There is soybean-free natto too
but it is not called impossible natto
Many people find natto impossible anyway but there are a few natto aficionados
Geothermal energy utlisation increasing in Cornwall/Europe
https://www.ethicalcorp.com/ba…-ignites-geothermal-hopes
Geothermal energy produces CO2 but much less than fossil fuel energy..
There is a possiblity that geothermal heat is not just from radiogenic heat( actinide plus K40 decay)
but has an LENR component
Always wondered why American consumers prefer food made of anything but the food iteself like Cheez-wheez
The Waters Wind Turbine is a revolutionary breakthrough that can replace the typical three blades and sharply increase the output.
This much smaller unit will have output identical to the much larger conventional wind generator.
The science is new and leaves behind the Betz limit. In addition to capturing far more of the wind energy the Waters Turbine absorbs ambient heat. And unlike conventional wind turbines it is silent.
See more at aesopinstitute.org
Lets wait for a commercial product!
But it looks great:
http://www.aesopinstitute.org/waters-wind-turbine.html
But,but,but ..this design is from 2014 and nothing happended since then why ???
http://watersturbine.weebly.com/wind-power.html
Potential answer: This design absorbs the full wind pressure/area and thus is limitted in height & size as the foundation/ mounting tower must resist the torque! In 3 blade designs a large part of the forces is acting radially and produces no torque!
Wind Power controversial in Ontario.
Wind Power controversial in Ontario.
The mafia is everywhere! In Germany the payed you more than a 12% annual rate for you Solar investment... It was the easiest way for a high return investment!
The Waters Turbine, shortly after it was invented, was explained to a small wind company. Their CTO erroneously concluded it would only be efficient at low wind speeds, so they passed.
Waters has been busy with other inventions which may prove much more important - but are not yet ready for public discussion.
A party that may be interested in both is looking at the Turbine now.
Converting existing towers is a promising market. As suggested above they may need reinforcement.
10,000 wind generators are included in the Biden renewable energy program. At this moment, the timing may prove propitious.
Joe Romm, former head of Renewable Energy at the US DOE, once pointed out that new science typically takes 20 to 30 years before practical products emerge. From that perspective the Waters Turbine appears to be doing just fine.
The Waters turbine looks like something that would make for a potentially very practical DIY project for someone with the skills. Then we would know firsthand of the type of problems it faces. It is works as claimed, personally I much prefer it to the designs currently in vogue.
Someone did reproduce it successfully. If you scroll down under WATERS WIND TURBINE on aesopinstitute.org to the last two pages - that and other confirmation is discussed. If fact, the results were so good that Waters found them hard to believe until additional tests confirmed the amazing performance. Tapping ambient heat in addition to the energy from the wind explains the extraordinary yield. A thorough independent evaluation Report is attached.WT MODEL 181015(2).pdf
Someone did reproduce it successfully.
The only thing that counts is an experiment under real world conditions. looks ok for smaller houses with moderate wind speeds.
Production will begin with prototype sizes and gradually scale in size. There is reason to believe large units will prove practical. Time will tell the tale.
Is there a height comparison and foundation comparison for equivalent power?
In strong winds?
We have been discussing that very question lately. So far, it looks good. However, until large unit field tests begin we cannot be certain. In any event it is clearly a straight engineering problem.
The calculations are very simple: 1m3 air is about 1.2kg. Air - 1m3 - traveling at 1m/s contains 1/2* 1.2* 12 =0.6J Joule of Energy or simply said almost nothing. At 10 m/s it's 60J So you need 15m2 for 1 KJ at 10m/s.
To cover the same area you need 30x more material than a conventional 3 blade rotator that also covers the same full area as the blades (at 10 m/s) almost stops the full air Cylinder it covers.
There is a small advantage with the Waters turbine as it can harvest a virtually larger size than it covers due to side winds blocking the near by flux of air.
But seen with clear brain this is a no brainer approach that tries to fool people with arguments like: It starts to rotate even at speeds of 1 m/s. So it does harvest farts...
So it does harvest farts..
Now there is an idea... harvesting the bathroom .LEFR .power
Display MoreThe calculations are very simple: 1m3 air is about 1.2kg. Air - 1m3 - traveling at 1m/s contains 1/2* 1.2* 12 =0.6J Joule of Energy or simply said almost nothing. At 10 m/s it's 60J So you need 15m2 for 1 KJ at 10m/s.
To cover the same area you need 30x more material than a conventional 3 blade rotator that also covers the same full area as the blades (at 10 m/s) almost stops the full air Cylinder it covers.
There is a small advantage with the Waters turbine as it can harvest a virtually larger size than it covers due to side winds blocking the near by flux of air.
But seen with clear brain this is a no brainer approach that tries to fool people with arguments like: It starts to rotate even at speeds of 1 m/s. So it does harvest farts...
Yes, the reason propeller type turbines won the battle of wind energy conversion, is that they are very material efficient.
The energy you can extract from wind is dierectly proportional to the swept area of any turbine perpendicular to the wind.
So propellers will cover a large area with only a small amount of material.
The waters turbine have a large amount of material to cover the same area as a propeller.
But another problem is the enormous torque on the foundation from the turbine depending on height above ground and wind speed.
Not much room in the wind industry for conspiracy theories, or scams. If it works in the field, it will be used. If not, it won't.
The waters turbine, as indicated in the attachments, has far greater output than can be explained without including the surprising thermodynamics, which result in tapping ambient heat in addition to the wind.
The torque on the foundation is clearly an engineering problem that will have a straightforward solution.
