Free Energy.
New ideas coming soon, June 2020
All below, last updated Nov 2017.
​
Energy can’t be created or destroyed, it can only be converted. No one knows what happened before the big bang but immediately after that, all the energy that existed then, exists now and vice versa, or so they say, and for the purposes of my ideas I chose to assume it's true. So all energy is free, the only problem is getting hold of it and converting it into energy we can use.
Several years ago, after hearing about heat pumps, I thought, "Why, can't some of this energy, that's been concentrated by the heat pump, be converted into electricity?". So I thought about it for a little while then sat down and produced a couple of sketches as to how it might be done. After a couple of failed attempts I produced the Ambient Heat Engine 1 sketch below. I have numerous other ideas and sketches, please watch this space and feel free to comment: johnparlour07@gmail.com . If there's anything you don't understand please get in touch and I'd be happy to explain.
News, Dec 2016.
I’ve just started experimental work on this project. I am building the heat exchanger, see below pic, for the Heat Engine 8, see photo below. Once completed I will attempt to see how low a temperature I can achieve.
Explanation of Ambient Heat Engine 8.
Better sketch to follow, watch this space.
This engine is very much like a steam engine except it doesn’t use water or coal. Instead of water the working fluid is nitrogen or something similar and instead of coal it uses ambient heat.
With a steam engine you use coal to transfer heat energy to water contained in a pressure vessel in order to boil it and make high pressure steam. With my engine you transfer ambient heat to cold liquid gas in order to boil it and turn it to high pressure gas.
In a steam engine you then pipe this steam to an engine in order to convert its energy to mechanical energy, likewise my engine.
In a steam engine the steam passing through the engine loses energy thus the temperature and pressure goes down and thus will start to condense. This condensing needs a little help to go all the way. In a steam engine this remaining energy is transferred to the ambient. In my engine we need to use some of the energy produced in order to complete this part of the cycle.
In both engines the condensed working fluid is then pumped back up to high pressure and the cycle repeats.
I recently discovered ( March 2017 ) a couple of web sites very much backing up my ideas:
http://liquidair.org.uk/files/potential-guide.pdf
http://liquidair.org.uk/full-report/report-chapter-two
I am a big believer in always having an edge and a backup. In this case my backup is: even if the so called experts, who say “this won’t work” are correct, we can always use it for energy storage, and I’m not telling what my edge is.
​
Ambent heat engine 1
Some so called experts will tell you that this can't be done. They don't even think about it. They just quote the laws of thermodynamics, and the theories of people like Carnot and Kelvin. Well the first law of thermodynamics states that energy can't be created or destroyed, so if a device that takes in energy, and almost all the waste energy is fed back in, then there must be something coming out. No expert has yet attempted to explain to me where the energy is going. If you could enlighten me I will be most grateful. johnparlour07@gmail.com
I always take every opportunity to badger any expert I come across. One day I was talking to a very nice guy from Drax power station in Yorkshire. He told me that this kind of device is possible; it’s just not yet economically viable. So who is mistaken and why?
​
​
Explanation of Trybrid car engine
The main idea of this is to improve the efficiency of the internal combustion engine and at the same time gather some ambient energy.
This is achieved by converting the waste heat into power and since we need machinery in order to recover this heat why not use the same equipment to gather a little heat from elsewhere.
In this application we are taking extra advantage of the fact that a piston engine is also an air pump. Most modern. force charged, car engines use a heat exchanger to cool the incoming air in order to make it denser and thus get more in. My idea is to go a step further with this cooling, to well below ambient temperature, and thus eliminate the need for forced charging. This will enable us to use a higher compression ratio in the engine thus making the engine a better air pump without melting it. This higher compression ratio also makes the engine more fuel efficient by allowing more expansion of the products of combustion. I realise that cooling the incoming air consumes power but so does super / turbo charging, which we don’t have. Also cooling the incoming air will help cool the engine allowing the use of a hotter engine coolant thermostat and thus improving the organic rankine cycle.
The exhaust of this engine will include a power recovery turbine which will increase the exhaust pressure and thus its temperature, Go to Google / gas laws. This technology is well established and still around, the Titanic had one. And the current formula one cars have them although the formula one ones also drive the supercharger. You might also like to Google ‘Napier Nomad’ claimed to be the most fuel efficient aircraft engine ever made.
This increased exhaust temperature will improve the effectiveness of the Organic Rankine Cycle Engine (steam engine but using some other working fluid). This technology is already well established see here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gsob6o6WP1g .
After cooling by the organic Rankine cycle the exhaust will be cooled still further, via a heat exchanger, thus extracting more energy from it. Then the exhaust will be passed on to the power recovery turbine and the temperature is reduced still further. I know what you’re going to say next ‘what about ice, dry ice or liquid air coming out of the exhaust’? Ice or dry ice may block things up and liquid air might freeze the feet of passing pedestrians but I’ll jump off those bridges when I get to them.
This car has no gearbox take a look here: http://koenigsegg.com/regera/ .
I think the rest of the sketch is fairly self explanatory. But if you have any comments / questions / suggestions please don’t hesitate to contact me, johnparlour07@gmail.com .
Global Warming
There’s so much rubbish bandied around about man made global warming. The vast majority of mainstream scientists say "it is happening and we should do something to reduce it". On the other hand, we have various sceptics like, for instance, fundamental Christians saying, "that since God said the climate will never change drastically, it can’t be happening, thus we can just continue as normal".
I would like to ask, whichever side you take, can we afford to be complacent? I never heard anyone deny that burning coal and oil causes smog etc. or that nuclear is complicated, expensive and dangerous and that we are addicted to cheap energy. So wouldn’t it be sensible to use all forms of energy to its best advantage while keeping all possible danger to a minimum?
Please find here two opposing views: http://www.aweo.org/windCourtney1.html and here http://www.aweo.org/windbackup.htmland here http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/climate/wind-power .
Reading these two opposing views indicates to me that someone is not telling the truth. So if people, who should know these things, won’t tell the truth how are we supposed to know? And why are these people lying?
I recently visited a Pumped Storage Hydro Power Station and badgered the guide with some awkward questions which he was unable to answer at the time. However he later came to find me and took me to the car park, where he told me, strictly off the record, (and that’s why I haven’t identified the source of this info), he said ‘the renewable potential of the UK is vastly underutilised and this information is being subdued by government and big business’.
Hydro is one of the oldest and, as far as I can tell, most effective forms of energy production, so why aren’t we pursuing it?
One of the above mentioned web sites claims that base load steam turbines take several days to start up and when running use just as much energy whether producing power or not. Although I don’t dispute the start up time of a steam turbine I do dispute the power required to keep it on spinning reserve and why do we need to keep a base load steam turbine on spinning reserve anyway? there's lots of other ways to cope with fluctuations, pumped storage hydro for one.
The above mentioned hydro power station can keep a water turbine on spinning reserve on 3% of the power required to power it under full load and can take it to full load in 28 seconds and can take a stationary turbine, to full load in 1.5 minutes. So instead of criticising wind and solar, why can’t we build more hydro to back up the wind?
Another fact they overlook is that not all fossil fuel power stations use steam turbines. I know of lots of gas turbines that can be started in minutes and go from spinning reserve to full power in seconds and operate on spinning reserve on a tiny fraction of the fuel required for full load.
Please click here to see my work web site. https://johnparlour.wixsite.com/mysite
