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

[mendip_discovery]

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.

[tom66]

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.

[tggzzz]

A1: scalability and dispatchability
A2: we do, e.g. https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/microhydropower-systems

[nctnico]

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.

I wonder if this is a typical case where government awarded construction to the cheapest bidder instead of the most competent one... In the end there is no technical reason a waterwheel wouldn't work as these where already in use by the Romans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierapolis_sawmill

[NiHaoMike]

It's more economical to build a few big dams than lots of small water wheels. But it's possible the water wheels would make a comeback where the disadvantages of a dam are problematic.

[pcprogrammer]

Well maybe the solution can be found here. 

[mendip_discovery]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

There are a few places near me that were old mills and a old large water wheel and it would be interesting to see the effects of a generator on that. At least it mixes in with a rual location rather than some of wind turbines or solar farms we get these days.

[mendip_discovery]

Well maybe the solution can be found here. 

I am going to get my mate Farringdon onto the project ASAP and see what he comes up with.

[janoc]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

It is not only matter of efficiency but maintenance costs. Solar panels costs almost nothing to maintain once installed. Water wheel (or any sort of moving machinery) not so much.

It needs to regularly inspected, cleaned, greased, seals replaced, painted, ... then you have the entire channel bringing water to and from the wheel that must be maintained, there is a risk of flood damaging the installation, etc etc. All that is specialized work that requires money, permits and people to regularly perform.

[langwadt]

Well maybe the solution can be found here. 

I am going to get my mate Farringdon onto the project ASAP and see what he comes up with.

have a consultant work on the design on a laptop in a coffeeshop in between replacing headlights, while arguing that the government should pay for it?

[Andy Chee]

I don't know any off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure there are calculators for waterwheel energy capacity (flow rate, head, etc).

If I had a running stream on my property, I'd definitely investigate the possibility of extracting energy out of it.  Even a 2kW waterwheel would exceed the average 24hr energy production from an average solar panel installation.

[langwadt]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

It is not only matter of efficiency but maintenance costs. Solar panels costs almost nothing to maintain once installed. Water wheel (or any sort of moving machinery) not so much.

It needs to regularly inspected, cleaned, greased, seals replaced, painted, ... then you have the entire channel bringing water to and from the wheel that must be maintained, there is a risk of flood damaging the installation, etc etc. All that is specialized work that requires money, permits and people to regularly perform.

and messing with the flow of water ways are likely going to have quite a bit of red tape

[AVGresponding]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

It is not only matter of efficiency but maintenance costs. Solar panels costs almost nothing to maintain once installed. Water wheel (or any sort of moving machinery) not so much.

It needs to regularly inspected, cleaned, greased, seals replaced, painted, ... then you have the entire channel bringing water to and from the wheel that must be maintained, there is a risk of flood damaging the installation, etc etc. All that is specialized work that requires money, permits and people to regularly perform.

and messing with the flow of water ways are likely going to have quite a bit of red tape

You need an abstraction license in the UK if you intend to generate useful amounts of power. I expect there are similar requirements in other countries.

[mendip_discovery]

and messing with the flow of water ways are likely going to have quite a bit of red tape

You need an abstraction license in the UK if you intend to generate useful amounts of power. I expect there are similar requirements in other countries.

Lol, I love how an organisation that does very little to maintain the waterways loves to charge people to fish in them, if they want to fill a pond or even use it to generate electricity. But happily let the sewage be pumped in to rivers. Maybe if we put the generators onto the sewage outlets it would be cheaper.

I only started this thread as I see many talking about wind turbines, solar panels and even solar fricking roadways but not much about small form hydro.

[langwadt]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

It is not only matter of efficiency but maintenance costs. Solar panels costs almost nothing to maintain once installed. Water wheel (or any sort of moving machinery) not so much.

It needs to regularly inspected, cleaned, greased, seals replaced, painted, ... then you have the entire channel bringing water to and from the wheel that must be maintained, there is a risk of flood damaging the installation, etc etc. All that is specialized work that requires money, permits and people to regularly perform.

and messing with the flow of water ways are likely going to have quite a bit of red tape

You need an abstraction license in the UK if you intend to generate useful amounts of power. I expect there are similar requirements in other countries.

and you'd probably have to show what effect is has on other properties and fish upstream and downstream

[mendip_discovery]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

It is not only matter of efficiency but maintenance costs. Solar panels costs almost nothing to maintain once installed. Water wheel (or any sort of moving machinery) not so much.

It needs to regularly inspected, cleaned, greased, seals replaced, painted, ... then you have the entire channel bringing water to and from the wheel that must be maintained, there is a risk of flood damaging the installation, etc etc. All that is specialized work that requires money, permits and people to regularly perform.

and messing with the flow of water ways are likely going to have quite a bit of red tape

You need an abstraction license in the UK if you intend to generate useful amounts of power. I expect there are similar requirements in other countries.

and you'd probably have to show what effect is has on other properties and fish upstream and downstream

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

[tggzzz]

Well maybe the solution can be found here. 

I am going to get my mate Farringdon onto the project ASAP and see what he comes up with.

You're safe. Faringdon is too busy giving his expertise to a Major Electronics Engineering Professor...

I have recently been approached by a Major Electronics Engineering Professor in a UK university. He is thinking of commencing a new Electronics Engineering degree course in UK. It is designed to cater for the reality that the UK Electronics Engineering sector is dominated by companies who import Electronics from China.
The course is designed to assist these companies in their efforts.

[coppice]

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.

[coppice]

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

Tidal power in inherently niche. Its possibly worth doing in a few select places, but it doesn't scale. Most of the world has only a small tidal range. If you live in a few places, like the UK and the surrounding countries, the continental shelf concentrates the water and you see tides big enough to do some decent generation. No continental shelf, no big tides. Most of the world would require vast areas of infrastructure to generate useful amounts of power from the tides.

[tggzzz]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

There are a few places near me that were old mills and a old large water wheel and it would be interesting to see the effects of a generator on that. At least it mixes in with a rual location rather than some of wind turbines or solar farms we get these days.

There is some validity to that, but for the absolute UK scale, see https://withouthotair.com/c8/page_55.shtml (BTW, that book should be the starting point for all discussions of energy in the UK )

40 years ago I was at a museum of rural life in Vik, Iceland. I was talking to the person who had collected all the artefacts ranging from penis fetishes to pelton wheels. I have mercifully forgotten about the former, but the latter is relevant.

40 years before that a farmer had heard about the newfangled electricity, and wanted to try it. The only practical was was to build his own turbine, based around a 10cm(?) pelton wheel that he cast himself. The water came through a pipe of similar diameter, from somewhere up a hill.

As for the legality in the UK, I have no idea - but ISTR it being seriously considered a couple of decades ago.

[tggzzz]

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

Tidal power in inherently niche. Its possibly worth doing in a few select places, but it doesn't scale. Most of the world has only a small tidal range. If you live in a few places, like the UK and the surrounding countries, the continental shelf concentrates the water and you see tides big enough to do some decent generation. No continental shelf, no big tides. Most of the world would require vast areas of infrastructure to generate useful amounts of power from the tides.

Not entirely true. See https://withouthotair.com/c14/page_81.shtml and pages following.

[Hydro]

We put solar panels on the roofs of houses and feed that small amount back to the grid. I dont think it needs to be hyper efficient.

It is not only matter of efficiency but maintenance costs. Solar panels costs almost nothing to maintain once installed. Water wheel (or any sort of moving machinery) not so much.

It needs to regularly inspected, cleaned, greased, seals replaced, painted, ... then you have the entire channel bringing water to and from the wheel that must be maintained, there is a risk of flood damaging the installation, etc etc. All that is specialized work that requires money, permits and people to regularly perform.

There is an argument against this

- it does not depend on weather conditions or time of the day and can work 24/7, all year round.

Compared to solar power stations , hydraulic turbines also have additional environmental advantages, as they do not have "consumable" components, such as batteries and solar panels, which are the main equipment in solar power stations. They have a limited service life due to degradation of these components over time. And their production and utilization is not environmentally-friendly.

   Hydropower units, on the other hand, can operate for decades without the need to replace the main equipment.

[coromonadalix]

anything who as mechanics in it may or will fail  by the way

anything put into water suffer more corrosion than normal,  over the ground equipement or even wind turbines

all of this require maintenances and checkups, THEY CAN NOT BE LEFT UNNATENDED

a25$ dollar part may fail an entire system of many $  just because it was not verified at regular intervals

[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.

Application options

https://waterotor.com/technology/
https://emrgy.com/
https://aqysta.com/our-story/

[coppice]

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

Tidal power in inherently niche. Its possibly worth doing in a few select places, but it doesn't scale. Most of the world has only a small tidal range. If you live in a few places, like the UK and the surrounding countries, the continental shelf concentrates the water and you see tides big enough to do some decent generation. No continental shelf, no big tides. Most of the world would require vast areas of infrastructure to generate useful amounts of power from the tides.

Not entirely true. See https://withouthotair.com/c14/page_81.shtml and pages following.

Where does MacKay differ from what I said? It was reading Without The Hot Air that first made me realise just how niche tidal power will always be. Before that I realised that Britain and France had taken the most interest in it, because of the continental shelf, but I didn't realise just how unusual that is. After reading MacKay and looking at some maps it became clear. If you live on the coast where there is no continental shelf, things like the tide going in and out on beaches is quite a weak effect.

[coromonadalix]

If it was a good as you say     we dont see them in big quantity ??   here in Canada, water is a treasure, we have barrages and TURBINES, BUT  we dont put tons of wheels in waters  etc ...

some do in small rivers if they are used for them and do make $ profit

some use solar power and have the powergrid systems, they receive invoice rebates thru the electricity provider

we have wind turbines,  we have natural gaz


But no solution is better than the one, studies are made,  locations are studied,  people have their say,  some projects where moved further away form civillians

here we have to protect wild life, sea life like whales  etc ...

you dont hear how wind trubine clap on your head, and we hear them far away,  they create energy, by they create incomfort too



and you barge here thinking hydro power is everything   

[coppice]

If it was a good as you say     we dont see them in big quantity ??   here in Canada, water is a treasure, we have barrages and TURBINES, BUT  we dont put tons of wheels in waters  etc ...

There in Canada you have a lot of hydro-power. You just aren't noticing it.

[coromonadalix]

nah the government is stupid using it  loll   i'm well aware of it   loll

The monopolistic energy provider known as Hydro Quebec is a cash cow for the government   loll

we waste a lot

[Hydro]

If it was a good as you say     we dont see them in big quantity ??   here in Canada, water is a treasure, we have barrages and TURBINES, BUT  we dont put tons of wheels in waters  etc ...

some do in small rivers if they are used for them and do make $ profit

some use solar power and have the powergrid systems, they receive invoice rebates thru the electricity provider

we have wind turbines,  we have natural gaz


But no solution is better than the one, studies are made,  locations are studied,  people have their say,  some projects where moved further away form civillians

here we have to protect wild life, sea life like whales  etc ...

you dont hear how wind trubine clap on your head, and we hear them far away,  they create energy, by they create incomfort too



and you barge here thinking hydro power is everything   

Free-flow hydroelectric power stations are just one solution among many.

There is not a single good solution.
Everyone has their shortcomings.

What surprises you about this?
Did anyone say that for this reason all other energy production should be cancelled?

[tggzzz]

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

Tidal power in inherently niche. Its possibly worth doing in a few select places, but it doesn't scale. Most of the world has only a small tidal range. If you live in a few places, like the UK and the surrounding countries, the continental shelf concentrates the water and you see tides big enough to do some decent generation. No continental shelf, no big tides. Most of the world would require vast areas of infrastructure to generate useful amounts of power from the tides.

Not entirely true. See https://withouthotair.com/c14/page_81.shtml and pages following.

Where does MacKay differ from what I said? It was reading Without The Hot Air that first made me realise just how niche tidal power will always be. Before that I realised that Britain and France had taken the most interest in it, because of the continental shelf, but I didn't realise just how unusual that is. After reading MacKay and looking at some maps it became clear. If you live on the coast where there is no continental shelf, things like the tide going in and out on beaches is quite a weak effect.

You don't need a large tidal range. A large tidal flow is sufficient, e.g. off the Orkney coast.

[coppice]

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

Tidal power in inherently niche. Its possibly worth doing in a few select places, but it doesn't scale. Most of the world has only a small tidal range. If you live in a few places, like the UK and the surrounding countries, the continental shelf concentrates the water and you see tides big enough to do some decent generation. No continental shelf, no big tides. Most of the world would require vast areas of infrastructure to generate useful amounts of power from the tides.

Not entirely true. See https://withouthotair.com/c14/page_81.shtml and pages following.

Where does MacKay differ from what I said? It was reading Without The Hot Air that first made me realise just how niche tidal power will always be. Before that I realised that Britain and France had taken the most interest in it, because of the continental shelf, but I didn't realise just how unusual that is. After reading MacKay and looking at some maps it became clear. If you live on the coast where there is no continental shelf, things like the tide going in and out on beaches is quite a weak effect.

You don't need a large tidal range. A large tidal flow is sufficient, e.g. off the Orkney coast.

That's a continental shelf effect. Without the shelf the flow wouldn't be very strong. I think MacKay actually talks about the Orkneys. Might have been someone else's analysis I read.

[tggzzz]

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

Tidal power in inherently niche. Its possibly worth doing in a few select places, but it doesn't scale. Most of the world has only a small tidal range. If you live in a few places, like the UK and the surrounding countries, the continental shelf concentrates the water and you see tides big enough to do some decent generation. No continental shelf, no big tides. Most of the world would require vast areas of infrastructure to generate useful amounts of power from the tides.

Not entirely true. See https://withouthotair.com/c14/page_81.shtml and pages following.

Where does MacKay differ from what I said? It was reading Without The Hot Air that first made me realise just how niche tidal power will always be. Before that I realised that Britain and France had taken the most interest in it, because of the continental shelf, but I didn't realise just how unusual that is. After reading MacKay and looking at some maps it became clear. If you live on the coast where there is no continental shelf, things like the tide going in and out on beaches is quite a weak effect.

You don't need a large tidal range. A large tidal flow is sufficient, e.g. off the Orkney coast.

That's a continental shelf effect. Without the shelf the flow wouldn't be very strong. I think MacKay actually talks about the Orkneys. Might have been someone else's analysis I read.

It is not a "continental shelf effect" in any meaningful sense of those words. If it was, then all the light blue areas would be usable.

The key requirement is a large flow though a constriction, e.g. the Pentland Firth.

[coppice]

They were all excited for tidal energy. There is place in Scotland that has a rather large one that does quite well but I wouldn't want to be in the water anywhere near it. I suspect it will devastate the fish but as with these things the bad news is kept out of the comments.

Tidal power in inherently niche. Its possibly worth doing in a few select places, but it doesn't scale. Most of the world has only a small tidal range. If you live in a few places, like the UK and the surrounding countries, the continental shelf concentrates the water and you see tides big enough to do some decent generation. No continental shelf, no big tides. Most of the world would require vast areas of infrastructure to generate useful amounts of power from the tides.

Not entirely true. See https://withouthotair.com/c14/page_81.shtml and pages following.

Where does MacKay differ from what I said? It was reading Without The Hot Air that first made me realise just how niche tidal power will always be. Before that I realised that Britain and France had taken the most interest in it, because of the continental shelf, but I didn't realise just how unusual that is. After reading MacKay and looking at some maps it became clear. If you live on the coast where there is no continental shelf, things like the tide going in and out on beaches is quite a weak effect.

You don't need a large tidal range. A large tidal flow is sufficient, e.g. off the Orkney coast.

That's a continental shelf effect. Without the shelf the flow wouldn't be very strong. I think MacKay actually talks about the Orkneys. Might have been someone else's analysis I read.

It is not a "continental shelf effect" in any meaningful sense of those words. If it was, then all the light blue areas would be usable.

The key requirement is a large flow though a constriction, e.g. the Pentland Firth.

Try reading MacKay again. He explains this. To get a strong flow worth tapping you need to seriously constrain the water. You need a horizontal narrowing, and you need a shallow bed. Any of the really light blue parts of the map have the necessary shallow bed. Anywhere amongst those areas which also has a strong horizontal constriction is a good candidate for tidal energy extraction. A horizontal constriction with a deep bed doesn't result in very strong flows, or large high to low tide differences. Look around the world's coastlines and you don't find so many workable places.

[Andy Chee]

The terminology "continental shelf effect" is more commonly associated with distant undersea earthquakes and the magnification of a relatively small water displacement into a tsunami.  Not really the same effect as gravitational ocean tides.

[coppice]

The terminology "continental shelf effect" is more commonly associated with distant undersea earthquakes and the magnification of a relatively small water displacement into a tsunami.  Not really the same effect as gravitational ocean tides.

Its exactly the same thing. Whether the water is disturbed by the moon or an earthquake, you still get the same multiplier effect when that water meets a shallow ocean bed.

[mendip_discovery]

Coppice how about you build one of these in your new place,
https://manxnationalheritage.im/our-sites/laxey-wheel/

Laxey Wheel,

The Great Laxey Wheel (Queeyl Vooar Laksey) is the largest surviving working wheel of its kind in the world. Designed by the Victorian engineer, Robert Casement, the wheel was built in 1854 to pump water from Glen Mooar part of the ‘Great Laxey Mines’ industrial complex.

The impressive 22m (72.5 feet) diameter structure found immediate popularity and has remained one of the Island’s most dramatic tourist attractions for over 150 years.

I that could keep you in energy for a few days. Just think of how much test gear you could have.

Anyway, now I am at a proper computer I found https://somersetrivers.uk/hydropower/ and they show at least 9 places. But I was hoping to see an old skool wheel turning a shaft onto a generator.

[Andy Chee]

The terminology "continental shelf effect" is more commonly associated with distant undersea earthquakes and the magnification of a relatively small water displacement into a tsunami.  Not really the same effect as gravitational ocean tides.

Its exactly the same thing. Whether the water is disturbed by the moon or an earthquake, you still get the same multiplier effect when that water meets a shallow ocean bed.

If that were the case, tidal power wouldn't be limited to specific geographical locations, and you could build an artificial tidal power basin anywhere in the world.

[coppice]

The terminology "continental shelf effect" is more commonly associated with distant undersea earthquakes and the magnification of a relatively small water displacement into a tsunami.  Not really the same effect as gravitational ocean tides.

Its exactly the same thing. Whether the water is disturbed by the moon or an earthquake, you still get the same multiplier effect when that water meets a shallow ocean bed.

If that were the case, tidal power wouldn't be limited to specific geographical locations, and you could build an artificial tidal power basin anywhere in the world.

Huh? That will need some explaining.

[Gyro]

I sometimes wonder if we will ever have a government brave enough to throw some form of tidal barrage across the Bristol Channel. It has the second highest tidal range in the world and depending how far out it is placed, a colossal volume of water on the move. Even an incomplete barrage (leaving a shipping channel) would increase the water flow over turbines greatly on either side, while reducing the inevitable environmental impact.

[EPAIII]

It's more economical to build a few big dams than lots of small water wheels. But it's possible the water wheels would make a comeback where the disadvantages of a dam are problematic.

Your first sentence is it, pure and simple. As for a comeback of smaller ones, I doubt it. Just too much effort for too little return other than here and there where circumstances are downright ideal for them. I had a friend in Iowa who was off the grid. He had his own windmill and batteries for when the wind was not blowing. He had a hard time keeping it running and the wind was not all that constant. So, yes it was problematic.

[Hydro]

[Smokey]

or this guy...

[Hydro]

... and this one

[Hydro]

.... and more...

[rdl]

Seems like a reasonable thing to try in some situations. Surely they can be built to last 10-15 years? They were probably able to do at least that good back in the medieval times.

[coppercone2]

i was trying to imagine a treez post about this but IDK what it would be. Something about sub par pot metal castings MTBF when used as a water wheels maybe

so basically the same thing as the engineers behind the rotor in my old washing machine, that turned into 10lb of zinc crystal.

[Kleinstein]

Water wheels are not especially efficient. For hydro power one usually needs quite some maintainance and care for cleaning and provisions for high water levels. At least the wheel has to withstand a normal high water event, that often come with wood drifting down the rivers.

Hydro power was used in the old times quite abit, but especially small scale hydro was also quick to be replaced once coal power was available.

[SiliconWizard]

Yes, it looks like we're rediscovering old tech thinking this is gonna be a breakthrough.

[soldar]

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. 

A 200 kW water wheel? Where can I see it? What are the dimensions? I find it difficult to believe.

[Hydro]

Yes, it looks like we're rediscovering old tech thinking this is gonna be a breakthrough.

You're right.
We have to return to old technologies, but at a more innovative level

This is probably better than building dams across rivers with all the negative consequences.
Moreover, dams cannot always be built everywhere.
And where it was possible, they have already built it.
And there are fewer and fewer places on the planet where dams could be built. The resource for construction of damage-free dams is being exhausted.
 

A 200 kW water wheel? Where can I see it? What are the dimensions? I find it difficult to believe.

By the way, the power of such a turbine depends on the cube of the flow velocity. Therefore, if the flow speed, for example, increases by 3 times, then the power increases by 27 times !!

[Hydro]

A 200 kW water wheel? Where can I see it? What are the dimensions? I find it difficult to believe.

[Andy Chee]

By the way, the power of such a turbine depends on the cube of the flow velocity. Therefore, if the flow speed, for example, increases by 3 times, then the power increases by 27 times !!

In the debate between turbine versus wheel, there was a similar experiment conducted by the British Navy.

Basically two steam ships, HMS Rattler with a propellor, and HMS Alecto with paddle wheels, were tied together stern to stern and had a tug-o-war.

https://www.memorialsinportsmouth.co.uk/dockyard/rattler.htm

Although propulsion seems different to energy generation, the fluid dynamics principles remain the same.

[Hydro]

Well, actually, here we are talking not only about propellors or paddle wheels, but in general about the use of free-flow turbines.
Here is another option based on the Darrieus-Gorlov rotor.

This is Denver, USA

[Hydro]

Here is an approximate table of the efficiency of such rotors

[Smokey]

I've got it..... (with the help of chatgpt)...

Solar... Freaking... Waterwheels!!

18% efficient solar panels + 85% efficient water wheels = 103% efficiency right!?!?

[SiliconWizard]

Nice one!

[Hydro]

[tggzzz]

A 200 kW water wheel? Where can I see it? What are the dimensions? I find it difficult to believe.

Soldar is right to be skeptical! That picture shows a 1.5kW prototype - iess than 1% of 200kW!
https://halesturbine.blogspot.com/2012/05/tidal-turbine-testing-cancelled-on.html

[soldar]

Soldar is right to be skeptical! That picture shows a 1.5kW prototype - iess than 1% of 200kW!

Not only that but to me a turbine is not a water wheel. To me they are completely different things.

This is a water wheel, a very large one
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Laxey_Wheel_08676u.jpg

This is a turbine, a very large one
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Sanxia_Runner04_300.jpg

[Hydro]

Yes, you tripped over the terminology

This is a turbine, also called a "head water turbine".

A free-flow turbine can be a wheel, a propeller, or a helical turbine.
Or like this one

[soldar]

This is a total waste of time. Hales Turbine is a guy working out of his home who has produced some papers which he says prove something but the rest of the world seems uninterested. And has produced some prototypes, many years ago, and the world seems uninterested. 

From where I sit it looks like smoke and mirrors. And one of the many schemes to find "investors" and separate them from their money.

[soldar]

Yes, you tripped over the terminology

This is a turbine, also called a "head water turbine".

A free-flow turbine can be a wheel, a propeller, or a helical turbine.
Or like this one

This exchange reminds me of the "Dave's not here" dialog

[Berni]

Water wheels are just not very efficient and have other technical challenges.

They still need structures to capture and funnel the flow of water onto them from a height drop, or if you just dip one into a river you are letting most of the water flow past. The rotation you get out of it is pretty slow, so you need to also convert that into something at a faster RPM to be used in a generator. Derbies will float into it and jam stuff..etc

The main advantage you get from using modern turbines is that you feed them over a pipe. This means you can place the turbine in a place low down where it has a lot of height difference from the water surface. So you get a lot of pressure at the turbine inlet, meaning the small blades can produce a lot of force. They also spin faster so they may be directly coupled to generators. This way a fairly compact turbine and generator combo can produce a lot of power. Floating derbies will stay at the surface where they can be either cleaned up or let down stream trough water gates. The dams also tend to simultaneously serve as a way of water control, smoothing out the flow of the river to prevent it from flooding during a sudden burst of heavy rainfall, while saving water for later in dry seasons.

Waterwheels are attractive just because they are simple devices that you can dip into a random river and have it produce power. That is why they were popular in the old days. But now our hunger for power is much bigger and so we need ways that can harness as much power as possible from the rivers that are available, so we need more efficient designs.

[Psi]

If you're going to use a water wheel to power something it must have a scale of 0 to 50 for the output power.
And if anyone sets it to 50 you must immediately yell.. "Not to 50!"

The reason for this I will not go into here, but if you know you know 

[Hydro]

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

[Smokey]

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.

[SiliconWizard]

Let's make some soup.

[Hydro]

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?

[soldar]

Maybe it's my eyesight but I fail to see this as a profitable investment ... except for the ones collecting the money.

Those generators in a ditch cannot generate more that a few hundred watts each, at most. I suppose they could have applications in very specific cases but they would have to be very cheap to buy and maintain in order to be competitive with solar panels or other forms of generation.

I just do not see it.

[Hydro]

I haven't seen this before either.
Now I see

[Hydro]

Maybe it's my eyesight but I fail to see this as a profitable investment ... except for the ones collecting the money.

Those generators in a ditch cannot generate more that a few hundred watts each, at most. I suppose they could have applications in very specific cases but they would have to be very cheap to buy and maintain in order to be competitive with solar panels or other forms of generation.

I just do not see it.

How much will a solar power plant with a capacity of 4 kW and a daily electricity generation of 10 kW*h cost?

[soldar]

How much will a solar power plant with a capacity of 4 kW and a daily electricity generation of 10 kW*h cost?

I do not care to even begin to investigate. You can do it if you feel like it.

The difference is that solar is available much more widely than ditches. If you can't get solar you definitely do not have a nearby ditch with running water. The number of people who have a ditch with permanently running water nearby is tiny compared to those who can look up and see the sun shinning.

Solar has a much larger market which makes it cheaper and more widely available. Also no moving parts, no corrosion, much less maintenance.

[Hydro]

How much will a solar power plant with a capacity of 4 kW and a daily electricity generation of 10 kW*h cost?

I do not care to even begin to investigate. You can do it if you feel like it.

The difference is that solar is available much more widely than ditches. If you can't get solar you definitely do not have a nearby ditch with running water. The number of people who have a ditch with permanently running water nearby is tiny compared to those who can look up and see the sun shinning.

Solar has a much larger market which makes it cheaper and more widely available. Also no moving parts, no corrosion, much less maintenance.

No one is saying that by introducing such technologies it is necessary to abolish solar, wind, nuclear, and gas power plants.
This is just an addition and an alternative to them where possible.
And the capacity factor of a solar power plant is 4-5 times less than that of such a hydroelectric station.
And its kWh cost will be several times more expensive.
Not to mention that after a few years the batteries will need to be thrown away and replaced with others. And pay an environmental tax at the same time.

[soldar]

If you think this is promising you can invest your money in this venture. I think I will hang onto mine for now.

[Hydro]

Yes, I do it in my own way.
I don't force you to do this.

[Andy Chee]

And the capacity factor of a solar power plant is 4-5 times less than that of such a hydroelectric station.
And its kWh cost will be several times more expensive.

You keep ignoring that there's often a lot more land area for solar panels, compared to rivers and waterways for hydropower.

For example, Ethiopia or Sudan has no water, therefore solar power will always have much more capacity than hydro.

Also the Moon and Mars has no water, so you need to use solar panels (or nuclear).

So be specific about which country has under-developed hydro resources.  Are you talking about Pakistan electric power? Or UK electric power?  Which country???

[Hydro]

You are probably not reading carefully yourself.
I will repeat.

No one is saying that by introducing such technologies it is necessary to abolish solar, wind, nuclear, and gas power plants.
This is just an addition and an alternative to them where possible.

Above are many links to which countries these technologies are being developed.
For example, the USA, the UK, Canada, India, the Netherlands, and many countries in Africa.
This is not a complete list.

[mendip_discovery]

Sorry when I first posted the subject I failed to add in a "more" in the subject.

Where I live we have the plight of solar farms, taking up large areas of arable land becuase the government gave a promise of lots of money for doing it. No crops are grown though some have animals grazing but not seen too much of that myself.

I was just liking the idea that we could keep the wheels turning and generate a few kW of electricity at the same time. The Americans Tourists will love it. I'm not overly fussed over hyper efficient systems just ones that could be used to add to the renewable sources without harming wildlife. Water does have the benefit of in many parts of the UK that it works at night and even in high winds.

[Hydro]

That's it !
The capacity factor of such micropower plants is almost 100%
Have you seen this?

[AVGresponding]

Doesn't work so well in the height of summer when the rivers are low.

Is this some kind of joke, troll, scam, or just colossal naivete? Undershot water wheels are literally the least efficient method of extracting energy from flowing water.

[coppice]

Doesn't work so well in the height of summer when the rivers are low.

Is this some kind of joke, troll, scam, or just colossal naivete? Undershot water wheels are literally the least efficient method of extracting energy from flowing water.

That hasn't stopped them being used since ancient times to irrigate fields. If you have some flow, but no sudden drop these undershot paddle pumps are quick and easy to drop into place where you need them. No infrastructure is required. You just need to anchor them.

[coromonadalix]

the classic 

[Hydro]

the classic

No. This is a classic 

[Canis Dirus Leidy]

Those generators in a ditch cannot generate more that a few hundred watts each, at most. I suppose they could have applications in very specific cases but they would have to be very cheap to buy and maintain

Well, in the "pre Р-63" USSR, such power plants were somewhat popular in rural areas because they could be manufactured by the local machinery and tractors station or vocational school workshop, and the generated power (several kilowatts) was enough for tasks like "lighting of the collective farm stable and cowshed".

[AVGresponding]

Doesn't work so well in the height of summer when the rivers are low.

Is this some kind of joke, troll, scam, or just colossal naivete? Undershot water wheels are literally the least efficient method of extracting energy from flowing water.

That hasn't stopped them being used since ancient times to irrigate fields. If you have some flow, but no sudden drop these undershot paddle pumps are quick and easy to drop into place where you need them. No infrastructure is required. You just need to anchor them.

Fair point. My comment was meant purely and solely in the context of generating power.

[Kleinstein]

A problem with small hydropower is that the power is small and the maintenane (e.g. lubrication, removing debris) costs and often also building costs are relatively high. There is also a rather limtied amout of hydro power.
There are few cases where small hydro like the floating waterwheels work, but this is rare. E.g. the floating wheel to pump water may have a power of some 100-300 W or about the equivalent of 1/3 to 1 solar panels. With the lower power factor for solar one may need 2 to get a similar energy with way less maintenance and better reliability. For pumping water one often does not need battery backup. For irrigation it helps that is is ofen needed most when there it's sunny. A suitable flowing water is also not that common - to slow a flow and it no longer has the power to drive the pump. This makes the solutions specific (adapt the gear and power level) to the location.

Large scale hydro with a significant drop (e.g. at a dam with sufficient hight) can be cost effective, but also this power is limited to only a few places.

[EPAIII]

And if you add a Dutch windmill ......... 200% efficiency!

I've got it..... (with the help of chatgpt)...

Solar... Freaking... Waterwheels!!

18% efficient solar panels + 85% efficient water wheels = 103% efficiency right!?!?

[EPAIII]

I am a pragmatist, plain and simple. If it works, then for gosh sakes, DO IT.

But if it doesn't, then stop wasting my tax money on it. I mean, REALLY!

[mendip_discovery]

I am a pragmatist, plain and simple. If it works, then for gosh sakes, DO IT.

But if it doesn't, then stop wasting my tax money on it. I mean, REALLY!

Lol, if they didn't waste it then what would they spend it on. Thier donors needs some sort of kickback.

When I win the lottery i will build my own water mill and see how it goes.

[Kleinstein]

I just realized how stupid some some of the water wheel powered water pumps are: they need a relatively fast flowing water to work at all. So water at a higher elivation needs to be a available not too far upstream. So a slightly longer hose, a bit upstream would also work, just less spectecular and more reliable.

[Hydro]

I just realized how stupid some some of the water wheel powered water pumps are: they need a relatively fast flowing water to work at all. So water at a higher elivation needs to be a available not too far upstream. So a slightly longer hose, a bit upstream would also work, just less spectecular and more reliable.

Do you think so ?
Does water flow where from and where to ?

[pcprogrammer]

Steve Mould did a video on this type of pump.



He explains it really well. The output is not continuous and won't have much pressure on it.

[tggzzz]

I just realized how stupid some some of the water wheel powered water pumps are: they need a relatively fast flowing water to work at all. So water at a higher elivation needs to be a available not too far upstream. So a slightly longer hose, a bit upstream would also work, just less spectecular and more reliable.

Do you think so ?
Does water flow where from and where to ?

Or you could just use a hydraulic ram; they are well proven in operation. Even in the UK, some were used for mains water supply within my lifetime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_ram "Priestly's Hydraulic Ram, built in 1890 in Idaho, was a "marvelous" invention, apparently independent, which lifted water 110 feet (34 m) to provide irrigation." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestly%27s_Hydraulic_Ram

[Hydro]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2&v=o9vpVExV1UM

[G7PSK]

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. This alone could make it unaffordable unless there is historical rights for the said use such as a very old water powered mill where the water wheel can be used.
Some years ago I was involved with the restoration of a Victorian era water turbine that operated a saw mill on an estate, the turbine dated from 1863 but had been unused for many years and despite being fed from a man made lake on the estate the lake was fed from a small river.
The amount of paper work and the hoops that had to be jumped through that wee put up by the environment and various other agencies.

[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.

1. We are talking here not only about the UK or Pakistan, but on a more global scale. I think that in many countries there is no such problem or it is solved quite simply.

2. In this case, there are antitrust laws. I don't know how well such laws work in the UK. In Pakistan is not doing well yet, but there are trends for improvement.

3. Even if you pay a tax for water, in any case it may turn out to be more profitable than buying electricity from suppliers.

4. Under all circumstances, it is necessary to increase the energy efficiency of such turbines and their profitability.
And one of the possible ways is probably here
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/unusual-design-of-a-free-flow-hydropower-station/msg5268390/#msg5268390

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/unusual-design-of-a-free-flow-hydropower-station/msg5257110/#msg5257110

It is stated that a method has been invented to increase the efficiency of such turbines from 15-20% to 50%.
I have not yet seen adequate refutations of this.

[Hydro]

http://www.waterwheelfactory.com/

[Hydro]

Some years ago I was involved with the restoration of a Victorian era water turbine that operated a saw mill on an estate, the turbine dated from 1863 but had been unused for many years and despite being fed from a man made lake on the estate the lake was fed from a small river.

G7PSK, is this the wheel you restored?

Edited by gnif: Copyrighted content removed.

[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.

Edited by gnif: Copyrighted content removed.

[coppice]

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.

[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.

[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.

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.

It seems Wikipedia authors can't really tell the difference. That page starts by saying the turbine was a 19th century invention, and lower down describes Roman turbine systems from the 4th century. Paddle wheels and turbines have never existed in isolation. You can find numerous medieval hybrids between a simple paddle wheels, cupped paddle wheels, turbines, and turbines that head a little back towards the cupped paddle wheel, using more cup like blades on the turbine. What the 19th century brought to the table was the performance benefits of sculpted, airfoil like, blades, probably adapted from the rapid development of propellers as steam powered ships took off.

[pcprogrammer]

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

It was restarted by a talking horse, so what do you expect 

[soldar]

It was restarted by a talking horse, so what do you expect 

I remember Mr Ed from my childhood. I grew up with Petticoat Junction, Perry Mason, Bonanza, etc. Good times.

[Nominal Animal]

How is a turbine not a high performance water wheel?

It is common to distinguish them by the direction of the flow compared to the axis of the rotating part, so that for a wheel, the flow is tangential to the rotating part; for turbines, either parallel to the axis (standard) or radial to the axis (centrifugal).

I have no opinion whether this is correct or not, however.  I thought it was commonly accepted (especially in engineering involving such devices), but I can find no support for such definition in English dictionaries.  To me, it is a logical definition; and I see no useful reason to lump all into a single category where multiple labels can be used interchangeably, when such a simple and intuitive distinction is available.

[IanB]

The engineering definition of a turbine is a device that converts the kinetic energy of a fluid to rotational motion. This would mean that many kinds of waterwheel would qualify as a kind of turbine, especially the ones with paddles pushed round by a flowing stream.

However, some waterwheels utilize the potential energy of the water due to gravity, where water flows at the top into buckets, falls down using its weight to turn the wheel, and empties out at the bottom allowing the empty buckets to rise up the other side to repeat the cycle. This kind of water wheel is not exactly a turbine according to the strict definition of the term.

[Nominal Animal]

The engineering definition of a turbine is a device that converts the kinetic energy of a fluid to rotational motion.

In Finnish, the definition of "turbine" translates roughly to "a device that converts the motion of fluid flowing through the device to rotational motion"; the italicized part referring to "läpivirtaus", "flow through".

I suspect, but am not certain, that there are quite a few differences in the nuances of the definition between different languages.  Thus, claiming a specific interpretation being "the engineering definition" is a bit of an overreach, in my opinion.

[IanB]

In English there is frequently a difference between the scientific or technical definition of a word and the common everyday usage definition of a word. Therefore, when encountering a word, one does have to be careful whether it is being used in a strict technical sense, or with its looser everyday meaning. I dare say the same is true in other languages?

[Nominal Animal]

In English there is frequently a difference between the scientific or technical definition of a word and the common everyday usage definition of a word. Therefore, when encountering a word, one does have to be careful whether it is being used in a strict technical sense, or with its looser everyday meaning. I dare say the same is true in other languages?

Sure, I agree; but I'd go even further in that the definition in strict technical sense varies!

A perfect example of this is the order of operations in mathematics (PEMDAS, BEDMAS, BIDMAS et cetera).  Some insist it is fixed and universal, but it isn't; the conventions do vary.

My point above was to point out one of the definitions for a water wheel and a turbine, that explain the disagreement.  It does not need to be universally acceptable, as it just points out that some might use a different definition; and this definition/misunderstanding is the cause of the disagreement.
Thus, the disagreement is one of definitions, not of concepts or models.  It is not an useful disagreement, because it will not lead to new understanding for anyone.

For this exact reason, I highly appreciate it when someone describes their key definitions and abbreviations.  For example, I might write "water wheel (tangential flow) instead of a turbine (axial flow)" in some sentence, including the key detail of the definition in parentheses, to indicate what is important in the distinction.  If someone disagrees, that is fine; that was just the context and definition in that post.  Even if you disagree on the definition, the use is fine as long as the definition is sufficiently clear to convey the idea/concept/model/argument.  (I often change terms mid-way through, if a consensus on a different definition emerges in context.  The terms themselves or jargon is not important, they're just surface gloss.  What is important, is conveying the desired message/idea/concepts/arguments/models.)

[soldar]

In English there is frequently a difference between the scientific or technical definition of a word and the common everyday usage definition of a word. Therefore, when encountering a word, one does have to be careful whether it is being used in a strict technical sense, or with its looser everyday meaning. I dare say the same is true in other languages?

In English both in the common language and in engineering the distinction is made between water wheels and turbines.

The topic of this thread is water wheels in the conventional sense, water wheels as opposed to turbines. Why are water wheels not used more?

To assert that water wheels are used to generate gigawatts in Canada or anywhere is disingenuous because it is only playing with definitions contrary to common usage and contrary to what was the convention in this thread. In fact, contrary to the basic premise of the thread. It is useless nitpicking which serves no useful purpose and only interferes with good communication.

The OP is proposing conventional water wheels as opposed to turbines so saying "turbines are waterwheels" is nonsensical. It is not clarifying anything; it is only muddying the waters.

It is like an aviation discussion where internal combustion engines are being proposed as opposed to jet engines. Everybody is understanding what is being discussed and the resident nitpicker comes in to point out that jet engines are, in fact, "internal combustion" engines.

This thread started out stupid and has steadily deteriorated.

[soldar]

I have spent the last few weeks roaming about in France and in Provence I saw many waterwheels but none in use. Originally they elevated water or provided motive power for mills or factories. None are in practical use any more. They are kept only as tourist attractions.  Since the wheels and water canals are already there you could think they could be easily adapted to generating electrical power but it looks like it just isn't worth it.

https://www.google.com/search?&q=waterwheels+in+provence

[coppice]

I have spent the last few weeks roaming about in France and in Provence I saw many waterwheels but none in use. Originally they elevated water or provided motive power for mills or factories. None are in practical use any more. They are kept only as tourist attractions.  Since the wheels and water canals are already there you could think they could be easily adapted to generating electrical power but it looks like it just isn't worth it.

I think you'll find plenty of water wheels preserved as museum pieces all over Europe. There are certainly many in the UK. They can't really be both museum pieces and effective modern power generation platforms. As they stand, their high cost of maintenance is justified as a running cost of the museum. If they have to stand on their own merit, maintenance costs could only be justified if the place is far from the madding crowd, and does not have economic access to grid power.