Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [AMBIENTENERGY] Horsepower

Expand Messages
• At 10:33 AM 5/31/01 -0700, you wrote: Charles, In message 102 you said that a Horsepower can take place in one second. I have been wrestling with this
Message 1 of 2 , May 31 7:46 PM
• 0 Attachment
At 10:33 AM 5/31/01 -0700, you wrote:
>Charles,
>
>In message 102 you said that a Horsepower can take place in one second. I
>have been wrestling with this and I guess I'm finally accepting it. I had
>always thought that lifting 33,000 pounds one foot in one minute actually
>mint "one minute" or else the rate of power would be different. I knew of
>course that it could have been lifted in ½ minute but thought the energy
>expended would then have to be at the rate of 2 Horsepower for ½ minute.

Although James Watt conducted his tests with actual horses and something on
the order of 650lbs it was the math that produced the 33000 ft lbs /
min. IT is more popular these days to use the second as a measure of
time. So the math offers us the number 550 ft lbs/sec

>If it turns out that one square yard of the earth's surface actually
>receives over a thousand watts per second constantly, then it's about 60
>times what I had always thought. I had thought that the Sun had to shine
>on it for a full minute to be one Horsepower. Now I find that it only
>takes one second.

I don't know the actual power of solar exposure. I do know that the
silicon cells that I am using produce about 14W / ft^2 That is about 126W
/ yd^2 however they do not convert 450nm blue through UV or anything in
the long wave IR (>1000nm) or heat.

>I don't know the efficiency of today's solar cells but 30 years ago they
>were about 6%. So 6% of 1000 watts per second is about the heat of a 60
>watt incandescent light bulb continuous.
>Even with the above losses of around 94% this is still a lot of free
>energy. Do you know the efficiencies of today's solar cells?

Just a point of interest. Another list pointed me to a source of screw in
white LED bulbs for the home. A bulb that consumes 3W and is 50%
efficient laminates comparabley to a 30W incandescent 5% efficient. This
is great news although they are a bit costy.
http://www.theledlight.com/120-VAC-LEDbulbs.html

>Anyway, I'm trying to accept that 746 Joules per second is the same as 746
>watts per second.

OK... 746 joules per second is a rate of change of energy which is
power at 746W or one horse power.

A watt per second would be a rate of change in power. Sort of like miles
per hour is a rate of change in distance. Energy is more like the
distance. power is more like the speed.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com
• Dear Sir , ******************************************* Do you know the efficiencies of today s solar cells ******************************************** To only
Message 2 of 2 , Jun 1, 2001
• 0 Attachment
Dear Sir ,

*******************************************
Do you know the efficiencies of today's solar cells
********************************************

To only partly participate please check

http://www.benwiens.com/energy1.html

I am pasting the relevant portion for your quick view

*************************************************
The light from the sun has an average temperament of
about 6300°K. The carnot-ratio diagram of Fig 26 shows
that the helmholtz-ratio of sunlight is about 95%.
This means that theoretically it should be possible to
convert 95% of the radiant-energy to electricity. In
actual practice, present day solar cells only convert
about 11% of the radiant-energy into electricity at
most. This means that 89% of the remaining sunlight is
converted into thermal-energy
*************************************************

Regards .

Vikrant Suri

--- Boyd Cantrell <bmc@...> wrote: > Charles,
>
> In message 102 you said that a Horsepower can take
> place in one second. I
> have been wrestling with this and I guess I'm
> finally accepting it. I had
> always thought that lifting 33,000 pounds one foot
> in one minute actually
> mint "one minute" or else the rate of power would be
> different. I knew of
> course that it could have been lifted in ½ minute
> but thought the energy
> expended would then have to be at the rate of 2
> Horsepower for ½ minute.
>
> If it turns out that one square yard of the earth's
> surface actually
> receives over a thousand watts per second
> constantly, then it's about 60
> times what I had always thought. I had thought that
> the Sun had to shine
> on it for a full minute to be one Horsepower. Now I
> find that it only
> takes one second.
>
> I don't know the efficiency of today's solar cells
> but 30 years ago they
> were about 6%. So 6% of 1000 watts per second is
> about the heat of a 60
> watt incandescent light bulb continuous.
> Even with the above losses of around 94% this is
> still a lot of free
> energy. Do you know the efficiencies of today's
> solar cells?
>
> My interest here does not mean that I could prefer
> solar energy over
> converting the heat in a single reservoir it into
> work. That will always
> be paramount to me simply because the world teaches
> that it can't be done
> and I don't believe them.
>
> My new interest in Solar energy is finding out that
> the rate is 1.5
> Horsepower every single second instead of every
> minute. This extrapolates
> out to visualizing what my would-be Apparatus
> (which is to work in the
> shade) would do if the input heat exchanger were put
> out into the sunlight.
>
> Anyway, I'm trying to accept that 746 Joules per
> second is the same as 746
> watts per second.
>
>
> Boyd
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> AMBIENTENERGY-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

=====
http://www.geocities.com/vikrantsuri3/index.html
vikrantsuri@...

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.