Face/Twit/Whatever status
2009-04-03 02:16:24.20342+02 by Dan Lyke 11 comments
Dan: Silly Q: Water mains at 95PSI, house could run at 35. How much energy could we extract from daily water use?
2009-04-03 02:16:24.20342+02 by Dan Lyke 11 comments
Dan: Silly Q: Water mains at 95PSI, house could run at 35. How much energy could we extract from daily water use?
[ related topics: Real Estate ]
comments in descending chronological order (reverse):
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-06 20:37:19.444215+02 by: m
Andy's solution is certainly the more elegant, and thus most likely to be correct.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 23:34:10.850137+02 by: andylyke [edit history]
Here's a stab -
Consider lifting the water 120 feet (pressure in water ~= 0.5psi/ft of head) The acceleration due to gravity in SI units is around 9.8 m/s^2 (not that I know what a square second looks like!)
So if we lift a kg of something 36.1 m, then it has a potential energy of E=mgh e=9.8 x 36.1 Joules/kg ~= 328 Joules/kg or about 0.32 W-hrs per Gallon, if I've followed the numbers correctly.
That's the total potential, but it comes glassfuls at a time, or at best bathtubfuls at a time. Maybe it's better to consider solar panels on the roof?
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 21:58:57.419562+02 by: m
Dan, The numbers apply to your water supply scenario -- 95lbs to 35lbs, calculated on a 60lb pressure differential. If you use 300 cubic feet a month, you could only hope to save 1.5KWH a month at best. Unless my model assumption or arithmetic is wrong (very possible), payback for you would take forever and longer
My house water pressure is about 32-33lbs, and my garden supply drops it to 10+, so I would do even worse.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 20:46:59.709135+02 by: Dan Lyke
m, yeah, I guess I've got some issues with conflating applications, 'cause you're paying for all the energy. Here in suburbia (semi-urbia?) we've got that 60PSI of wasted energy (stored here in water tanks on the tops of hills).
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 19:55:19.980352+02 by: m
Offhand I don't think it would produce very much. One model for this would be the the energy it would take to to keep a bladder inflated in a water tank as water was released. To take a gallon of water out of a 95psi system to a pressure of 35psi, would gain the same energy that it would take to inflate the bladder from 35psi to 95psi. A gallon of air at 35psi is about 9 grams at 0C. The specific heat is 0.23cal/gm, and a kilocalorie/hour is roughly 1.16 watts.
To increase the pressure of a gallon of air from 35psi to 95psi would require a temperature change from 0C (305K) to 554C (828K). So the 100% efficiency energy required would be 1.15Kcal, or 1.33 watt hours. There are about 7.5 gallons in a cubic foot, possibly 10 watt hours from a cubic foot. Assuming 50% efficiency (wild guess), it would take 200cubic feet of water to produce 1 KWH. That is a lot of water. When I lived in a house about the size of yours, with two adults, I rarely used more than about 300 cubic foot/ month.
Its been a very long time since I did a physics word problem, so you might want to check the logic/arithmetic before embarrassing yourself to anyone else with my discussion.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 19:19:08.803378+02 by: Dan Lyke
Yeah, my first reaction is to think of it on the Raccoon Mountain scale, but it seems like there are a bunch of places where just a little bit of power would be useful. For instance, in m's irrigation system, could he skip the photovoltaics and (given some priming) charge the computer/valve battery off a small turbine which could function as the pressure reducer as well? How about for sensors?
And Top Gear-wise, somewhere under my Stig exterior is a James May looking to get out.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 18:52:49.836595+02 by: TC
Nice to see lunch got the wheels turning but I was talking about much larger scale like http://www.rentricity.com/ type projects. I think Meuon nailed why it would not be practical for home use. With 60psi differential you have enough energy to drive a low head micro turbine but your not going to have enough flow to make it worth your effort (let alone sunk cost). Lunch was good for me too, I put TOPGEAR in the tivo cue and decided Jeremy Clarkson http://www.topgear.com/us/the_show/bios/jeremy_clarkson is a good role model.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 15:23:20.070173+02 by: Dan Lyke
Aha! Yep, that was exactly what I was looking for, Larry.
More idle musing than anything practical, just sprung from a conversation yesterday about pumped storage facilities.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 15:00:12.683046+02 by: Larry Burton
I believe this might be relevant to your ideas. I can see this being useful in powering your irrigation system, maybe, but where are you going to find a turbine type pressure reducer that will meet code?
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 14:40:27.849105+02 by: Dan Lyke
Yeah, this should be fairly easy if I can ballpark water use. Must find water bill.
#Comment Re: made: 2009-04-03 11:04:53.792991+02 by: meuon
Do you use enough FLOW it would be useful? Hmm..
We will not edit your comments. However, we may delete your comments, or cause them to be hidden behind another link, if we feel they detract from the conversation. Commercial plugs are fine, if they are relevant to the conversation, and if you don't try to pretend to be a consumer. Annoying endorsements will be deleted if you're lucky, if you're not a whole bunch of people smarter and more articulate than you will ridicule you, and we will leave such ridicule in place.
Flutterby™ is a trademark claimed by
Dan Lyke for the web publications at www.flutterby.com and www.flutterby.net.