Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Non-Tech : Alternative energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (4332)	2/25/2008 3:16:53 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 16955

Sorry John, I didn't mean to be rude or smart-alecky, was just trying to be witty. Yes, that's exactly what I meant: < Or are you saying that the turbines would increase the drag, all else being equal?> Perpetual motion machines work by confusing what's going on. The idea of using drag to provide energy struck me as being along the same lines as perpetual motion machine principles. The drag is already energy lost. It can't come back again. Driving a car up a hill is only partly energy lost [the drag, friction, rolling friction, thermodynamic losses]. The potential energy is stored until it starts going down again at which time the regenerative braking can convert some of that energy back into battery recharge. The same with accelerating a car converts some of the engine output into kinetic energy which can be converted back into battery energy when regenerative braking stops the car. It's only a small portion of the energy which is recovered though. Just ploughing a car through the air and running all the mechanical parts in the drive train, as well as overcoming rolling resistance [tyre flexure], not to mention air conditioning, lighting, radio etc takes a lot of energy, none of which is recovered. Reducing drag is the way to save energy which is lost in drag. Mqurice