SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : ECHARTERS
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bill Jackson who wrote (2055)12/18/1997 12:35:00 PM
From: E. Charters  Read Replies (1) of 3744
 
That is why steam engines on trains lost their steam to the atmosphere. The most efficient heat sink. A rankine cycle system would have taken too much isolation and energy to make the heat difference.

One guy told me that the steam trains were not efficient in the cold in Northern Ontario. Not true. The temp difference increased their efficiency. Steam trains were up to thrice * the efficiency of diesel electric and the high torque from standstill was the best use of force possible. What you need it rubber wheels to get out of the station and steel when you get rolling.

* Diesel is 30% and conversion to electric is 50%. So that is 15%. Steam is up to 48% with triple expansion. Old steam trains ran at about 30% because they only used one piston.

The economic difficulties of America can be traced to the conversion to inefficient use of heat in the conversion of goods transfer to expensive high rolling friction diesel trucks and wasteful diesel electric trains. The " cheap" east Texas oil spurred the conversion process. When oil runs out we will see how stupid we were to waste heat. Carnot weas right. The air expansion engine is the most efficient cycle only of the waste heat can be used. Otherwise it cannot beat steam. The waste heat has never been utilized so the 30%
maximum efficiency has never been surpassed.

The Hearne is still the cheapest most efficient power Hydro in Ontario has. It is coal steam Turbine electric. Dams are more costly to build and Nuclear is impossible to cheaply-safely control.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News