- Hole in mountain from top to bottom
- Connect to vents drilled at bottom of mountain
- Fit wind turbines to generate power. (Constant supply of wind because of heat circulation)
- Use the power to produce hydrogen from water
- Store in tank (filled with metal powder in order for safety and to store more hydrogen relative to pressurized tanks) connect to pipe as gas line
- Use for fuel,heating etc etc
- At the same time it can also can be used as a cost effective water treatment facility.
- No birds or other wild life will be harmed and an absolute minimum of pollutants produced.
- One plant can power a state like Wisconsin.
The real green energy
Endless supply of clean, reliable, renewable, and cheap energy.
Note: This would replace coal and oil used for energy.
These types of techs are being suppressed.
There are over 6300 patents that were seized by the US gov't under the guise of "national security" most of them were energy patents. There are literally thousands of proven ways to produce power more efficiently. This is the Deep state keeping us under their thumb because they are the owners of the Oil/Gas companies.
It's not at the behest of oil and gas companies, get over that. It's because without a struggle for energy there would be far fewer conflicts to manufacture and exploit.
Maybe so.
Nothing wrong with burning coal,it produces CO2 witch also known as plant food....
Do you have any clue the volume of air that would be required to replace even one turbin at say Hoover Dam? Here is an assist. Hoover has 17 turbines and uses 32,000 cubic ft. pr. sec. Thats 1,882 cfs per turbine. Multiply that by 770 (density ratio) and you get 1.5 million cfs. If you could build such a thing (not) you would get 2.35 gigawatts per year. US uses maybe 4.5 billion gw pr. yr. IF you master the technology you will need 192 MILLION mountains to hollow out...not "130". The hydrogen conversion is another matter. Good luck.
No luck needed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower
Oh and their proposal is to mount them on the side of mountains, mine is to use the mountain itself. It can be done and the benefits would be huge.
Lol. Chk the math. It is what it is. When you finish consider 2 additional points. 1. You will lose 2/3 of your energy production in the hydrogen conversion process. 2. Your required surface area pr Kw makes solar and wind farms look like tiny by comparison. I know math is hard...but...wiki!...baHahAha!
Hey buddy the tech works. it has been mathematical shown to work. You yourself (based on their tower output design ) said it would work if we built 190 of them. Then you went on to say "good luck" Sure it would cost 100s of billions but the savings alone would ensure it would be money well spent. Now if you want to go around spewing this can't be done, I'd have to remind you of our past achievements. This can be done and if I was in charge it WOULD be done. Now go play with your windmills and solar panels.
I said "190 million"... actually 1.90 million.** This is how many turbines you need, each producing 1/17 the output of Hoover...that would be the 1.5 million cfs air requirement for each. To replace US energy demand... 3,930 Terawatt hrs.** (3.93 trillion kWh) each of your 130 plants produce 30 Tw (Trillion watts)....not the 235 thousand kWh as described in example. Palo Verde is largest functioning US nuclear plant at 3.3 gW. Each of your 130 wind turbines will produce the equivalent of 9.5 PV Nuclear plants before storage... 28.5 after. Your plants will need to produce 94 gW each! Brilliant! You will be a god among men and far and away the wealthiest!! Certainly a genius above all others!!! As a final assist, that's 2.85 Trillion CFS of air to move...hopefully by convection (cuz it would suck to have to use fans to move all that air through the turbines!)...math is hard
100% correct. The math is what it is. We can only work within the constraints of physics.
Regardless of design, horizontal/ vertical blade turbine, source of rising heat, the q can be rephrased "how much moving air at atmospheric pressure do we need to capture energy equivalent of 9 to 28 of the largest nuclear plants. Not going to get cat 5's rising from that giant open mine/ big bore hole.
Probably a good idea, because if it were a bad idea, the cabal would already doing it in vein while telling us not to fart or eat beef.
I always thought wave power seemed like an infinite and steady resource.
They say it's hard to keep them from falling apart in the water, but I wonder if thats an excuse as there are all kinds of machines operating just fine in water.
That's hardly new tech, it's just an application of current tech and involves mining through an entire mountain which is not nearly the simple task you seem to think it is.
Never simple but, very attainable
You've described a solar tower but with the additional difficulty of all that tunneling vs building the tower.
No, a wind tower. BTW it works at night as well
Why not use Tesla Towers. Tap into the ether where lightning comes from. Keep it simple and efficient.
The ideal only differs with the base structure. They proposed to use a skyscraper that dwarfs any man built structure to date (They used this excuse alone to squash the ideal). They also didn't see how this could be used as water treatment facility or the application of hydrogen for energy storage.
Birds aren't real.
It may be that "no birds or other wild life will be harmed", but what about all those reptilians living there? Yea, you better add that to your list. 😊
lol
err kek
Do you have any calculations on sizes of vents, potential between ground level and peak, efficiency of hydrogen generation, etc?
That would depend entirely on the size of the hole and geography but, one such plant on average can produce roughly 2.0% of the energy needs of the whole of the united states. About, roughly, 130 plants would be needed to supply our entire energy needs (this includes transportation)
I mean what I wrote.
Funny because as soon as I sent this, a torrid of shit posts appeared afterwards. It is almost like someone wants this post to be buried