Comments by "g simpson" (@GSimpsonOAM) on "Two Bit da Vinci" channel.

@milktobo7418 If it is not even covering it's operating costs there is no pay-back period. It just becomes a money pit.
14
@milktobo7418 So it has to be all about you? I thought the point is to discuss the topic. I was agreeing and then elaborating on the pay back issue.
9
I feel it is BS. There was a lot of random buzzwords thrown about and scant detail as to how it actually works.
5
@gregbailey45 The fact that I am the Chief engineer of a 5MW refrigeration plant with 30 years experience and 2 diplomas in engineering makes me capable of asking awkward questions. I watched this because I am actually interested in the subject. However the fact that they have built full prototypes and yet cannot produce basic operation data such as the heat rejection of the panels makes me suspicious. Along with the all the buzz works in leu of real data. Some data for you. Our main cooling tower rejects heat of 4MW. It has a 40m2 footprint. That is 100kW per m2. When we have that offline we use a dam to radiate the heat. It is only capable of 400w per m2. This system I suspect will be similar. That means this system will be 250 times the size. The cost will be astronomical compared to a cooling tower and in any case what are the real advantages? Evaporative cooling works just fine (except in high humidity)
5
@stoneomountain2390 Transitioning from from high grade energy (electricity, gas etc) to low grade energy (hot water) is easy and relatively efficient. Going the other way still requires high energy input. For example a heat pump is efficient but requires a high energy input to drive the compressor. As I said, the extensive use of buzz words eg nano anything, rings alarm bells. I look after a 5MW heat pump. To direct that amount of energy out in to space by means described does not seem plausible. At the moment I am overseeing a 5MW experimental hot water heat pump heating system so I am familiar with the mathematics and thermodynamics involved.
3
@stoneomountain2390 Catching high energy radiation in the vacuum tubes and converting to low grade heat in water works well. It just does not work well trying to go the other way. The Skycool panels will be much less effective than a conventional cooling tower which is all they appear to attempting to replace. So the claimed energy savings are bogus.
2
@Ranshin077 There have always been suckers for snake oil.
2
Someone has to pay. Not all houses are suitable and so who decides who gets it done for free?
1
@olympicfireball It is just a way of moving the heat around. A car uses glycol mix to transfer the heat from the engine to the radiator. It has nothing to do with the radiation of the energy. You could just use water. It is just as effective as glycol but it has issues with corrosion and freezing at low temperatures.
1
Not necessarily if they have to be many times larger to achieve the same result. A cooling tower is much smaller and the recirculating pump does not use much power in the scheme of things.
1
Explain why R717, one of the original refrigerants is still extensively used.
1
@phillipsusi1791 I am sure someone would like to. It would take the phrase "to spend a penny" rather too literally. One would have to pay to have a p!ss
1