At 12:59 PM 2/16/5, Jones Beene wrote: >Horace, > >> You will find that 570 kJ/kg, is close to the bottom line. >Assuming >> conservation of energy, the high expansion ratio merely >extracts the 370 >> kJ/kg energy available from gas expansion. > >I disagree, as do the the researchers of the report cited >yesterday and others who are actively working on this. I >hope to get around to typing in some of their findings later >today. You are trying to pigeon-hole this into existing heat >engine technology. It won't fit.
I'm not trying - conservation of energy fits any technology ALL BY ITSELF, unless that technology provides free energy. Liquified air or LN2 can not compete in a global market where transport and storage are key. The economics of these things are tied to energy density. Better to use much higher density alternatives, which clearly are already available. On second thought, I take that back. I CAN be very trying! It's just part of my old curmudgeon's temperament. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner
