An American company is looking for land in Arizona for the construction of Sharev chimneys with the assistance of Prof. Dan Zaslavsky and Dr. Rami Guetta from the Technion
An American company is looking for areas in Arizona to build Sharev chimneys with the assistance of Prof. Dan Zaslavsky and Dr. Rami Guetta from the Technion. This is how a website is delivered at the end of the week Green Prophet dealing in the field of green energy in the Middle East.
Prof. Dan Zaslavsky and Dr. Rami Guetta from the Technion are trying to develop an idea first proposed by Philip Carlson in 1975. In what is known as a Sharev chimney, drops of water are dispersed into air that has been warmed by the heat of the sun at the top of a hollow tower. They cool down and make the air more compressed so it falls down quickly and at the bottom of the chimney it drives turbines and creates electricity.
A company from Annapolis - Maryland called Clean Wind Energy Tower, Inc (CWET) plans to build two such towers near the US-Mexico border in the city of San Luis, Arizona. The towers, whose height will be 3,000 feet (about 914 meters) will exceed the height of the tallest residential building in the world - Burj Khalifa, but unlike most skyscrapers, this building will provide more energy than it will receive in the form of clean electricity.
On the face of it, the idea seems simple, especially if you compare it to oil wells 1.6 kilometers deep or with nuclear reactors. There are major technological challenges in building a structure at a height of 900 meters, especially when artificial rain clouds will be created inside the tower and the system will generate electricity. Shreb chimneys cooled by water vapor like the ones we built require a very, very dry climate.
The deserts of the Southwest USA, the Middle East and North Africa seem ideal for such projects, but the cooling water must come from somewhere, so as not to invest additional energy in bringing it. Therefore the engineers suggest using salt water to cool the air. The by-product can be part of the exhaust system, the disadvantage is the risk of consuming the turbines and structural components.
Another problem is that energy is required to raise the water to a height of 900 meters, about a kilowatt hour per thousand liters. To compensate for the loss, Zaslavsky and Guetta proposed to install horizontal wind turbines in the walls of the building. Their models showed that these turbines have the ability to generate 1-4 cents per kilowatt hour.
Additional problems are the need for careful planning of water use, environmental effects, the distance from energy consumers, and the carbon footprint from the moment the project begins until its end. But if the project is successful, it will make it possible to promote the use of alternative energy in general, reusable shopping bags and local shopping.
Clean Wind Energy is conducting negotiations to lease space for this project. For some reason investors did not like this announcement and lowered the share price. The Green Profit website does not understand what the problem is with such a project in a country that sent a man to the moon.
For the article on the Green Prophet website
to locate a company Clean wind energy tower
16 תגובות
rascals There is a feasibility model in the Faculty of Civil Engineering at the Technion and it works great.
The problem is only the construction cost of the tower.
I think that basically the time has come to imitate nature more, that is, the activity of living productions and plants.
Regarding nuclear energy, I am not sure that there is already a proven solution of "breeding cores". Also, the amount of uranium known today is limited to only decades in the scope of the output of the existing technologies.
Regarding the "Sherev Chimneys", why is such a tall structure needed? Is it not possible to get similar results from much smaller structures with the same height/width ratio? Does it depend on the size of the water droplets? Does the height/width determine the wind speed and power to run the turbines?
rationalize
Very true and the investment of energy in my idea comes from the sea waves that break on the sides of the tower and push the water up
Why don't they build 2 nuclear reactors instead of all these solar chimneys to supply electricity to the whole country?
(Today's miners are much safer than those in the past)
Hi Eric,
As far as I know, water climbs through narrow glass tubes due to a phenomenon called 'surface tension', but water does not escape from those tubes - because energy is needed to overcome the 'surface tension'.
Therefore, from an energetic point of view, your idea does not make sense to me - in order to take energy out of a system, you must put it into the system (law of conservation of energy). Your idea is a kind of upgraded "leading perfectum" that defies the laws of physics.
In chimneys, most of the external energy source is the sun and therefore they work (at least theoretically).
Apparently I did not explain myself correctly
My idea is to create a delicate tube system like the tube system that conducts water in plants
In plants, water reaches from the roots to the top of the tree without an investment of energy, only by relying on the physical properties of water, surface tension, the attachment of molecules, etc.
On a theoretical level, let's say that I build a tower made entirely of thin tubes (I remember that in the plant they are called mongooses) with a certain diameter and a height of let's say a hundred meters like a sukoya tree
I place the tower in the sea with the start line of the piping at water level so that every wave pushes water into the pipes
(I remember a laboratory experiment from my school days in which we took a very thin glass tube 10 cm long and dipped its end in water with water splashing from its upper end)
The water will climb up the pipeline until it reaches the upper end and there it will fall into a turbine and back to the sea
Of course you have to calculate the exact height that the water could reach in the pipeline and what amount we can go up
But again, this is an idea that occurred to me a few years ago and I didn't develop it, the chimneys just reminded me of it
Is there anyone here who can say if the idea can theoretically work?
If I understood correctly, the idea is to turn the heat energy of the air and solar radiation into electrical energy.
What will cool in the process of the water drops falling is the hot air inside the Galilean tower
And not the drops of water. The water drops will actually heat up and evaporate. The heating of the water droplets will cool
the air inside the inner space of the cylinder. After the air inside the cylinder has cooled it will be necessary
Stop the flow of water until the air inside the cylinder warms up and dries up again because it is
It's cold, the water drops won't evaporate.
As was also mentioned in the article, the fall of the water itself, from the height, has no energy gain since it has to be invested
the same energy in bringing them up.
Have you already activated a test facility to test the idea? I'm a little skeptical about the chance of success.
It seems to me that the water will mainly wet the turbines.
I heard and read the above idea of Prof. Dan Zaslavsky about 20-15 years ago. It seems that until
So he failed to raise investors for the idea, at least not in Israel.
I wonder if the theoretical background of is indeed clear and agreed upon or if the theoretical derivation is also named (for that matter)
"Lot in the fog", literally.
Eric - I have seen 2-3 major problems that do not seem terminal: like the salinization of the area, which they said is not serious, and in Israel, for example, in the Dead Sea area, it will not be a problem, for example, the relatively high initial cost in our country is a problem because people prefer a mortgage to using their money, because They don't think about the long term, and discuss economic viability and the need for access to water.
So it's true, it's not a magic solution, but a coal station, even if it's familiar and convenient, does a lot of damage and also requires high costs (which are expressed a lot in the fixed fuel costs and less in the construction costs): it really raises the question why they didn't think of it before.. ?
How does the project not violate the second law of thermodynamics?
1. I didn't understand how much energy you have to invest and how much energy you get?
2. And what is the ratio of costs (initial and return on investment ROI) and energy production to a solar installation or other green energy
Very interesting
Probably bigger for investors to invest their money!
If I remember correctly from the comments to the article on the subject on the YNet website, there are quite a few problems with it:
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3451499,00.html
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3452159,00.html
I have a better plan
to build a tower that is built from a system of very thin pipes (like the water system in a plant that carries water from the ground to the top)
Today, with our son's knowledge, it doesn't seem to me that there would be any particular problem to create such pipes
It is possible to place the tower on the sea shores where the movement of the sea waves will help a lot to push the water in the pipes to a height that the water will reach a peak height it will fall into a turbine that will generate electricity
I thought of this idea 5 years ago but I couldn't calculate its viability
Is there anyone who can calculate the viability of the facility?
Good evening and thank you for the strange and interesting article.
It seems to me that the translation of:
But if this project succeeds, it will pave the way for all of us. Solar energy, reusable grocery bags and buying local will no longer seem like such far-out lunatic ideas.
Should be different from what is written in the article:
But if the project is successful, it will make it possible to promote the use of alternative energy in general, reusable shopping bags and local shopping.
It seems to me that I would omit the sentence altogether, but if necessary - I would write.
If the project is successful, it will pave the way for all of us. Solar energy, reusable shopping bags and buying local produce will no longer seem like such crazy ideas.
If it is possible to place cellular antennas above it may reduce costs.
A second option is to organize a buying group, which will market it on the basis of consistent weather all year round! The end of clothes dryers!
It is not possible for such a structure to be more economical than the technology. Who is the idiot who would put his money on it?
If you build apartments and offices on the sides of the chimney, you get several additional advantages: they have an amazing view from the outside, and natural and almost free air conditioning and ventilation from the inside. In this way, it is possible to create a vertical Galilean city (but removable) and solve a number of housing and employment problems while maintaining open spaces.