Bumpkin wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:36 am
OK Tom, here goes.
“If you want to run a Stirling engine off solar to produce electricity as a primary energy system it makes no sense IMO.” — I think you mean “P.V.” solar there and I totally agree, in fact it’s basic enough that I would probably leave off the “IMO.”
“An electrical heating element produces 0 power. The power comes from the PV panels OUTSIDE at maybe 25 percent efficiency at best, being very generous.” — That is indeed very generous. But once again such a basic truth that you left off the “IMO.” As I would too.
“Now if you wish to imagine the heating element INSIDE alone is your power source, be my guest. Your entitled to your opinion, though I find it rather bewildering.” — Such an opinion would indeed be very bewildering, and reading back, I can’t see how you would see it as mine, without your having made some very negative assumptions and leaps of tunnel-vision.
“It seemed to me you introduced the 200 watt heating element into the context of this discussion as some kind of viable alternative to heat a sand battery to run a Stirling engine. That is the context. I did not change the context. If you intended some other context, then your argument is irrelevant to the discussion.” — It’s your thread and if any other context is irrelevant, I will leave if asked, but like the others, that’s just silly. I’ll try to explain better: If you want to be the Stirling guy and possibly even turn it into a living, I can honestly and sincerely say I wish you the best. I think there are still places for Stirlings. But I think that if you want to be taken with credibility, you need to acknowledge there are limitations and treat other technologies or even points of view with a bit more respect. Now I’ll insert the “IMO.”
Bumpkin
OK Mr. "Bumpkin". You entered into this thread making some rather vague insinuations about "credibility",
Seemed as though it was directed at me, but I wasn't really sure what you were driving at. Thanks for making yourself clear.
Most of your posts, in retrospect appear to be, as I suspected, an attack on my credibility. I make various statements, which I consider factual and reasonable or common sense and you come back with a barrage of counter arguments.
Overall, your motive appears to be backing up your personal belief or opinion that Stirling engines are "limited" to some "niche use" and that to believe or state otherwise, as I do, is dishonest, to quote: "It’s a niche use, great for some, not useful for most, sorta like Stirlings if we’re honest. We’ve gotta pick our spots. If we’re honest. Bumpkin"
So, you step in and basically accuse me of having no credibility and of being dishonest because I believe Stirling engines are actually more useful than what a lot of people give them credit for. Does that accurately sum up your position?
To again quote a previous statement, (out of context, so correct me if I'm somehow misinterpreting your meaning) - "as I’ve said for years, I think practical uses (for Stirling engines) are very limited, "
Now again you assert: "if you want to be taken with credibility, you need to acknowledge there are limitations..."
On that issue, since your meaning seems clear enough to comment on at this point, - that is YOUR opinion, not FACT, and no, I do not "need" to acknowledge any such thing.
I DO believe Stirling engines could potentially replace IC gasoline engines in nearly every department. Solar Stirling engines, in particular, could largely replace coal, oil, gas, wood etc. The nearly unlimited versatility of these engines to run on virtually any fuel or any source of heat has made them of great interest to the military, to NASA, and to the Oil and Gas companies as well. It is, very much a "disruptive technology" no question about it.
As I stated at the very start of this thread, I definitely do not share the opinion that these engines are only historic artifacts or toys without any real practical application.
You seem to be making a concerted effort to criticize and debunk me and my point of view.
Could a Stirling engine be used to power an entire household? Absolutely!
But not by starting out with inefficient PV panels to make electricity to power a heating element to run the Stirling engine to run a generator to turn back into electricity again. Sorry to say but that is not the "uncompromising best option".
I have no problem with Photovoltaics. I'm not against any "other technologies", far from it.
But a PV panel turns sunlight into electricity directly.
Sandwiching a Stirling engine in between and converting the electricity into heat to run a Stirling to convert the heat back into electricity just introduces a lot of needless conversion. Every conversion is a loss. With that arrangement the Stirling engine serves no purpose.