DARK SOLAR technology applications; infrared and ICE replacing FIRE and smoke! by enthalpiq

Dear Judges, Thank you for your comments. Please revisit my proposal; Particularly NEW: figures 2,4,6,7,8,9,10,11,12. Please also note the "What actions do you propose": "Social actions..." Methane (GHG) is a propellant candidate in the closed cycle gas-turbine loop. In this way; the natural gas companies do not lose out with TEEU. My justifications for the 58% efficiency claim has been supported. Also, please see rows 39 & 40 for mass flow rate and pressure on figure 9 (NEW): Will be in touch. Thanks...

Evaluation Reply: Dear Judges, Thank you for giving me the opportunity to contend in the semi-finalist stage, for giving me valuable expert feedback, allowing me a platform for response and promotion of the research and the further development of the concept in detail. Please find my responses ## between the hashes ##. They allude to the most-recent edition of the revised proposal... ------ Judges' Comments An interesting proposal. ## Thank you ## Improving the efficiency of relatively low temperature heat sources is a well known goal. ## The author contends that the novelty exists in the technical approach to achieve this well-known and long-existing goal. Specifically, power plant pressure and temperatures are elevated by using thermal radiation as a heat transfer mechanism to accelerate volatile ices in a vacuum. Claim 11 of published patent GB2510435 (A) was found to be novel as discussed in private communications with its patent examiner and also according to the search report. Claim 11 [a] not debunked by the first search report [b] states that thermal radiation from a thermal power plant is collimated or focused to produce electricity. The first search report did cite solar-based [c,d,e] and combustion based [f] technologies most similar to TEEU (Please review to verify my novelty claim). Attempting to reduce carbon emissions at source may not be a novel strategy but it is perhaps the most effective. Nuclear power plant efficiency increase seems the most immediate way to make a large impact on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. ## That being said, the proposal does not make a strong case based on thermodynamics. ## I hope that the added tables and diagrams (proposal revision) help to bolster what was an introduction (proposal creation)to the concept. In fact, the entire concept behind the Thermal Efficiency Enhancement Unit (TEEU) was developed with the second, and then the first law of thermodynamics (TD) in mind. I hope this becomes apparent in the revised proposal as the stated energy transfer mechanisms are limited by Carnot efficiencies ##., Specifically, one must look at the enhancements from a second law perspective, ## dQ = TdS , dS (Entropy) = or > 0 , and hC (Carnot efficiency) = 1 - ( Tcold / Thot ) > hreal (real-world efficiency). Please see "rows 36" of figure 8 and figure 9. The heat loss at each major stage of a TEEU-Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) power plant is illustrated and quantified in figure 10. Please review. ## not just a first law one (the efficiencies in the summary are first law efficiencies). ## DU = Q - W was considered, where hreal (real world efficiency) = W(mf) / ( V*DP + (d/dA(dQ/dt))*A*Dt ) = ratio of the final (pre-collision) kinetic energy of the ice crystal remnant after its rocket-like propulsion and the sum of the energies required to pump the previous ice remnant rocket's exhaust vapour out of the (6) receiver vacuum chamber and the integrated thermal energy (5) radiated from the (4) collimator during the flight-time of the present ice remnant. Please see "rows 35" of figure 8 and figure 9. In fact, the energy (V*DP) to pump out the (6) receiver may be replaced with the energy required to condense, cool and freeze the propellant ( hv*m + c*m*DT + hf*m ) into an ice-crystal if the magnitude of the latter's energy is greater. ## The second law efficiencies are much higher and truly define the potential to recover more work (i.e., electricity). ## The real world efficiencies were always less than the Carnot efficiencies in the revised proposal. As such, the first and second laws of TD have been respected in the proposal. Please see figures 8, figure 9 and figure 10. ## The result is that the potential is there in increase first law efficiencies modestly, but nowhere near the 58% we see in the gas turbines. ## The gas turbine could be more than twice as efficient as it currently is due to its high operating temperatures. However, it uses 55% to 65% of its combustion-derived work to drive the compressor. Conversely a steam turbine in the Rankine cycle uses no compressor but operates at lower temperatures, and so is less efficient. The TEEU proposes to produced highly pressurised gas at high temperatures to be fed into a gas turbine - absent its compressor. Therefore, it is claimed and shown that in theory (please see figure 8, figure 9 and figure 10, cell: "column I", "row 8" of the table of figure 10) that more energy is available with TEEU produced gas than combustion gases ## Thermodynamics tells us that it is not feasible. Given the cost of a TEEU system and the inefficiencies always found in energy conversion processes, ## The ratio of real to Carnot efficiencies for a gas turbine can be comparable to the the ratio of real to Carnot efficiencies of a TEEU. If TEEU Carnot efficiencies peak at 84.15% as shown on "row 36", "column D" of table 8, then real-world efficiencies can approach that value with research & development. A TEEU fitted non-fossil fuelled power plant can reach 55.81% efficiency as shown in "row 13", "column D" of the table of figure 10. ## I have great doubts whether such a system could be cost-effective. However, there is not enough information in the proposal to make any definitive statements here. ## Based upon solar thermal parabollic trough TEEU estimates, TEEU mark I cost to drive a 301MW gas turbine (Please see figure 9, "row 38", "column G") are greater than those quoted in the earlier created proposal for the unpublished TEEU ($800,000). This figure is intermediate in cost between a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) and a gas turbine and has comparable impact on the estimated electrical power output to the two (latter) said components. Without a gas turbine and HRSG, a natural gas power plant would require a boiler and steam turbine; thus providing ~ 33% power plant efficiency (the same as a nuclear power plant). With a gas turbine and HRSG, the efficiency is ~58%. Therefore, with a gas turbine, HRSG and TEEU, a nuclear power plant can increase its efficiency from ~ 33% to around 58%. To see how to arrive at the 55.81% efficiency as shown in "row 13", "column D", please carefully follow the argument as revised in the present proposal's newly added figures (2,4,6,7,8,9,10,11&12). In short; the undisclosed TEEU is well worth the cost, and is an improvement on the disclosed TEEU mark I cost of $24.25 million integrated cost of a field of units to drive the aforementioned gas turbine. Cost calculated from nuclear power plant thermal flux (please see "row 9", "column D" of figure 9), gas turbine gross power of 601,000 kW (Please see figure 9, "row 38", "column G") and the "Current and Future Costs for Parabolic Trough and Power Tower Systems in the US Market Preprint", "Table 2. Estimated current and future costs for Parabolic Trough Systems"[g]. Please recall that the preferred TEEU embodiment has a cost of $800,000 rather than the TEEU mark I units' integrated cost of $24.25 million based upon solar thermal parabolic trough (less tracking technology in comparison to the dish Stirling and well suited for turbine operation. TEEU mark I does not track the sun across the sky). Finally, operations of the gas turbine are much more complex than described in the proposal. ## The author agrees with this comment, and this fact is the reason why collaborative research is sought with industry partners and universities as mention below figure 11 (Please see the "What actions do you propose?" heading). ## While temperature is important, so are pressures and mass flows. ## Please see figure 9, "row 40" and "row 39" respectively. ## What is missing from the proposal is looking at how an enhanced feed would work in a real gas turbine. Getting 58% is not automatic, but takes hard work and the right conditions. ## Please see figure 9, "row 41". To satisfy operational conditions of the aforementioned gas turbine, the (9) target must be limited in thickness so as to reduce its volume and increase its operating pressure. The tables of figure 9 describes (row by row) and the diagrams of figure 8 illustrates how and where the physical quantities were arrived at. Although the drag-free rocket equations were used due to the short time allowed for proposal revision presentation, a rocket equation has been derived and spreadsheet prepared with net thrust, ablative thrust, ablative drag, vapour-pressure thrust, vapour-pressure drag and gravitational thrust terms included. The spreadsheet results support the abbreviated form shown in figure 8 and figure 9 of the revised proposal. The author hopes to prepare the spreadsheet results shortly. ## It also requires a bottoming cycle. While the goals of this proposal are good, the technical analysis is incomplete for reasons stated above. ## I hope that the bottoming cycle has been adequately featured in figure 12(b) and alluded to in figure 2,figure 5, figure 6, figure 7, figure 8 and figure 10 of the revised proposal. Please compare figure 12(a) to figure 12(b) to see how high efficiencies can be achieved by removing the gas turbine compressor and combustor as well as the bottoming cycle heat-exchanger with a high grade heat (HGH) TEEU as well as a low grade heat (LGH) TEEU respectively. ## ## Please see the "What actions do you propose?" text between figure 10 and figure 11. Although fossil fuels are inteded to be phased out from combustion to produce power, natural gas (methane) is a GHG and an excellent absorber of infrared radiation (Please see "row 10", "column D" of figure 9). As such its ice-crystal ablative mass flow rate, its relatively low molecular mass, its low-toxicity in comparison to borane and its chemical longevity in comparison to the transient borane BH3 molecule suggest methane as a desired propellant! Sequestered GHGs may be trapped in the closed TEEU cycle, not to be released into the atmosphere but rather accelerated, heated, condensed, frozen and accelerated again in a power cycle. As such, the competitive natural gas sector barrier to market may be mitigated as "fossil fuels" are replaced with "fossil propellants". ## ## Please also see the "related proposals" section as this has been revised to include the surviving "Energy Supply 2015" proposals ##. ## Please also see the "timeline" section below figure 18. The references [34, 35] were too long to list in the "references" section but link to the "TEEU mark Zero" published patent application, which can be used to accelerate or irradiate sequestered frozen GHGs for formation into plasma. This can alter the chemical identity of the captured GHGs and convert the plasma neutral and charged particle kinetic energies into electrical energy for the consumer.## Thank you for reading Evaluation Reply References [a]https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Document/ApplicationNumber/GB1304570.3/67daedb5-9b57-4b91-a60f-0d3167c34050/GB2510435-20130827-Claims.pdf [b] https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Document/ApplicationNumber/GB1304570.3/6a033c17-f31c-44ac-be26-3070466e50d2/GB2510435-20140121-Search%20report%20%20First.pdf [c] http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19801210&CC=EP&NR=0019619A1&KC=A1 [d] http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19830614&CC=US&NR=4388542A&KC=A [e] http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19790925&CC=US&NR=4168716A&KC=A [f] http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19790109&CC=US&NR=4134034A&KC=A [g] http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/49303.pdf

Dear Judges,

Thank you for your selection of my proposal.

I will address your feedback,

Regards,

Dimoir