LARGER RIVER TURBINE - One more - giggles...
Here's another - river turbine -
larger - 25 kw power
I would think this could be poistioned
outside the river - on it's own pad -
Use larger water pipes in river - upstream
river turbine - downstream - at lower elevation or pitch.
Larger diameter pipe in water - 1 meter width
And incrementaly reduced in diameter =
more velocity. Thus... increasing the speed of flow rate -
Placing the unit at lower elevation
allows the submerges water pipe
to gradually emerge out out of water
enguaging the turbine - flange.
One could even make a cat cage ease of access
with operable -
gate valve - to tweek with a secondary
preasure increase at the flange connection.
Out of water -
easierr to monitor, maintain, leaving only the preasure reduction size pipe
in water with - screen to prevent - clogging.
Again, using small amount of river power
scaling this power into hydrogen, and hydrogen
to scale into mega free electricty.
Good looking unit.
Nicely priced.
Scan the flow rates...
0.55 cubic meter flow rate is needed
hence - pipe reduction could assist slow moving river
$16,000.00 - $32,000.00/ set |1 set https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Francis-Turbine-Free-Energy-Generator-Alternative_1600432867276.html Not sure if this idea is doable for the junior, but they
do have rivers encoumpassing thier claims.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One last rant on - assaying. My angst is against the - sodium peroxide.
All because - former assaying on cores used
4 part acids - and well.... the grades appear higher.
I'm not a fan of,
labs only using a few mists of vapor to determine
percentage grade.
I feel a feel - a
few droplettes of mists in vapor are
not a ( full ) representation of the entire - solubilized - sample.
I would love to see labs test the entire solubilized
sample - knowing - the digested sample may have
sat for hours and with no agitation the solubilized
metals may not have good suspension in medium
and may have settled to bottom.
Or... the fact compound bonds are far larger than
actual state of mineral in ore.
Once converted and now far larger in size with
H's + O's attached - doesn't leave much within a
droplette for the spectrometer to detect.
Could it be... the onset of spectrometer machines
have skewed the grades over the years to lend the
impression that mineral deposits are becomming
weaker in grades or.... more like tech is not as good
as the former methods ?
If it were me... i'd be testing the cores myself,
prior to sending off to lab... and not with an XRF...
They too area hit and miss with - nickel...
Especially if the nickel is in - salts or Mg bonds.
i WOULD SAY....
Making entire sample into oxide would be best.
And... somehow use a optical analyzer to perform
a full 1 gram value - then... scale those results to 1 tonne.
VERSUS -
few vapor mists with larger compound bonds.
Some may diagree.... and that's ok,
but, pull the former drill cores along with former
peer deposits that are in close vicinity -
yup... far higher grades.
Yes... in this Langmuir area... grades do increase at depth.
But... on average, the grades i read were approx, 0.5 % - 1 %
Fastforward,
and suddenly new assaying methos of sodium peroxide,
and the grades are - lower.
Keep in mind - sodium added to the peroxide does bond to
nickel - but based on chelical equations - the salt stays with
the nickel and chloride.
Which begs... could a spectrometer pick up on the nickel,
or... would it just detect sodium ?
May aswell, touch topic on the carbon seq,
I was chatting to another about tihs subject....
Explaining how - miiners with Mg ores can bond
CO2 to the Magnesium converting into - Mg carbonate.
They cmmented and said.... isn't that wonderful...
I remarked... i don't think it is...
One would first have to know how much they could earn
seq another's carbon - is it even worth it ?
Basing this on the advent the miner only uses green energy.
If even graphite are in the ores. the carbon in graphite is
already sequestered.
I continued on, and pointed out - what would it cost the miner
to hire a driver, pay for truck, a facility to host the ores in containment
then, intorduce the co2 - to sequester.
then.... pull the ores back out, and dispose of....
Now look at the prices offered per tonne of co2.
lol
Jan 5, 2022 ( assigned price ) In 2021, the federally mandated minimum price is C$40 (US$31)
per ton of CO2-equivalent, but that will increase steadily
to C$170 (US$133) per ton in 2030.
hence.... far better to - frame an entire project
without producing co2 - - co2 path would slow the miner down.
Focus only on green mining which revolves around - green energy.
river power - - - to - - - hydrogen - - - to - - - mass electricty.
Same as,
the tohught of producing a concentrate...
Is it worth it ?
Or.... work the angle of, electrolysis....?
Make a full scale operation of finished product onsite.
Simply compare the efforts to work on a concentrate,
perhaps a whoel year long.... whereas another truly
gains all the more profit -
Then factor, cost to ship concentrate elesewhere...
versus - full production - onsite.
There...
I'll zip it for now....
Wink.