I didn't say it was recovered. I said it wasn't wasted. Instead, it's used to do a job that needed doing.
CH
- Vote on answer
- posted
3 years ago
OT: When Will the Next Nuclear Accident Happen?
Loading thread data ...
- Vote on answer
- posted
3 years ago
This is nonsense, of course. Energy is USED pushing the water up into the tower.
No, it converts power to aeration in faucet, good rinse-procedure flow from above for bathing at a showerhead, or sufficient flow rate in limited-diameter pipes to refill toilet tanks.
Regenerating electric energy is not the only way to recover energy. The m*g*h product pressurizes and causes water flow, therefore obviatng the function (and electric usage) of a powered pump at usage-time.
- Vote on answer
- posted
3 years ago
[attrs elided]
And, that energy (less the losses in the pumps motor) is *stored*, as "potential energy". If this were not the case, then a dam would never be able to generate electricity (as the water would never flow through the turbines)!
If the tank *leaks*, the leakage represents a loss in overall system efficiency. Likewise, if the tank is open (at the top) and can suffer evaporative losses.
No, you don't fill a tank from the *bottom*. The fill pipe goes to the underside of the *top* of the tank so the effort required to push the first gallon into the tank is the same as the effort required to push the last.
If the top of teh fill pipe becomes submerged, the tank is overfull (there is usually an "overflow" outlet to prevent this from happening)
Hence the reason for lifting the water (at a rate that can approximate the AVERAGE demand rate, instead of the PEAK demand rate -- which can be supplied by gravity as the tank drains).