New type of gravity power plant offers chance to be landmark use of fusion

Status
Not open for further replies.
exchemist said:
Dessert is what you eat after the main course. You mean desert. But you have just said you would do this in a different location every time, right? So after a year or two, how many of these 0.64 sq. mile holes would you have? And what desert, where, would accept this? And what about nuclear fallout?
Click to expand...
There are already many underground test sites in the Nevada desert. I don't know how many craters you would want, one is a million dollar business. I'm not the government I don't regulate such things. There is no fallout
trevor borocz johnson said:
You wouldn't be sending up any fallout either as the blast energy is absorbed by the one huge piece of rock.
Click to expand...
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
There are already many underground test sites in the Nevada desert. I don't know how many craters you would want, one is a million dollar business. I'm not the government I don't regulate such things. There is no fallout
Click to expand...

But they are underground. Underground. So they do not spew fallout into the air. And, by the same token, they cannot be used to make a hole that you fill in with seawater. And Nevada is at least about 200 miles from the sea, I gather.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
There are already many underground test sites in the Nevada desert. I don't know how many craters you would want, one is a million dollar business. I'm not the government I don't regulate such things. There is no fallout
Click to expand...
Oh, so now there are at least 2 magical aspects to your invention.
 
The method of pre-cutting the crater has no fallout. Fallout is the result of blast energy carrying huge amounts of vaporized dirt and rock up into the atmosphere. The block of weight from the pre-cutting method absorbs all this blast energy that would carry radioactive dirt high into the atmosphere. It's the difference between a surface blast and an underground. The pre cutting method is more similar to underground.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
The method of pre-cutting the crater has no fallout. Fallout is the result of blast energy carrying huge amounts of vaporized dirt and rock up into the atmosphere. The block of weight from the pre-cutting method absorbs all this blast energy that would carry radioactive dirt high into the atmosphere. It's the difference between a surface blast and an underground. The pre cutting method is more similar to underground.
Click to expand...
We are now up to 3 magical aspects of your invention. Except for the magic and absurdly terrible efficiency - I think you got a winner here!
 
origin said:
absurdly terrible efficiency
Click to expand...
you say inefficient, science and nature says otherwise. Here's a funny qwestion that I'm sure you have no answer so I'm laughing already but what other methods are there in nature to convert explosive energy into usable electricity, and I'm talking a real explosion not the piddle paddling of an IC engine.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
The method of pre-cutting the crater has no fallout. Fallout is the result of blast energy carrying huge amounts of vaporized dirt and rock up into the atmosphere. The block of weight from the pre-cutting method absorbs all this blast energy that would carry radioactive dirt high into the atmosphere. It's the difference between a surface blast and an underground. The pre cutting method is more similar to underground.
Click to expand...
So the "pre cut block" will not only stay together, but will not come out of the ground? How do you get any energy out of it, then?
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
Here's a funny qwestion that I'm sure you have no answer so I'm laughing already but what other methods are there in nature to convert explosive energy into usable electricity
Click to expand...
In nature? None.

In engineering? MHD. Internal combustion engines. Pulse jets. Nuclear pulse engines.
and I'm talking a real explosion not the litlle piddle paddling of an IC engine.
Click to expand...
Given that IC engines have generated far more energy than you have demonstrated with your method, and since such engines can generate megawatts, I'd not be so quick to disparage them.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
Yeah and there are probably a dozen or so other ideas to generate electricity from wave motion in the ocean to lowering rocks off of mountains to wind, solar, coal, gas, dams etc.etc.. This is just one more.
Click to expand...
It's not a good idea. Get over it. It's silly, dangerous, and doesn't add anything of value.
 
spidergoat said:
It's not a good idea. Get over it. It's silly, dangerous, and doesn't add anything of value.
Click to expand...
you know what, that's your opinion and your entitled to it, and I don't promote dangerous use of the patent nor is it silly, so since you all clearly have a head of steem in playing me down, perhaps you could do me one little favor brilliant scientists and explain to me in easy to understand terms how they plan to extract useful energy from laser fusion because I've read those articles a hundred times and still don't understand the concept.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
you know what, that's your opinion and your entitled to it, and I don't promote dangerous use of the patent nor is it silly, so since you all clearly have a head of steem in playing me down, perhaps you could do me one little favor brilliant scientists and explain to me in easy to understand terms how they plan to extract useful energy from laser fusion because I've read those articles a hundred times and still don't understand the concept.
Click to expand...
Fusion makes heat. We already know how to make electricity from heat, and we can make liquid fuels with electricity. Explosions are fine in an ICU, but they are relatively small and controlled. I don't mean to disparage you personally, but maybe you need this wake up call from disinterested third parties.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
you say inefficient, science and nature says otherwise. Here's a funny qwestion that I'm sure you have no answer so I'm laughing already but what other methods are there in nature to convert explosive energy into usable electricity, and I'm talking a real explosion not the piddle paddling of an IC engine.
Click to expand...
An explosion by its very nature is not going to be conducive to being efficiently converted to electrical power. If you take the U235 that would be used for an explosion and put that in a nuclear reactor then you would get a good utilization. Likewise if you were to take the conventional explosives for your idea and instead fed them in a slow controled manner to a chemical reactor you could efficiently use the heat produced to drive a steam turbine and produce electricity.

The whole blow up things for making electricity is just not viable. It is a novel approach though.
 
billvon said:
So the "pre cut block" will not only stay together, but will not come out of the ground? How do you get any energy out of it, then?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Our friend Borocz seems to change the story, ad hoc, to meet any objections. First, according to the patent , it was a hole that was made by an explosion which generated hydroelectricity when filled with water, the process being repeated by "pumping out" via successive further explosions. Then it was a new hole every time, then we have the idea that the solid block of ground itself will create energy on its descent from being expelled into the air, then we have the revision that it won't be expelled, in order to keep the radioactive fallout in.:confused:

By the way, if inrush of water were used to generate energy, you would end up with cubic miles of radioactive saline water, in a terrain marked by rock heavily fractured by nuclear explosions. And we know that aquifers can extend for hundreds of miles, depending on the geology. Good plan, eh?
 
Waiter_2001 said:
What about black people in wheels? How much energy would be produced?? I'm talking a power-station full!! :D
Click to expand...
Or refugees in wheels. We take them in, but they stay in the wheels forever producing power. It would overcome the objections of both sides of the aisle.

I could give Trump a run for his money.
 
you could have horses or some shit walk in a circle tied to a turnstile or smthin pfft or squirrels climbing up a vertical stair climber that's a wall for them to run up. Lets just get to page six and forget about five.
 
One motivation that's being overlooked, and i think a pretty strong one, is the fact that deep down I think everyone wants to see a huge mountain of rock blasted out of the ground. It's as sweet as when you set off bottle rockets underwater when you were a kid. It would just be so amazing to watch the footage of a 4,000 ft cube of rock being tossed into the air from out of the ground. Just my personal belief but I was the one who got in trouble when I was 2 for stealing a candle from the drug store cause I thought it was a big M-80.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top