The heatpump, with more energy out than in (FACT)

[Tom Booth]

This thread seems to have run out of steam some years ago and I don't know if the original poster is still around (Nabo00o) but I find the topic and discussion very interesting.

I think what Nabo00o was driving at is something like this, put in terms that might be easier to understand or follow than the complexities of "COP" heat pump efficiency calculations and such.

If you dump a truckload of dirt on the ground. (call ground level the "baseline"). You raise the baseline by whatever feet. Now you can roll a ball down this hill and have it impact something, like a paddle wheel or whatever and extract some energy in one way or another from the "potential" created. That is, by dumping the dirt and making a hill you have raised the baseline and can then extract X amount of energy.

So, what if, instead of dumping dirt from a dump truck to make this hill to raise the baseline we use a backhoe ?

Now, theoretically, for the same energy output to raise the baseline to make our hill we also have a hole beside the hill. Now we can put our paddle wheel in the hole, roll our ball down the hill - into the hole and get 2X energy output.

Under normal circumstances a heat pump raises or lowers temperatures from an ambient baseline. All that is generally considered when determining efficiency is the degree of heat or cold above or below this baseline.

A heat pump, air conditioner, refrigerator etc. all use the same basic principle and all almost always waste either the heat or the cold.

To air condition your house you save the cold produced and throw away all the heat produced. Generally you just want to get somewhere above or below the baseline and don't care about or don't intend to utilize the hole that has been dug to make the hill or the hill that has been created to make the hole.

There is something not quite right about this illustration, but the idea is that if you MOVE heat or concentrate it with a heat pump you simultaneously dig a "cold hole", assuming the place from which the heat was taken is well insulated.

A refrigerator doesn't just produce cold it also produces heat. The coils on the back of the refrigerator get hot, but for refrigeration this heat is unneeded and unwanted and generally ignored or discounted. It is a "waste product" of the refrigerator. The heat coming from the back of the refrigerator is coming out of the insulated box inside the refrigerator. The insulated box inside the refrigerator is your HOLE. The HOT condenser coils on the back of the refrigerator constitute your HILL.

I think the point Nabo00o was trying to make is that a Stirling engine runs on a temperature differential so instead of just utilizing the temperature above or below the baseline it can very well utilize both. Not just roll your ball down the hill but roll it all the way down the hill and into the hole. By using X amount of energy to make a hill you can get back 2X by also utilizing the hole that was inadvertently created to make the hill.

Now if the balls you are rolling down the hill are really Ambient Heat, then you can roll them down the hill and into the hole all day and never run out of "fuel". The problem is that eventually your hole will get filled up to overflowing. Or will it ?

According to this article by Tesla:

http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1900-06-00.htm

No, you won't fill up the hole because, when you roll the balls down the hill your Heat engine/electric generator at the bottom of the hole converts the heat into another form of energy - electricity, which can easily be gotten out of the hole through some wires. Given a constant supply of heat (Ambient), once you have first dug your "cold hole" you have a constant supply of heat flowing into it. If that heat is converted to electricity the "cold hole" never warms up and the energy supply is never depleted (until the sun burns out).

Of course a Stirling engine generator is not 100% efficient at converting heat into  electricity so the "cold hole" will eventually warm up, but Tesla believed that it would take less energy to remove whatever heat is not converted than what is gained.

In other words, a Heat Pump would only have to move or remove a fraction of the heat entering the hole, the bulk of the heat (hopefully) being converted to another form of energy.

Having said all that, apparently Tesla spent many years actually working on such a device but never brought it to completion (as far as I know) and if it were really all that simple why hasn't anyone done it yet or why hasn't anyone tried it.

Strange as it seems, search as I might on the internet, considering all the tinkerers and dabblers in alternative and "free" energy and such, I am hard pressed to find anyone reporting on their efforts to couple a heat pump with a Stirling Engine. No failures, no attempts to try it and see if it works. This seems rather strange as how difficult could it be ?

On the other hand, both Stirling Engine and Refrigeration are rather specialized esoteric subjects. How either one actually works is more or less a mystery to most people. But I would think that somebody would have at least tried and failed and reported on the failure or something but for the most part all I find is speculation such as this thread.

[PulseFuelNerd]

My attempt to build a working stirling was frustrated by not knowing enough to make it work correctly. The symbiotic systems are complimentary. There are three technologies: stirling, steam, TEM.  Does a stirling's working fluid undergo phase change? I believe, by definition, this would not be a stirling anymore, thus, undefined technology.

Continued collaboration is of interest.

This is a great thread! Some of the posts show a great level of understanding. I have spent many hours in deep study of heat pump dynamics. I have developed a question, a thought experiment, to get the grey masses moving:

In regards to the thermal potential (note there is pressure potential also) resulting from compressing the working fluid (refrigerant) - is this potential realized only when it affects the environment through the exchanger or does it exist prior to being applied to the environment through the exchanger? (The same question applies to the thermal potential created on expansion through the valve.)

This is open for discussion.
The reader that begins to question the magnitude of that potential and it's creation and existence is in for an awakening and a new world.

Other questions to ponder:

What happens to COP when the air exchangers become liquid exchangers?
Can the thermal potentials be applied directly to a symbiotic system? (What happens to primary system COP when you do?)

Russell Philips

[Tom Booth]

It would not be that difficult , but it would not be any use. Thermodynamics puts limits on the efficiency of operating a heat cycle in either direction, e.g. taking in work and moving heat or moving heat and producing work. Those limits guarantee such a device could not produce any net work, as we would expect if the law of conservation of energy is considered.

That is your opinion, based on false reasoning. Unfortunately this idea is so prevalent it tends to discourage anyone from even making the attempt.

There is no violation in the law of conservation of energy in moving heat from one place where it is of no use to another place where it can be utilized to perform useful work.

[PulseFuelNerd]

The scientific method is how theories become law. It is understood that if we discover validated discrepancies, law must give way to new theories and the scientific method again is diligently applied.

It appears that a wider perspective is in order to explain the higher COP's of the heatpump.

I have heard the argument that heat being moved is not in violation of thermodynamics. I was satisfied with this explanation until I realized that the thermal spikes above and below the ambient are in fact created and exist. They are created within the system and applied to the environment through the respective air exchangers as is common.

Because they exist independent of the exchangers - thus, a system designer, may elect to apply them to air exchangers (amazing), liquid exchangers (unbelievable COP's), self-exchange (nullifying the thermal potentials), or direct exchange via a symbiotic system or other device. The choice is up to wise design.

This is new information. Do not reject it, or dismiss it. It is worthy of inspection and discussion.

[onthecuttingedge2005]

http://www.rapidtables.com/convert/power/Watt_to_BTU.htm