 years ago
Comment removed
walter0bz 2 years ago
That was at least 550F...
Sirmau 2 years ago
Dude your failure points are; * brown bottle - beer bottles are brown or green generally because UV light kills the flavour, use a clear bottle and it'll boil faster * the leak sucks!!!
AWESOME experiment though, found it while considering building a test myself :)
klattimer 2 years ago
Clear does not boil at all. In fact clear glass and water will only reach 140 f . Brow (or any dark material) absorbs the light. The only way you can use clear is like this:
watch?v=8bubFtRK6F8
GREENPOWERSCIENCE 2 years ago 3
brown bottles produce more steam/quicker because they retain the heat better. thats why if you see solar water heaters (look for the video by green power science) you'll notice they use black hose,black pipes everything back. Ive even seen painted bottles on one side with reflective paint that had a black backing to reflect light but not let it pass out of the bottle as easily
sunspots 2 years ago
@klattimer he's using Infrared light, not UV
robertsulley 1 year ago
@klattimer You have to use very dark bottle to absorb heat. The darker the better
Wildatheart73 1 year ago
@klattimer its the infra red that makes it hot for the most part not uv
grizzskoalcope 1 year ago
10/10 for showing the idea. Properly engineered it would work well and easily power generators for african village for example.
jeremusic 2 years ago
Grenn power science is awesome. Where do you get a "steam engine" like this one from?
MikeBBJJ 2 years ago
Dams fill with silt, deprive downstream environments.
knot2man 2 years ago
Devi aumentare il calore
sei alle prime prove!!!
sfenodonte 2 years ago
Instead of a bear bottle, use a steel sealed container, like a pressure cooker. Gotta go, The Sarah Conner Chronicles is comming on. Cheers my friends...
VinceRainbow 3 years ago
Why are we still hooked on Oil? This is cool I wish I could see the mirror a little better.
btigtime2 3 years ago
Because it's still the cheapest energy source...that includes the fact that we already have the engines, refineries, infrastructure, and know-how to use it. Even with $140 a barrel oil (I know, it's come down), it's really not that expensive...especially when that price is adjusted for inflation.
Oil is not as cheap as it was, but it's still cheaper than any other alternative (if you include research, development, and infrastructure costs for alternatives...we already know how to use oil.
cocacola443 3 years ago
Not true. Think of power generation. With oil you have to do the following: find the oil, build the rig, drill, ship the oil, then refine it into fuel. You could build one hydroelectric dam for about the same cost as getting your first drop of fuel. You don't need any fuel, only rain, and it is free. Some dams are already 80 years old and have produced 0 emissions and have 0 fuel costs. With oil and coal plants the fuel costs alone are $100's of millions per year. How cheap is that?
ReisendeEuropa 3 years ago
You're only talking about fuel costs. Hydroelectric dams are pretty big capital development projects, and there's only a limited number of sites to build dams (less so with environmental regulation), and most of them are already developed. If the terrain doesn't favor dam construction, it won't be economical. Unlike a coal or nuclear power plant, a hydroelectric dam can't be built just anywhere.
cocacola443 3 years ago
You can't simply build a power plant anywhere. Most power plants use a resivoir for cooling water. If you can build a dam to create a lake, then you can just skip the nuke or coal burner and stick some generators in the dam. I'm fortunate to live in a country where 99% of the power is hydroelectric. The other 1% is offshore wind power. You dont need to build the Hoover dam for every place that you want to use hydro power. Most dams here are only 5-10 meters high with lakes of a few acres.
ReisendeEuropa 3 years ago
As for nuclear power startup cost vs hydro vs vs solar. A new 966MW nuke in North Carolina cost $10B. The 22,500MW Three Gorges Dam in China cost $15.5B. You would need 23 Nukes to match this one dam. That is about $230B. A 64MW Solar plant in NV cost $262M. You would need 351 of these to match the dam at a cost of $92.1B. Hydro is still cheapest and has no major operating cost. Solar has a higher initial cost but isn't affected by drought and also has very lost operating costs.
ReisendeEuropa 3 years ago
You originally said oil was cheaper because we already have the infrastructure, the engines, the refineries, and the knowledge. If half the people in the world switched to electric cars and charged them from renewable sources there would be a higher demand for that. Higher demand, and hence higher production, leads to improved technology. Oil is already losing out. The rest of the technology has already gained momentum. My apologies for the long winded comment-
ReisendeEuropa 3 years ago 2
Hey,no need to apologize. I like your style, and the fact that you back up what you say with facts. Good work. :)
I can agree with you on renewables being cheaper in the long run. It's just a shame so much is invested in oil infrastructure. When crude prices get high enough, though, the world will be forced to switch to alternative energy.
cocacola443 3 years ago
The other nice thing about hydro is that output can be adjusted to demand, within reason (except, like you said, if there's a drought) more so than solar or wind. Wind is probably pretty reliable near the coast, and solar is good in places the American southwest which get almost no cloud cover, but solar doesn't produce anything at night (electrical demand is generally lower at night, though).
I didn't realize building dams was so cheap.
cocacola443 3 years ago
Do your figures on the 3 Gorges Dam account for the displacement of people, the loss of land, and the loss of habitat?
I bet they don't...
And forgive me for noting that a "nuke" is a bomb. There is a kind of dark humour to be found in your use of it but it probably isn't funny.
phorbin 3 years ago
"nuke".. yes.. not funny.. think Chernobyl. As for the displacement and loss of land, I was just making a comparison of the actual construction cost to power generated. The environmental impact of displacement is a smaller area than that of a coal or oil plant, and much less than that of a possible nuclear leak. With a very large resivior you can reduce flooding downstream and slightly increase rainfall downwind. Two good things in a place with dry summers and monsoon winters.
ReisendeEuropa 3 years ago
The true cost involves displacing 1.5 or more (I've seen up to 4) million people, destruction of endangered species habitat, flooding 1300 known archaeological sites, sewage and industrial pollutant backup, the Yangtze silt issue which requires more dams upstream, 1 of which is in an earthquake risk area...
3 Gorges power is more costly, far dirtier and more dangerous than it looks.
phorbin 3 years ago
Ahh good call. I forgot about cooling water for a thermal power plant.
cocacola443 3 years ago
Actually, many thermal plants are along rivers, not necessarily reservoirs.
The cool thing about hydro is it's basically stored indirect solar energy (the sun evaporates water and it rises in into clouds, then rains), and you're right..once you've built the dam, there's not much else to do except minor maintenance, and dams are much simpler devices than a thermal power plant.
cocacola443 3 years ago
Nice solar powered "grenade", that leak was actually buying you some time. Going with a metal boiler tank would be a lot better. Having a pressure gauge, throttle valve and relief valve might not be a bad idea either. That way you could keep the boiler pressure in a safe zone and actually control the steam engine on it.
pauljs75 3 years ago
I sure hope he had on safety glasses...could you imagine that cap coming off when he's standing near it...or the bottle exploding? It wouldn't be much fun getting broken glass or a bottle cap in the eye (or anywhere else, for that matter).
cocacola443 3 years ago
He probably consumed the beer before he filled the bottle up with water. This may have clouded his judgement. This must have been his fifth attempt.
rsslvscff 3 years ago
No one solution will fix the problem but the solutions will probably come from some inventors garage because the oil companys are going to make as much money on current technology and ony convert when it cuts into THEIR proffit margin.
carbons4 3 years ago 4
this rocks !! totally clean and renewable techonology !!
steampunk, here we come !
I believe ancient steam locomotive did have a 'primer' or sorts to turn a flywheel before hitching it to the actual train wheels ...
lani0 3 years ago
That engine needs oiling, I think.
MrMan1980uk 3 years ago
HAHAHAHAHA
BrooklynNYC777 3 years ago
it would, steam and steel, make rust. maybe we could rub a grass blade on it to lubricate it.
chopped50ford 3 years ago
This is already done with a steam turbine but they heat sulfur to a heat exchange to create the steam. Your experiment is good I like it but turbines are far more efficient. Your experiment is entertaining and fun.
cdltpx 4 years ago
AGREED ON THE TURBINE. I have an air engine that I have converted to steam power. It actually can turn stiff with power. Still working on it but will have a video shortly.
THANK YOU for the comments. GREENPOWERSCIENCE.
GREENPOWERSCIENCE 4 years ago
Actually, turbines are only more efficient on a much larger scale.
MrMan1980uk 3 years ago
Good idea, if it werent for the leak I think you would have a fully functional green machine. I like the way you think.
DavidHolmesIII 4 years ago
you should be a black tin indeed a bottle
it will produce more energy
blabla1275 4 years ago
that made no sence at all- people, the whole world is reading ur posts- proof read them !!!
dankfin 4 years ago
LOL! Pot meet kettle.
UKBB 4 years ago
try a stirling engine instead of a steam engine. No need for exploding glass bottles, stirling engines don't need pressure tanks. They work on the gas sealed inside the engine.
guitarplayerepiSG 4 years ago
Hi,
Check out my other videos. Stirling Engines.
GREENPOWERSCIENCE 4 years ago
lucky your face wasnt near it when the bottle exploded..
2Shye 4 years ago
how much tempetarute can you get with this lent?
miguelvalenzuela 4 years ago
This lens spot temp is 2000 F. I have one that goes over 3000.
GREENPOWERSCIENCE 4 years ago
why do we need nuclear power at all ?
GodForum 4 years ago
becuase we have millions of people that need affordable power. Solar can't get us there, neither can wind. Coal is clearly NOT the solution.
rick0289 3 years ago
I beg to differ- Bush gave 20 billion last year and again the yr before to the oil industry to explore alt-energy. now how many wind terbines and solar pannels will 40 plus dollars buy? This is when oil indust made 10's of billions proffits per quarter.
icicicles 3 years ago
Sorry- Look at the numbers, solar can not provide the needs of the US. Systems life span is near equal to capital improvments. Major (MAJOR) improvments in efficency is required to make the ROI 1/2 or less of the initial cost. All for seeing it happen, but it will take decades. Giving money for RESEACH is not the same as giving money to install the current "state of the art" systems.
rick0289 3 years ago
Fix that leak!!!! nice work! cool
jandreassticman 4 years ago
very Nice!!! i saw Roy Mackallister with a parabolic mirror that activate a stirling engine concentring the sun of liht but I Think that big fresnel works better.Try to put Hydrogen inside the bottle
alex681219 4 years ago