Re: Nuclear back on
- From: David Hansen <SENDdavidNOhSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:24:06 +0100
On Thu, 18 May 2006 12:20:55 +0100 someone who may be AJH
<sylva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote this:-
I attended a meeting with the
firm of (Danish)consultants and they were to let me have details of
heat losses for an environment impact assessment but the work has been
shelved. Having previously discussed transmission losses for
electricity I would like to see a similar calculation for hot water,
both pumping and heat.
It rather depends on what one is comparing with what. However, my 20
year old copy of Faber and Kell gives the following figures for heat
losses of pipe-in-pipe systems buried 600mm below ground level.
Modern pipes will be better, but probably not much.
20mm flow pipes 39W/m run at 75C mean water temperature
20mm flow pipes 63W/m run at 125C mean water temperature
150mm flow pipes 96W/m run at 75C mean water temperature
150mm flow pipes 165W/m run at 125C mean water temperature
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
.
- References:
- Nuclear back on
- From: mogga
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: alexterrell
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: David Hansen
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: John Beardmore
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: alexterrell
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: John Beardmore
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: alexterrell
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: John Beardmore
- Nuclear back on
- Prev by Date: Re: Nuclear back on
- Next by Date: Re: Nuclear back on
- Previous by thread: Re: Nuclear back on
- Next by thread: Re: Nuclear back on
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|