This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

# A new energy source-maybe--maybe-not

Discuss A new energy source-maybe--maybe-not in the American Professional Electrical Advice Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
I am bringing this drawing back into the discussion just to ask one last question.
In the drawing there are twelve (12) buckets on the right side. Just for discussion each bucket has a lifting force of 100-foot pounds. 12 buckets times 100 = 1200-foot pounds of lifting force.
1200-foot pounds of lifting force can produce more energy at any one moment in time than 100-foot pounds;
Once all the buckets are full and this machine is running, the process continues to produce 1200-foot pounds of force if you continue to fill one (1) bucket at the bottom in sequence with the rest.
YES or NO?

This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

#### Paignton pete

##### -
Arms
Esteemed
I would say yes.

and an extra word

#### littlespark

##### -
Arms
Esteemed
no.

The buckets are sitting in water. Any water “in” a bucket will be held up by the water below it.

Nothing will happen

##### -
Arms
Supporter
Esteemed
What gives it motion?....12 buckets full of water in water will weigh nothing effectively.......or have I missed something?

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
What gives it motion?....12 buckets full of water in water will weigh nothing effectively.......or have I missed something?
They are not full of water, they are full of air

##### -
Arms
Supporter
Esteemed
sorry mate lost me.....

S

#### Silly Sausage

What gives it motion?....12 buckets full of water in water will weigh nothing effectively.......or have I missed something?
I think the system is that the inverted buckets are filled with air at the base of the conveyor, hence getting the thing in motion.
He can rest assured though, that it will require more energy to pump air down to the bottom than he'll extract from the system.
Just another perp-motion nonsense.

#### Dan

These threads always make me think of doc from back to the future. I imagine his shed/lab from the first one.

##### -
Arms
Supporter
Esteemed
Got more chance with time travel than perpetual motion me thinks

#### StephenRowley

##### -
Got more chance with time travel than perpetual motion me thinks
It can't work otherwise the universe would Hve destroyed it self a long time ago

#### Dan

I love people trying. And hope one day somebody clocks it. But brainier people than us discovered the laws of physics that prevent it. And only brainier people than us will find a way to beat the laws.

(Worth noting some laws have been disproved now - but not theory or relativity just yet)

#### Matthewd29

##### -
Arms
Esteemed
I've read this 3 times and I still don't understand it how is this going to work?

#### DPG

##### -
Arms
Esteemed
I've read this 3 times and I still don't understand it how is this going to work?
That because it won't

#### ElectroChem

##### -
Arms
I'll try to tackle this with some math, just to amuse myself.

I had originally assumed that ft.lb was a unit of power, but a quick google shows that it is actually an energy, with ft.lb/s being the power unit. The buoyant force of each bucket will marginally decrease as it rises, as a function of the surrounding water density, but this can be effectively disregarded as trivial.

Be that as it may, let us assume that each bucket can provide a total of 100ft.lb of energy as it rises from the bottom of the cycle. Over each 'interval' of machine time, this being the time between each bucket passing a set point, you can only extract 100ft.lb of energy, this being the difference in potential buoyant force given by raising N buckets 1/N of the way from bottom to top. Let us assume that one bucket passes the top each second, your total extractable power will thus be 100ft.lb/s, and not one erg more. Thus is exposed your first mathematical error, that you can extract the full stored energy of the system over and over again.

You will find, should you calculate the power and energy needed to compress and force enough air to fill a bucket from sea level to the bottom of the machine, that it will be greater than 100ft.lb and will thus require more than 100ft.lb/s to fill a bucket as it passes the bottom. And the bucket MUST be fully filled at the lowest point, any delay in filling only reduces the total energy that can be provided by it then rising to the top, in direct ratio to the delay in filling with air.

Needless to say, all this assumes that your machine has no bearing losses, drag losses through the water, power extraction losses, compressor losses, heat loss, leaks, etc, etc, etc...

So, no, you cannot fill buckets under water with air and let them pull your machine along, the idea is even less feasible than pumping water up to buckets which then fall down and pull a chain to provide power. The latter at least can be used to store energy, though a hydro station using one bucket of water per second would be rather on the small side (excepting certain very large definitions of 'one bucket').

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
..., The buoyant force of each bucket will marginally decrease as it rises
You are 180 degrees wong. As the balloons of air rise they will expand; increasing the lifting force.

Please stay on this topic; I need you -
Post automatically merged:

you can only extract 100ft.lb of energy, this being the difference in potential buoyant force given by raising N buckets 1/N of the way from bottom to top. Let us assume that one bucket passes the top each second
Bubbles in water+/-salt water
The air bubble will expand as the bubble rises
This is where the term "poof"{ came from -

Last edited:

#### davesparks

##### -
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
You are 180 degrees wong. As the balloons of air rise they will expand; increasing the lifting force.

Please stay on this topic; I need you -
Post automatically merged:

Bubbles in water+/-salt water
The air bubble will expand as the bubble rises
This is where the term "poof"{ came from -
The bubble expands, but doesn't contain any more air, it is just less compressed.

#### ElectroChem

##### -
Arms
I humoured your delusions once only.
Come up with some serious explanation (with actual mathematics) as to how your proposal would work or be blocked and ignored.

Arms
Esteemed
Put up a sail

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
Here is another diagram that might help this discussion

#### Attachments

• 25.6 KB Views: 14

Mentor
Arms
Esteemed

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
SeaPower description
This is a diagram that details a new energy generating power from the expanding rise of air underwater
In the diagram, there are balloons that air was injected in the lower balloon. As the balloon rises it expands and this expansion is caused by the reducing pressure applied upon it.
Picture this as if each balloon was a hot air balloon with an opening at the bottom. The first balloon at the bottom is injected with air; as the balloon rises it expands creating more lifting power.
This is the same principal that keeps a boat afloat.
I realize that there must be a reason this idea won’t fly but as of yet I have not found it.
If you really believe this contraption won’t work, please explain; otherwise you don’t have a clue.
The lifting force is equal to the volume of water displaced. This is the same principal that keeps a boat afloat. One cubic foot of water weighs 64 lbs. A balloon that displaces 10 cubic feet of are has a lifting force of 640 lbs.

#### telectrix

##### -
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
you are injecting a balloon with air. where does the power to do this come from?

#### Lucien Nunes

##### -
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
I'm not even going to try to unscramble the numbers on the drawing. Force is not measured in foot-pounds. Sea-water does not weigh 64 lbs per square foot. There seem to be some fundamental misconceptions.

In an ideal machine, the energy used to compress air at sea-level to fill one balloon at the bottom of the belt will be equal to the energy transferred to the belt as the balloon ascends back to sea-level, numerically the integral of the buoyancy force over the distance it moves. The balloon skin simply behaves like a piston of variable area, against which the air expands, a reverse analogue of what went on in the compressor cylinder. It's an air-motor using a liquid medium as a cylinder, nothing more, nothing less.

#### Zerax

##### -
Like what he said...

#### static zap

##### -
It looks like the type of idea we all could invent in the bath ,
on a diet of baked beans.
(thanks for sharing - I'm always googling my "ideas" to find they are not original.
and now getting paranoid enough to think , Google may steal any original thought , - Similar to the terms of an "Employment contract" )

#### Megawatt

##### -
Arms
It looks like the type of idea we all could invent in the bath ,
on a diet of baked beans.
(thanks for sharing - I'm always googling my "ideas" to find they are not original.
and now getting paranoid enough to think , Google may steal any original thought , - Similar to the terms of an "Employment contract" )
O
SeaPower description
This is a diagram that details a new energy generating power from the expanding rise of air underwater
In the diagram, there are balloons that air was injected in the lower balloon. As the balloon rises it expands and this expansion is caused by the reducing pressure applied upon it.
Picture this as if each balloon was a hot air balloon with an opening at the bottom. The first balloon at the bottom is injected with air; as the balloon rises it expands creating more lifting power.
This is the same principal that keeps a boat afloat.
I realize that there must be a reason this idea won’t fly but as of yet I have not found it.
If you really believe this contraption won’t work, please explain; otherwise you don’t have a clue.
The lifting force is equal to the volume of water displaced. This is the same principal that keeps a boat afloat. One cubic foot of water weighs 64 lbs. A balloon that displaces 10 cubic feet of are has a lifting force of 640 lbs.View attachment 52190
mr. Curious you will have to find someone smarter than me. I got no idea what you are talking about and I’ve worked in a hydroelectric power plant and it just has a dam and the water dropping down turning turbines

#### static zap

##### -
.... got no idea what you are talking about ...........
A little bit of Physics .. mixed with common sense
is the best basis for "Looks plausible - Never done before schemes " .. as they are breaking the laws of physics in a subtle way.
volume of water displaced by an expanding air bubble
..Looks good
Put it in a piston chamber , it will expand (only if it started a higher pressure ) final step at surface
.. will have minimum force -not so impressive
(In the UK some Employment contracts -claim your inventions)

Last edited:

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
Here is another look at the system. The bubbles are more like hot air balloons but instead of heat, air is added. As the air bubble rises, it expands creating more lifting force. When all six (6) bubbles have air in them they combine this lifting force.

#### DPG

##### -
Arms
Esteemed
But how are you filling the balloons with air?

##### -
Arms
Supporter
Esteemed
@justcurioustwo why don’t you build it.....film it......and prove all us doubters wrong?

#### davesparks

##### -
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
Here is another look at the system. The bubbles are more like hot air balloons but instead of heat, air is added. As the air bubble rises, it expands creating more lifting force. When all six (6) bubbles have air in them they combine this lifting force.
But the problem is that the energy used to move the air to the bottom of the system will be more than the energy output from the system.

The balloons will expand yes, but the amount of air in them will remain the same, it will just be less compressed. The lifting force won't change as it rises.

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
@justcurioustwo why don’t you build it.....film it......and prove all us doubters wrong?
This is a simply mechanical machine that utilized the rising force of balloons with air in them. You can also envision this as inverted umbrellas. What makes this “work” is the combining lifting force of multiple umbrellas with expanding air in them. The result is an increase in “force”; that I am now trying to convert into watts and the speed these rising balloons are traveling.
Maybe someone here with more technical knowledge can help me out in this. Once done we can the evaluate whether it is a zero-sum game or whatever.
Post automatically merged:

But the problem is that the energy used to move the air to the bottom of the system will be more than the energy output from the system.

The balloons will expand yes, but the amount of air in them will remain the same, it will just be less compressed. The lifting force won't change as it rises.
You state that the lifting force will not change as the balloons expand. This might be my Achilles heel. The lifting force is equal to the water being displaced. At 1 ATM the volume of air under this umbrella is 300 cubic feet. This same 300 cubic feet if air under an umbrella at a depth of 594 feet is under a pressure of 264.6 p.s.i.; has a volume of 16.66 cubic feet.
As the umbrella rises the air bubble expands pushing out more water.
If I understand your statement correctly, please tell me how a balloon displacing 16 cubic feet has an equal rising force of a balloon displacing 100 cubic feet?
I am sure I am wrong, and you are right but just saying so is not convincing enough for me.
Post automatically merged:

There is one more thing I need help on, and this is the place I can get it. I am trying to compute two values.
[1] The electrical output of this machine.
[2] The speed of the rising bubbles.

Last edited:

#### static zap

##### -
[1] The electrical output of this machine.
[2] The speed of the rising bubbles.
Just an observation on [2]
A trade off , how often a new bubble can be added , vs how much
water resistance -friction slows the system down ...
Let it run free ,it will go its fastest but make no energy.
(plus maybe a short stint of overspeed as its stored inertia comes out)
A slower speed , less water friction -- more energy recovered .
( less opportunity to gather energy as its running slower )
Remember boats ! (built like barges , travel slowly compared to cars)
Hold a cupped water wheel under water , and let some air bubbles in .
( a scale model -simplified will be easier to see its shortcomings )
..For super expanding bubbles .. cool butane gas !.. (sorry global warming)

Last edited:

#### davesparks

##### -
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
There is one more thing I need help on, and this is the place I can get it. I am trying to compute two values.
[1] The electrical output of this machine.
[2] The speed of the rising bubbles.
To work out the electrical output of the machine you will need to know how you are converting the output into electricity and the efficiency of that system.
I assume the output of your machine is mechanical via a rotating shaft? And also assume that this will couple to an alternator to produce electricity?
In which case the electrical output will be the mechanical output power of the machine minus the losses through the mechanical linkage and the alternator itself.

You also need to factor in to the overall efficiency how much energy is used in controlling the alternator and regulating its output.
For the electricity to be useful it must be regulated, otherwise you could output varying voltage and frequency which will damage any connected loads.

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
To work out the electrical output of the machine you will need to know how you are converting the output into electricity and the efficiency of that system.
The inverted umbrellas (balloons) are attached to a cable that turns a DC generator at the top or it could be an AC generator or both. To determine the efficiency of the system requires you to compare it to a system that has no deficiencies.
I assume the output of your machine is mechanical via a rotating shaft? And also assume that this will couple to an alternator to produce electricity?
In which case the electrical output will be the mechanical output power of the machine minus the losses through the mechanical linkage and the alternator itself.
I totally agree
You also need to factor in to the overall efficiency how much energy is used in controlling the alternator and regulating its output.
I totally agree
For the electricity to be useful it must be regulated, otherwise you could output varying voltage and frequency which will damage any connected loads.
Again, I agree
The inverted umbrellas (balloons) are attached to a cable that turns a DC generator at the top or it could be an AC generator or both. To determine the efficiency of the system requires you to compare it to a system that has no deficiencies.

At this stage of the game I need to determine is this system is possible. If it is; then a three-dimensional computer model of the system needs to be written showing real time results with the ability to change variables in order to maximize output.

#### static zap

##### -
Not any nearer friction losses , but did look up dive tanks.
230bar x 12 litres = 1.2MJoules of stored energy.
Why they regularily inspect aluminium tanks (-400 withdrawn annually -USA--out of millions )
From distant memories of Air lifting bags used to lift sunken ship treasure. Just need electricity bill from a dive shop next !

#### davesparks

##### -
Mentor
Arms
Esteemed
Again, I agree
The inverted umbrellas (balloons) are attached to a cable that turns a DC generator at the top or it could be an AC generator or both. To determine the efficiency of the system requires you to compare it to a system that has no deficiencies.

At this stage of the game I need to determine is this system is possible. If it is; then a three-dimensional computer model of the system needs to be written showing real time results with the ability to change variables in order to maximize output.
It could turn a dynamo to produce DC or an alternator to produce AC, or as you say it could be both (though this will, I think, decrease efficiency further). What do you intend to power from it? This will determine whether it is AC or DC.
Unless it is for a dedicated specific application then I'd assume you'll want to produce AC.

Is it possible to build this system? Yes, if you throw enough money at it you can build it.
Is it possible to build it and make money from it? highly unlikely in my opinion.

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
Is it possible to build this system? Yes, if you throw enough money at it you can build it.
Is it possible to build it and make money from it? highly unlikely in my opinion.
I have no interest in making money from this. I already have a great job that pays for all my needs.
Post automatically merged:

Why I am here--
Awhile back I started a number of forum topics that started with “End Of Oil; WHAT NEXT?”. I was trying to inform people that oil is finite, and we will run out.

It's time to look forward and find solutions before we are forced to. (link removed by admin)

Now that renewables are being utilized in many countries, I decided to come up with a renewable too which uses the force of gravity and pressure under water.

Of course, it will more than likely not work, but it’s fun trying.

Last edited by a moderator:

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
The above diagram has changed, here is the revised version

#### justcurioustwo

##### -
There are several people who can see the writing on the wall. Fossil fuel as our major energy provider is ending. Your grandchildren will not be driving gasoline powered cars.
This insight created the green new deal, hybrid’s and the re-invention of the electric car. My efforts are along those same lines; trying to find the “what next”; a new era of renewables.
I am aware that the SeaEngine is a long shot but at least I’m trying.
You can’t fault me for that

Reply to A new energy source-maybe--maybe-not in the American Professional Electrical Advice Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

### Latest Media

This official sponsor may provide discounts for members