Obama administration grants $737 million for a 24/7 solar power plant
http://blogs.forbes.com/toddwoody/2011/05/19/obama-administration-grants-737-million-for-a-247-solar-power-plant/ A group of 1 megawatt thermal E-Cats could reduce the cost of this plant by producing heat at night when the sun is down. The size of the molten salt buffer tanks could be reduced and the service life of the E-Cats could be extended by the use of solar heat during the day. When the sun is out, the E-Cats could be shut down to conserve nickel. If I were Rossi, I would go after this type job. On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: > not a bad idea if the salts are sufficiently stable,some problems of safety > both with nitrates and (!) cyanides/ > Perhaps on internal circuit. well closed a amd an outer with water. > The problem of contacting a very hot surface remains for molten salts too. > Peter > > > On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> As in a solar thermal system, use molten salts such as sodium and >> potassium nitrate or a combination of the two. >> >> >> >> It is cheaper to have 1000 thin molten salts pipes and a high pressure >> heat exchange, then 1000 high pressure steam pipes. >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:50 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Based on my experience with many thermal transfer agents for higher >>> temperatures I think water remains the unique choice . Mercury as used in a >>> process of converting cyclohexanol to cyclohexanone) is prohibitely >>> expensive and very toxic- while organic agents as Diphyl (diphenil oxide >>> plus diphenyl) will rapidly degarde in contact with a very hot surface and >>> this will lead to fouling. What other possibilities are in your opinion? >>> Peter. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Alan J Fletcher <a...@well.com> wrote: >>> >>>> At 01:24 PM 5/25/2011, you wrote: >>>> >>>> *HARD CURRENCY ENERGY*- how the thermal energy of the active core can >>>> be converted in electric energy in an economical way? >>>> >>>> I don't think that's going to (or needs to) happen any time soon --- it >>>> only delivers 500C (limited by the nickel powder degrading?) at 50 bar. >>>> Electrical conversion efficiency at that level is less than 20% (??) -- >>>> times the 6x factor is barely over unity. >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm probably too conservative there. 40% ? 60% ? >>>> (Way out of my expertise, anyway.) >>>> >>>> But the working fluid doesn't have to be water. >>>> I'm not sure that a >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_vapour_turbinewould get approval for >>>> domestic use, though !!!! >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>> Cluj, Romania >>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > >
