A new way of generating electricity without polluting

[klaudio]

Hi,
My name is Claudio Bianco. I am an inventor, and have just completed my last work called "Continual Wind-Up", with which I take advantage of water oscillations to wind up a cord, and thus generate electricity.
I believe to have opened a new research field for renewable energy, but since I am the father of this invention, my opinion does not matter.
I chose to use internet to make the invention known and I would appreciate your opinion.I would therefore like to invite you to discover a
new way of generating electricity without polluting on www.cuerdacontinua.com

[Tim Bourke]

Hello Claudio,

Firstly thank you for your website - while I am not an engineer and so can't comment to any great extent on the practicalities or the originality of what you present, I think your prototype machines are beautiful.

I like very much how you have presented the development of your thought, and its interaction with your prototype machines, so attractively and logically. It made it very easy to understand what you are on about.

Now, as to your machine which, according to your calculations, may produce more energy than is put in, again, not being an engineer but having an interest in physics, my approach in understanding this is to look for the simplest physical system which works on an analogous principle.

So: I think I understand the principle you are using is that, in a gravitational field, an object will fall if it is more dense than the surrounding medium. On the other hand, it will rise if it is less dense than the surrounding medium.

So then, initially your bell is at the top of the water, full of air. Opening the valves, it fills with water, as a result the overall system of bell plus water is denser than the surrounding water, and it falls.

Now, at some arbitrary distance below (100m in your case), the bell is stopped and pumped full of air. Now the bell plus the air inside is less dense than the surrounding water, hence it rises again.

It's clear that energy can be generated on both the upward and downward journeys and some of this could be stored in springs or whatever. The big question is, whether there is an overall surplus of energy generated by your system when all the inputs and outputs are taken into account. I'll ignore the springs for the moment as they are only storage devices and so should be irrelevant to the question of whether "extra" energy is generated overall in the universe as a whole.

Now we have two points at which there are significant exchanges of energy with the rest of the outside world - at the top, where enough water is let into the bell to make it heavier than the surrounding water, and at the bottom, where enough air is pumped into the bell to make it lighter.

Again, we know from experience that not too much work or energy has to be put in to fill the bell and make it sink - just think of a sinking ship. So I'll assume that no significant amount of energy is "put into" the system at the top.

The critical point, then, is at the bottom: how much work has to be done to pump enough air into the bell to make it rise again at least to the same point it started from? If that is less than the total energy generated by the system during the ascent and descent (and possibly stored in a spring mechanism) then we have a possible candidate for a perpetual motion machine.

Now the very presence of the air at the bottom implies that there is an imbalance in the overall system and hence an "energy reservoir" from which your machine can draw for a finite period - just think of bubbles rising in the water, for example. So work has to be done to move the lower density medium (air) into the region of higher density (the water).

While I'm not familiar with the source of the equations you give for the total energy in and out, I'd venture to suggest that you may not have taken into account the amount of energy required to transport the air down to the bottom.

Now we can ask, that sounds plausible but how about the case of a column of water suspended in the air standing on a table, a rock or something similar? Well, in that case a certain amount of work has to be done to raise the water into the air initially. The larger the body of water, the greater the work. And the larger the body of water, the closer it will approach to the behaviour of a large body of water like the sea at equilibrium in the earth's gravitational field.

To make this even clearer, think of a helium balloon lifting weights into the air. This looks on first glance like it could be a source for a perpetual motion machine - the only problem is that it takes energy to collect the helium and put it in the balloon in the first place.

Of course, the above doesn't totally rule out your machine being a true perpetuum mobile, but I hope it does point out some basic physical principles which may have been overlooked in your calculations, there may well be others.

But the best test, far beyond all theory and calculation, is to build it and see if it works of course!

Best regards,
Tim Bourke

[Aireal]

Klaudio

Using wave energy to generate electricty is a great concept. I do not remember the details, but other attempts have been made in this direction. I however do like the approach you took, very good.

Now the bouy system, like Tim suggested, may need some testing, but this is a small matter. The clockwork spring heart of the concept is sound and practical.

My best wishes on the future of your invention.

Charles