maybe I am missing something but when the battery is done you chuck it, that costs as well

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #408,054 by boxley 2/13/16 3:54:33 PM 2/13/16 3:54:33 PM Reply	maybe I am missing something but when the battery is done you chuck it, that costs as well always look out for number one and don't step in number two
Post #408,055 by malraux 2/13/16 4:03:04 PM 2/13/16 4:03:04 PM Reply	Eneloops are rechargeable Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #408,056 by Another Scott 2/13/16 4:11:59 PM 2/13/16 4:11:59 PM Reply	Yeah, but they don't last forever. Neither do locomotives though. :-)
Post #408,058 by boxley 2/13/16 5:57:07 PM 2/13/16 5:57:07 PM Reply	can they get recharged by running them down a hill? If not what is the cost of the recharge? always look out for number one and don't step in number two
Post #408,062 by Another Scott 2/13/16 7:49:50 PM 2/13/16 7:49:51 PM Reply	The whole point is to store solar power, not to just generate power from locomotives. Regenerative braking isn't hugely efficient: Conclusions? For one, we can document that electric regenerative brake systems are able to recover 55% of the vehicle's kinetic energy. I suspect it would be easy to get over 70% if we changed the gearing to improve efficiency. The real lesson is that if you want to recover more total energy, start by being more efficient in translating the electric energy into kinetic energy. That is where the biggest losses are. TANSTAAFL. :-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #408,067 by Andrew Grygus 2/13/16 9:10:58 PM 2/13/16 9:10:58 PM Reply	Probably inefficient because . . . . . the systems are designed primarily for braking, not for power generation. Efficiency of electric motors and generators can be in the 90% range.

How to store solar power - (drook) - (18) - Feb. 12, 2016, 12:15:23 PM EST

Neat! -NT - (mmoffitt) - Feb. 12, 2016, 02:23:40 PM EST

I don't know about that. - (a6l6e6x) - (3) - Feb. 12, 2016, 03:39:03 PM EST

I'm guessing they leave the rocks loaded -NT - (drook) - (2) - Feb. 12, 2016, 03:46:49 PM EST

Unless they want to scale up capacity. - (a6l6e6x) - (1) - Feb. 12, 2016, 04:13:58 PM EST

I assume they mean leave the entire train, then go back down for another - (drook) - Feb. 12, 2016, 04:25:56 PM EST

TANSTAAFL. - (Another Scott) - (12) - Feb. 12, 2016, 10:10:19 PM EST

"and it takes so much energy to move the necessary mass" - (drook) - (11) - Feb. 13, 2016, 12:10:39 PM EST

The key benefits are simplicity and cost - (malraux) - (10) - Feb. 13, 2016, 12:25:07 PM EST

500K AA batteries ... that's a useful metric :-/ -NT - (drook) - Feb. 13, 2016, 01:05:03 PM EST

Dunno. I'm skeptical of things like this. - (Another Scott) - (7) - Feb. 13, 2016, 02:46:45 PM EST

The other big benefit - (drook) - Feb. 13, 2016, 03:41:17 PM EST

maybe I am missing something but when the battery is done you chuck it, that costs as well -NT - (boxley) - (5) - Feb. 13, 2016, 03:54:33 PM EST

Eneloops are rechargeable -NT - (malraux) - (4) - Feb. 13, 2016, 04:03:04 PM EST

Yeah, but they don't last forever. Neither do locomotives though. :-) -NT - (Another Scott) - Feb. 13, 2016, 04:11:59 PM EST

can they get recharged by running them down a hill? If not what is the cost of the recharge? -NT - (boxley) - (2) - Feb. 13, 2016, 05:57:07 PM EST

The whole point is to store solar power, not to just generate power from locomotives. - (Another Scott) - (1) - Feb. 13, 2016, 07:49:51 PM EST

Probably inefficient because . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - Feb. 13, 2016, 09:10:58 PM EST

Yeah, fill the damned things with sand . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - Feb. 13, 2016, 06:41:38 PM EST

iwethey.org

I like it warm and pink, with the whip-marks still on it.
240 ms