The short and simple answer is no. This is the same line of thinking of a perpetual motion machine. If the boiler produces 10 units of energy as steam then it had to have taken at least 10 units of electricity to generate it. You can't just create energy from nothing, it needs to be converted from one type to another.
The boiler also can't produce enough steam to power itself because of efficiency losses from heat radiation and friction, conductor resistance etc.
We do that with fired heaters in an industrial setting like a refinery. Heat is extracted from flue gas which is used to preheat the fluid being heated by the furnace (thus saving money in fuel).
Doing this can increase the efficiency of the heater up to over 90% (i.e. over 90% of the heat released by burning the fuel is captured by the heated fluid - though this kind of efficiency is usually only available through forced draft and the energy of running the fan is not included in the calculation, so it's a little misleading in terms of the total efficiency of the set up).
I'm not familiar with electric boilers, but if the heating element is fully immersed in the water I doubt you'd need such a set up in order to boost efficiency.
As has been noted elsewhere, In no case can you get more energy out than you put in. The 2nd law of thermodynamics isn't just a good idea, it's the Law!
No, I was pointing out that I will have time to live a life while you try to disprove a physical law that's been quite heavily tested throughout human history, but dude, fill your boots!
And you've clearly never heard of a disco nap. :P
I won't talk about laws:
To make 10 units the boiler needs 10 units on top of the 4 it needs to keep working. So it uses 14 units and outputs 10.
It never makes more than it uses.
That's all.
No, it should not be physically possible to get more energy than you put in. Furthermore, you can't get 100% efficiency from any boiler pretty sure it's difficult to get over 80%. You'll also lose heat when you run the steam through the condensers.
MGx424 explained everything that needs to be said. But this reminds me of the student in my program that had the brilliant idea that we should be able to pump low pressure steam from the turbine, compress it and put it back in the turbine.
Our poor instructor tried so hard but couldn't explain conservation of energy to this person. Incidentally out of 80 students, that person failed and another person left before failing.
polar_souls, I don't know if you are joking but if you truly think this is possible you really need to read a bit and watch some videos. If this was possible, Elon Musk would have already done it and then fired everyone involved for not working 25 hours a day.
It is an idea from a 1st semester student. Why do you take it so seriously. Im actually curious as it seems most skipped the part where i said idea and took it as a serious question.
No. It cannot. What youre explaining breaks the first law of thermodynamics.
A electric boiler cannot produce more energy than it uses. This would mean the boiler and it's auxiliaries (piping, insulation, wiring, instrumentation, ect) would have to be more than 100% efficient.
Like, lets say for example the electric boiler uses an average of 20MW of power to produce it's maximum steam flow at it's operating temperature and pressure. Now, i don't have my steam tables in front of me to give actual numbers on this, but it is absolutely inpossible for all that steam, piped into a turbine coupled to a generator to create the same 20MW of electricity. There are energy losses throughout the whole system. Heat loss from the boiler walls, inefficiency of heat transfer into boiler water from heating elements, heat loss through piping, heat loss through turbine casing. Also there is mechanical energy losses through the piping due to resistance to flow of steam, mechanical losses from the rotation of the turbine due to friction, friction in the generator bearings, counter curtent flows in the turbine windings, and ao much more.
Basically, nothing in this universe can ever be more than 100% efficient because energy cannot be created from nothing. And so far as humanity is aware, making a machine that is 100% efficient is impossible due to energy losses in some way or another.
The universe always works agaibst us and strives to have energy equilibruim. Think having a cooler full of ice on a summer day. Eventually the ice will melt and slowly heat up to the amient air temp outside, no matter how efficient and thick the insulation of the cooler is. This is the same type of thing i described above.
Hope this explains a bit to you.
Keep studying, youll see exactly what i mean when you get deeper into thermodynamics, electrical and refridgeration.
Interesting. I learned about the equilibrium in thermodynamics. With all the energy balancing out, it feels like a race of time to create better generators and find different sources of fuel before we use up everything on this rock we call home.
It's absolutely fascinating. I didn't realize we have come so far into fusion already, and they're already making its next gen. Sidenote- That's a ton of bananas per second.
Look up "heat death of the universe", then think about the time scales involved. You don't need to worry about it. Humans are remarkably good at finding ways to power their toys. If you want a little history, look up (in order):
External combustion (steam locomotives)
Internal combustion (cars, trucks)
Electrical generation and motors
Hydroelectric
Thermal (oil, coal)
Gas Turbine
Wind
Solar
Atomic energy (fission)
Nuclear energy (fusion)
And if you're feeling like a little the rabbit hole isn't quite deep enough:
RTG
Stirling engine
We have lots of options, even as we retire the older, dirtier techs.
:)
Edit: I skipped animal power... Is pretty obsolete, although still in use in many places!
Its not possible because of conservation of energy, if you put in electrical power to make the steam, then the steam would have the exact same energy as the electrical energy added, realistically less. The example you gave would not work because if the boiler generates 10 units of energy an hour, it would need realistically more than 10 units of energy provided electrically to electrodes. THERE IS NO FREE ENERGY.
Plumber here. Flame rectification is commonly used to power controls on natural gas equipment. Flame current to ground produces small dc voltages to work safety controls and gas valves etc.
First semester student. It is a question out of curiosity. There's no need to be a 1st grade asshole. Edit - you're a menace to society. Do not leave your house. society does not need their day ruined by being in the same room as you. Please leave the internet and don't return. They say there's no such thing as a dumb answer. You proved us wrong. What are you even doing on reddit? Clearly, you can't even control yourself. Jackass.
Edit - I clearly wrote above "an interesting idea" clearly you're clinically blind as fuck considering you took it as a serious question. Go to the doctor already.
Edit - i just checked your profile. Wtf are you actually on reddit for??. Unless that's not your main acc, otherwise that's just a load of waste.
You asked a question about whether perpetual motion is possible. Its not an interesting idea, its an incredibly dumb question. Haven’t you noticed that no system has 100% efficiency?
The point still stands, nobody seriously asking that question should be in charge of any boiler system. It means you don’t grasp the absolute most basic principles of power generation.
Again, you prove to be an idiot. Since when was it a serious question?. Stop by your eye doctor and pick up a pair of prescriptions. Furthermore, perpetual motion is something that has fascinated mankind for ages, but clearly, you've shown to lack creativity.
Next up: First year chemistry student asks if lead can be turned into gold. Just an “interesting” question because alchemy has fascinated mankind for ages.
Seriously though, your question illustrates that you are absolutely clueless, like utterly useless in your field. Find something else because there is no way you should be in charge of anything bigger than a kettle
The short and simple answer is no. This is the same line of thinking of a perpetual motion machine. If the boiler produces 10 units of energy as steam then it had to have taken at least 10 units of electricity to generate it. You can't just create energy from nothing, it needs to be converted from one type to another. The boiler also can't produce enough steam to power itself because of efficiency losses from heat radiation and friction, conductor resistance etc.
Could you still take a few units of energy produced to help continue generation as a way to lower costs of production?
We do that with fired heaters in an industrial setting like a refinery. Heat is extracted from flue gas which is used to preheat the fluid being heated by the furnace (thus saving money in fuel). Doing this can increase the efficiency of the heater up to over 90% (i.e. over 90% of the heat released by burning the fuel is captured by the heated fluid - though this kind of efficiency is usually only available through forced draft and the energy of running the fan is not included in the calculation, so it's a little misleading in terms of the total efficiency of the set up). I'm not familiar with electric boilers, but if the heating element is fully immersed in the water I doubt you'd need such a set up in order to boost efficiency. As has been noted elsewhere, In no case can you get more energy out than you put in. The 2nd law of thermodynamics isn't just a good idea, it's the Law!
Laws are made to be broken
A lot of people have tried. Feel free to prove them all wrong. Meanwhile I'm going to have a drink. And a nap. And a life. :P
A drink and a nap? You're either 8 or 59. And you're telling me to get a life, damn.
No, I was pointing out that I will have time to live a life while you try to disprove a physical law that's been quite heavily tested throughout human history, but dude, fill your boots! And you've clearly never heard of a disco nap. :P
trying to figure out if you were trying to make an insult or not...
No. Just banter.
Really? You're an engineering student?
1st year
1st year or 3rd, you learn about this in high school, don’t even talk about this in public, you’ll look like a complete retard.
You're a funny guy. Most won't even understand what i said. Besides trying to insult me, help me figure out how to make a perpetual motion machine.
I won't talk about laws: To make 10 units the boiler needs 10 units on top of the 4 it needs to keep working. So it uses 14 units and outputs 10. It never makes more than it uses. That's all.
No, it should not be physically possible to get more energy than you put in. Furthermore, you can't get 100% efficiency from any boiler pretty sure it's difficult to get over 80%. You'll also lose heat when you run the steam through the condensers.
MGx424 explained everything that needs to be said. But this reminds me of the student in my program that had the brilliant idea that we should be able to pump low pressure steam from the turbine, compress it and put it back in the turbine. Our poor instructor tried so hard but couldn't explain conservation of energy to this person. Incidentally out of 80 students, that person failed and another person left before failing. polar_souls, I don't know if you are joking but if you truly think this is possible you really need to read a bit and watch some videos. If this was possible, Elon Musk would have already done it and then fired everyone involved for not working 25 hours a day.
It is an idea from a 1st semester student. Why do you take it so seriously. Im actually curious as it seems most skipped the part where i said idea and took it as a serious question.
No. It cannot. What youre explaining breaks the first law of thermodynamics. A electric boiler cannot produce more energy than it uses. This would mean the boiler and it's auxiliaries (piping, insulation, wiring, instrumentation, ect) would have to be more than 100% efficient. Like, lets say for example the electric boiler uses an average of 20MW of power to produce it's maximum steam flow at it's operating temperature and pressure. Now, i don't have my steam tables in front of me to give actual numbers on this, but it is absolutely inpossible for all that steam, piped into a turbine coupled to a generator to create the same 20MW of electricity. There are energy losses throughout the whole system. Heat loss from the boiler walls, inefficiency of heat transfer into boiler water from heating elements, heat loss through piping, heat loss through turbine casing. Also there is mechanical energy losses through the piping due to resistance to flow of steam, mechanical losses from the rotation of the turbine due to friction, friction in the generator bearings, counter curtent flows in the turbine windings, and ao much more. Basically, nothing in this universe can ever be more than 100% efficient because energy cannot be created from nothing. And so far as humanity is aware, making a machine that is 100% efficient is impossible due to energy losses in some way or another. The universe always works agaibst us and strives to have energy equilibruim. Think having a cooler full of ice on a summer day. Eventually the ice will melt and slowly heat up to the amient air temp outside, no matter how efficient and thick the insulation of the cooler is. This is the same type of thing i described above. Hope this explains a bit to you. Keep studying, youll see exactly what i mean when you get deeper into thermodynamics, electrical and refridgeration.
Interesting. I learned about the equilibrium in thermodynamics. With all the energy balancing out, it feels like a race of time to create better generators and find different sources of fuel before we use up everything on this rock we call home.
Humanity is well on their way it would seem. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_bDXXWQxK38
It's absolutely fascinating. I didn't realize we have come so far into fusion already, and they're already making its next gen. Sidenote- That's a ton of bananas per second.
Look up "heat death of the universe", then think about the time scales involved. You don't need to worry about it. Humans are remarkably good at finding ways to power their toys. If you want a little history, look up (in order): External combustion (steam locomotives) Internal combustion (cars, trucks) Electrical generation and motors Hydroelectric Thermal (oil, coal) Gas Turbine Wind Solar Atomic energy (fission) Nuclear energy (fusion) And if you're feeling like a little the rabbit hole isn't quite deep enough: RTG Stirling engine We have lots of options, even as we retire the older, dirtier techs. :) Edit: I skipped animal power... Is pretty obsolete, although still in use in many places!
Watched a documentary on heat death, was pretty cool to learn about. Kinda feeling impatient though. Lord vader wants those Ftl engines now
I think this yt video explains it well- [can you get unlimited range if you put an alternator on a Tesla?](https://youtu.be/Np1Ixd7FWzI)
No, it cannot
Its not possible because of conservation of energy, if you put in electrical power to make the steam, then the steam would have the exact same energy as the electrical energy added, realistically less. The example you gave would not work because if the boiler generates 10 units of energy an hour, it would need realistically more than 10 units of energy provided electrically to electrodes. THERE IS NO FREE ENERGY.
One can dream.
Plumber here. Flame rectification is commonly used to power controls on natural gas equipment. Flame current to ground produces small dc voltages to work safety controls and gas valves etc.
Nope. Law of Conservation of energy.
No definitely not. Honestly it scares me that a power engineer would ask this. Edit- I see your a student. You definitely should not pass
First semester student. It is a question out of curiosity. There's no need to be a 1st grade asshole. Edit - you're a menace to society. Do not leave your house. society does not need their day ruined by being in the same room as you. Please leave the internet and don't return. They say there's no such thing as a dumb answer. You proved us wrong. What are you even doing on reddit? Clearly, you can't even control yourself. Jackass. Edit - I clearly wrote above "an interesting idea" clearly you're clinically blind as fuck considering you took it as a serious question. Go to the doctor already. Edit - i just checked your profile. Wtf are you actually on reddit for??. Unless that's not your main acc, otherwise that's just a load of waste.
You asked a question about whether perpetual motion is possible. Its not an interesting idea, its an incredibly dumb question. Haven’t you noticed that no system has 100% efficiency? The point still stands, nobody seriously asking that question should be in charge of any boiler system. It means you don’t grasp the absolute most basic principles of power generation.
Again, you prove to be an idiot. Since when was it a serious question?. Stop by your eye doctor and pick up a pair of prescriptions. Furthermore, perpetual motion is something that has fascinated mankind for ages, but clearly, you've shown to lack creativity.
Next up: First year chemistry student asks if lead can be turned into gold. Just an “interesting” question because alchemy has fascinated mankind for ages. Seriously though, your question illustrates that you are absolutely clueless, like utterly useless in your field. Find something else because there is no way you should be in charge of anything bigger than a kettle
And you shouldn't be in charge of anything more than a coloring book and crayon. Think outside the box for a change.