Add a Comment
- Water Fired Power Plants
Summery
This concept for a completely carbon-less power plant is very doable. All the technology is there. What we need is someone who can coordinate these brilliant minds, companies, and concepts into a power house of ideas for the better good of this country. I really wouldn't mind being that person. Getting these groups together to develop these power plants. Just think of where we can go.
These ideas should be put into public domain, and distributed world wide to help stop global warming. Maybe published in world science magazines. It's time to stop putting our own interest ahead of the interest of the entire country or world. If we keep going the way we are, it will be total destruction for this country and the world. I don't want to see that happen.
I would like President Barack Obama & V.P. Joe Biden, Dr. Steven Chue Secretary of DOE, and Dr. Jim Hanson of NASA and others to review my paper an give me their opinion on this matter.
Thanks for listening.
Charles - Reply to this comment
- Water Powered power Plants
Other Cost Savings
Other cost saving not yet realized would probably be in the field Health Care of our nation and the world. Just breathing would be good. Not to mention the slowing down or stopping global warming. Stopping of the destruction of our oceans. This unseen damage can not be measured, however, we are starting to see some of the effects it is having on animal life dependent on the oceans. Polar bears, penguins, seals, aquatic birds, fish, etc. Don't we understand, this is our greatest food source. Eating would be good too.
Charles - Reply to this comment
- Water powered Power Plants
Operating Cost Savings
1.Lower maintenance cost, due to lack of carbon build-up.
2.No expensive carbon filters required by the EPA, or turning carbon into liquid and pumping it underground with NO Idea of what kind of damage it might be doing under ground. ( Ref: Scott Pelley's Report. )
3.No heating cost for the building. Heat with electricity or steam produce by the plant itself.
4.Smaller footprint required for the building and land.
5.No land required for storage of coal or trains.
6.No train loads of coal, or tracks.
7.I could going on and on.
This is a win, win situation.
Charles - Reply to this comment
- Water Powered Power Plants
Well Scott Pelley what do you think of the idea?
Charles - Reply to this comment
- Water powered power plants.
The problem is that you'll be shutting down the coal, oil, and gas companies if this happens. Thiese guys have deep pockets full of money to stop this movement. The question I ask to youis: Do you to continue paying high prices for oil, or do you want to change to water and continue breathing. If we continue burning oil we are killing ourselves. We have a chance to change things, stop global warming amoung other thing.
Charles - Reply to this comment
- Water Fired Power Plant
Thanks to TVA ( Tenneessee Valley Authority they have provided some hard numbers.
" for the year of 2008, they purchased 2.11 billion dallars in coal." Now just think of burning water. The water is already there. It can be converted so very easy. After it burns it turns back into water, and can be reburned. Not only could they save 2.11 billion dollars, they could stop global warming. A WIN, WIN! But no one is listening!
Charles - Reply to this comment
- Financing this Project / Burning Water Power Plant
According to the News Paper accounts the Power Company in Holland, Michigan has $250,000,000 Dollars which they planned on to build this coal plant. The D.O.E. has matching funds for any project dealing with alternative energy. I believe this fits the bill if the power company will build an alternative type plant. I don't have any hard numbers yet, but just think about it, the fuel saving alone will more than pay for this project. According to Scott Pelley's report on CBS 60 Minutes, one coal plant will burn two train loads of coal (each train is a mile long) every day. Multiply by 365 days, that equals 730 train loads of coal a year. In Scott Pelley's report, China is opening a coal fired plant at the rate of one a week. Assuming they use the same amounts of trains per plant, that would be 730 trains times 52 weeks, equals 37960 total trains a year. Then multiply times the tons, then times the amount of carbon in each ton of coal, and so on. You do the math, and wounder why you are having trouble breathing.
Charles - Reply to this comment
- Did you know one gallon of water (a liquid) = 1833 gallons on HHO (a gas) which can be burned as fuel. Think of it this way, water is fuel concentrate, just add low voltage electricity and you have an enormous amount of fuel to burn. After it is burned it returns to its original state. Unlike gasoline and others which will burn at any time, water will not. Only upon demand will water turn into fuel, and it expands so fast that it will keep up with what ever thing you are using it to burn it. NO CARBON! So why not use it in a power plant. All power plants have a water supply.
Charles - Reply to this comment
- You can create energy two ways, by separating atoms or putting them back together. Water is H2O liquid can be separated by running a low voltage electricity through it, turning it into HHO a gas. You then take HHO and put it back together by burning it. The exhaust is water. NO Pollution, NO Carbon! What a Great Concept! It really works!
- Reply to this comment
- WHen fossil fuels combust they produce carbon dioxide. "Clean" energy from fossil fuels is physically impossible. Congratulations to Scott Pelley for calling the coal Tsar on his preposterous claim. He hung himself. Hopefully he won't get the opportunity to hang all of us as well.
S. Burton MA - Reply to this comment
