Why don't we make [more] use of water wheels?

[Hydro]

Back in the day the UK we had thousands of water wheels that were used in industry. Why can't we do somthing similar to the small wind farms and use small hydro generation.

Many of those old water wheels only operated for a small part of the year, when flow was high. When the high flow rate coincided with need, like harvest time for grinding wheat, they worked out well and were built. When the high flow rate did not match up with needs, nobody built. Only a few places had a natural continuous flow, usually on the direct outflow of a large lake. Most continuously operating hydro power plants involved a large scale civil engineering job to construct a dam and a lake.

One hundred - two hundred years have passed.

Everything has already been built up with dams - there is nowhere to build.

They flooded everything that was possible with reservoirs -  there is no place to graze the goats.

The atmosphere has been polluted - it couldn't be worse. The climate is deteriorating, in the cities can no longer breathe.

Fuel is getting more expensive and is not going to get cheaper.

Technologies have been improved so much over 100 years that it is possible to gradually revive old environmentally friendly technologies at a new quality level.

Dialectics....

[Hydro]

I think you will find that in the UK all the water belongs to the local water company or the Crown, if you want to use it even in a water wheel or small turbine the aforesaid will charge you for the pleasure.

Have you seen such a book?
Click on the picture

Edited by gnif: Copyrighted content removed.

[IdahoMan]

A friend of mine lives in a new-build estate that has a water wheel along a major river.  The water wheel generates a peak of 200kW.  The idea was it would cover the average energy usage of the 200 or so homes built near it.  The reality is the council spends more money maintaining it than it generates in electricity and it is only retained because the government grant that paid to install it has some mandatory maintenance period, but it'll probably be switched off in the next decade or so.

This same issue is faced by windmills, and solar panels, and will be faced by SMRs if they really make it to market. The cost of maintaining a few big systems almost always works out wayyyyyy cheaper than maintaining a lot of small ones.

If I lived in some hilly places with a good flowing stream cascading down all year, I would construct my own private mini-hydropower system. However, it would be more for fun, and the satisfaction of a greater sense of independence, than to save on energy costs.

Same here. If I had a good flow of water I'd love to have a micro-hydro. If you could have your own source of power and water you'd only need to worry about food.

[pcprogrammer]

Same here. If I had a good flow of water I'd love to have a micro-hydro. If you could have your own source of power and water you'd only need to worry about food.

And taxes. You always have to pay the taxman 

[Hydro]

A friend of mine lives in a new-build estate that has a water wheel along a major river.  The water wheel generates a peak of 200kW.  The idea was it would cover the average energy usage of the 200 or so homes built near it.  The reality is the council spends more money maintaining it than it generates in electricity and it is only retained because the government grant that paid to install it has some mandatory maintenance period, but it'll probably be switched off in the next decade or so.

This is because it works using old, inefficient technology.
If it uses modern technologies that improve efficiency, for example this https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/unusual-design-of-a-free-flow-hydropower-station/msg5281537/#msg5281537 then it will become cost-effective and profitable

[Hydro]

Mini Hydro Company Raises $18M to Generate Power in Canals

This just looks like a water channel immersion blender.  Good to know all the fish will be a nice consistent food-processed paste at the bottom.

Let's make some soup.

1. This is an irrigation canal. There is no fish in it.

2. Do you know how the fish passage at a hydroelectric power station works?

3. The rpm of this "blender" is so low that it does not pose a problem for fish.

4. Do you believe that the company raised millions of dollars to make fish soup and cannot take action against it?

Edited by gnif: Copyrighted content removed.

[langwadt]

A friend of mine lives in a new-build estate that has a water wheel along a major river.  The water wheel generates a peak of 200kW.  The idea was it would cover the average energy usage of the 200 or so homes built near it.  The reality is the council spends more money maintaining it than it generates in electricity and it is only retained because the government grant that paid to install it has some mandatory maintenance period, but it'll probably be switched off in the next decade or so.

This is because it works using old, inefficient technology.
If it uses modern technologies that improve efficiency, for example this https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/unusual-design-of-a-free-flow-hydropower-station/msg5281537/#msg5281537 then it will become cost-effective and profitable

run it on the water from a WaterSeer powered by a solar roadway, then a it'll really hit peak effieciency

[Hydro]

Yes, there are many options.
No one is stopping you from doing this either.
Therefore, I give you literature to read so that you can do this as efficiently as possible

[gnif]

@Hydro

Stop posting content that is copyrighted and not permitted to be reproduced.

[Hydro]

Hello.
And where does it follow that this content is copyrighted and not permitted to be reproduced?

All content to which you have removed links is in the public domain and the owners of this content, on the contrary, strive to publish it as widely as possible.
Here is an example (link in a private message)

May I restore these links?

[gnif]

As for the link you sent me, there is 1/2 a page of the document stating it's copyright with explicit terms.
Being published in a public place doesn't negate copyright or make the content public domain.

As for the links to external pages, the bolded huge links are very spammy and were removed because it was, essentially spamming the thread.

[Hydro]

I see, thank you.
I didn’t pay attention because these files were in the public domain.

Okay, I’ll return it for now, a video about “make [more] use of water wheels.”
It doesn't violate anyone's rights.

And funny 

[ebastler]

[...] these files were in the public domain.

No, I don't think they were (and are). "They are in the public domain" is not the same has "they have been published".

When "publishing", the author or a publishing house makes works available for access, but still retains the copyright in them, and often puts restrictions on their use. Re-publishing the works elsewhere, or using them commercially, will often be restricted -- e.g. by requiring written permission from the copyright owner, or by requiring royalty payments.

In contrast, a work is "in the public domain" only when it is not covered by copyright at all, and hence has no use restrictions. This may be the case because the copyright has expired or because the author has explicitly forfeited his rights and put the work in the public domain. Details vary by national legislation and date of the original publication.

[Hydro]

We are trying to establish contact with these manufacturers.
It's India

[mr ed]

In the Canadian province of Quebec, water wheels generate 40TW :-). Big wheels!

[coppice]

In the Canadian province of Quebec, water wheels generate 40TW :-). Big wheels!

That would be most impressive, but I think you made a 3 orders of magnitude slip up. Hydro-Quebec only claims a capacity of 37.2GW.

[langwadt]

In the Canadian province of Quebec, water wheels generate 40TW :-). Big wheels!

That would be most impressive, but I think you made a 3 orders of magnitude slip up. Hydro-Quebec only claims a capacity of 37.2GW.

yeh, 40TW would be close to four times the global capacity ...

[wilfred]

Youtuber Marty-T in New Zealand has a few videos on his channel about using a rewired old washing machine motor for water generated power.

[kkayser]

The obvious answer is that they cost more to build and maintain than the value of the power generated.

[soldar]

In the Canadian province of Quebec, water wheels generate 40TW :-). Big wheels!

That would be most impressive, but I think you made a 3 orders of magnitude slip up. Hydro-Quebec only claims a capacity of 37.2GW.

Not only that but they do not have water wheels at all, they have dams and turbines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec

[SiliconWizard]

Big wheels keep on turning.

[coppice]

Not only that but they do not have water wheels at all, they have dams and turbines.

How is a turbine not a high performance water wheel?

[soldar]

How is a turbine not a high performance water wheel?

In the same way that a horse is not a high performance dog.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_wheel

[coppice]

How is a turbine not a high performance water wheel?

In the same way that a horse is not a high performance dog.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_wheel

Er, look at the first image of the types of water wheel on that page. Its a turbine.

[soldar]

How is a turbine not a high performance water wheel?

In the same way that a horse is not a high performance dog.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_wheel

Er, look at the first image of the types of water wheel on that page. Its a turbine.

This thread started stupid and it has not improved one bit.

I think the difference is quite clear. It is quite clear for Wikipedia and I think it is quite clear for engineers. If you want to argue semantics you can argue all you want but I will not be participating.  You can argue a jet engine is an internal combustion engine.

The water wheel is an ancient invention across different cultures of the ancient world. They did not have water turbines which are a 19th century invention of the Industrial Revolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_turbine

It seems to me the world can tell them apart. If you can't I don't think I can help you.