Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 29 replies
  • Subscribers 13 subscribers
  • Views 2774 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Cooling towers on power stations - why?

Stephen Biddle
Hi All


I was working on a power station in Oman last month and it was gas fired with condensing steam turbines - no evaporation.  This week I'm working on a coal fired one in Poland, which has cooling towers and evaporation.  Is it something to do with the gas or just that they have no water in Oman?


Thanks


Stephen
  • 0
    Maurice, cooling towers don't 'vent steam'. Too much effort has been put into making sure that the water that makes the steam that drives the turbines doesn't fur up or corrode the system to waste it by venting to the atmosphere. The turbine steam is condensed and fed back to the boiler, i.e. it is a closed system. The 'steam' sometimes seen above cooling towers is made up of water droplets condensing out of the warm air updraft that the cooling tower is designed to create.
  • 0
    I used to work for a plasterboard manufacturer where 20 tons of water vapour per hour was ejected into the atmosphere from the drying process. Depending upon the atmospheric conditions, you could sometimes see massive clouds emanating from the factory miles into the sky that could easily be seen from twenty miles away. On the other hand, on a very hot dry day the same process produced 10m of “steam” before the vapour disappeared invisibly.
  • 0
    That is all fascinating.  It all makes sense now.  It's just whichever of the three cooling methods makes the most pragmatic choice.  That point about the absence of steam is interesting.  It's always the one Greenpeace use to symbolise pollution.  It's a shame their good intentions get undermined by misguided publicity, which is easily exploited by climate change deniers.


    Stephen
  • 0

    Stephen Biddle:

    It's a shame their good intentions get undermined by misguided publicity, which is easily exploited by climate change deniers.


    Stephen




    What would Richard Feynman have thought about the term 'climate change deniers'?


    “Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.”

    ― Richard P. Feynman


    “I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong.”

    ― Richard P. Feynman



    “We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.”

    ― Richard P. Feynman



    “If you thought that science was certain - well, that is just an error on your part.”

    ― Richard P. Feynman



    “I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.”

    ― Richard Feynman



    “For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.”

    ― Richard P. Feynman

  • 0
    I'm differentiating between denial and scepticism.  Here I regard denial as an unjustified certainty.  My nephew "knows" that climate change is "pseudo science", because he watched a Youtube video.  I tried to get him to do some reading that I recommended to get him in a discussion, but he found it too much hard work.


    Stephen
  • 0
    I'm certain of nothing, but a 'science' that has to amend the historic record and whose models neither agree with each other or reality looks more like an ideology or a religion to me.


    The discovery and exploitation of a new 'Joan of Arc' in Sweden is further evidence of an ideology being pushed rather than a science being pursued.


    I thought in this wonderful new Orwellian-world of intolerant tolerance and diverse inclusivity we all get to 'self-determine'? It is therefore for your nephew to define himself as a 'denier' if he chooses; for you to label him as such is surely 'unjustified certainty' on your part!
  • 0
    I feel that the later answers in this thread have gone off-topic. Perhaps they could be moved to a new discussion and this one kept for information relating to cooling towers.
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    I was of the understanding that when the CEGB was first formed it could only produce electricity they could not use the waste heat it for any commercial use.

    I also remember the cooling towers at Ferry bridge blowing down and after that the West Burton towers where made thicker, when the local press asked what was happening they were told it was general maintenance.
  • 0

    James Shaw:

    I'm certain of nothing, but a 'science' that has to amend the historic record and whose models neither agree with each other or reality looks more like an ideology or a religion to me.


    The discovery and exploitation of a new 'Joan of Arc' in Sweden is further evidence of an ideology being pushed rather than a science being pursued.


    I thought in this wonderful new Orwellian-world of intolerant tolerance and diverse inclusivity we all get to 'self-determine'? It is therefore for your nephew to define himself as a 'denier' if he chooses; for you to label him as such is surely 'unjustified certainty' on your part!




    I agree with William Dick Dickson this is an Engineering discussion, I wasn't expecting religion or Joan of Arc


    Stephen

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines