Advanced tech without electricity/internal combustion?

alj_sf wrote:

TN4994 wrote:If in the future a new technology supersedes ours, will the documentation on the stirling be important enough to survive?

The Carnot cycle is the most fundamental cycle in thermodynamic. Without it, you cannot understand any engine. But the Carnot engine is purely theoretical and cannot be built nor really simulated.

Stirling cycle is a close approximation and you can built or simulate it. In fact you can make a model from paper that works on the heat of a cup of coffee. Don't produce any real power, but do works.
From there you can go to Otto or Rankine Cycle (resp IC engines and Turbines).

So Stirling is always the first engine studied, and unless laws of physic change, it will stay there.

Which in turn means that even if Nimue Alban was a tactical officer on a starship, one of the Inner Circle scientists -- and we've got a physicist and a chemist already -- will eventually be looking at thermodynamics. So will anyone interested in making steam engines better. Which might well start to happen organically, once steam engines come in contact with enough smart people.

It might even be funny; one of Houseman's, I'm sorry, I can't remember the mangled spelling -- engineers, or a student, or some guy at a factory with one of the first stationary engines, could plausibly show up with a bunch of math and some diagrams and a burning fervor to build this other kind of engine.

Which presents the poor Inner Circle member with a bit of a quandary; this is exactly what the core objectives want to happen, and it will make a hash out of the industrial rationalization plans again. And His Late Highness wants to move the development to Emerald, and is looking utterly innocent about it...

alj_sf wrote:

TN4994 wrote:If in the future a new technology supersedes ours, will the documentation on the stirling be important enough to survive?
Probably yes. But, there's a chance it might be lost.
The wood stoves used in the palace.
I would speculate that only the most effective designs survived any documentation.

The Carnot cycle is the most fundamental cycle in thermodynamic. Without it, you cannot understand any engine. But the Carnot engine is purely theoretical and cannot be built nor really simulated.

Stirling cycle is a close approximation and you can built or simulate it. In fact you can make a model from paper that works on the heat of a cup of coffee. Don't produce any real power, but do works.
From there you can go to Otto or Rankine Cycle (resp IC engines and Turbines).

So Stirling is always the first engine studied, and unless laws of physic change, it will stay there.

But it's not exactly practical or that well known by most people. Whereas the steam engine has a very well documented history and is known by pretty much anyone that has even given a cursory glance at history. And there are hundreds of designs and models to follow that work and have proven to work, as well as decades and decades of functional improvements and refinements.

Housemyn and his people and the Inner Circle as well as Merlin have all of that documentation of working models and how to avoid the problems of the early stages of steam development, and yet there are people who think they should dump all of that for a barely used and not very widely made engine type that has far far less documentation and working models than the steam engine. Considering that Merlin's desire, his mission is to get Safehold to Federation tech levels as fast as safely possible. It doesn't make sense to skip using steam engines for the stirling which was far less used or useful at that point in time.

Zakharra wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the push for stirlings on this forum are from those who kind of want Safehold to advance differently. So even though there is already a well documented history of steam engines, they're pushing for the stirling because its different (and coming up with reasons why it would be better), at least that is the impression I'm getting. /shrug

I think Safehold SHOULD advance differently; OWL and Merlin have documentation on the way Terra developed including all of the mistakes and dead-ends Terra endured.

Safehold already has advanced differently going from "Only Wind, Water, and Muscles" to High Pressure Triple Expansion Steam Engines in Iron Hulled Warships in less than a century.

Zakharra wrote:It seems like the most efficient way to advance Safehold is to follow the Terran example, and having the history and technical information they do, they can cut out a lot of the mistakes we made. Going for the stirling would be going into much more uncharted territory.

Included in that history and technical information is the drawbacks and penalties of an over-reliance on burning fossil fuels and the alternatives the 24th century Terran Federation came up with when the oil finally ran out.

I guess it boils down to what each poster considers a "mistake." There is no reason that Safehold should ever experience the Smog problems of LA, London, Beijing, and other big cities -- Problems directly attributable to the use of Fossil Fuels and large numbers of the Internal Combustion Engine.

The quicker that Safehold can move past a mistaken reliance on fossil fuels to fusion and electric power, the better for the entire planet.

Zakharra wrote:Considering that Merlin's desire, his mission is to get Safehold to Federation tech levels as fast as safely possible. It doesn't make sense to skip using steam engines for the stirling which was far less used or useful at that point in time.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Steam be replaced by Stirling Engine technology contemporary with any given Steam tech. What they're suggesting is skipping over the low power, inefficient Stirling engines that lost out to Steam and Otto Cycle IC engines, to Stirling Designs that push the bleeding edge of Safehold's materials tech but avoid many of the drawbacks to Steam -- like the need for frequent water replenishment.

Personally, I agree that Stirling technology should be skipped over along with virtually every fossil fuel based technology that replaced Steam in OTL.

Weird Harold wrote:Included in that history and technical information is the drawbacks and penalties of an over-reliance on burning fossil fuels and the alternatives the 24th century Terran Federation came up with when the oil finally ran out.

I guess it boils down to what each poster considers a "mistake." There is no reason that Safehold should ever experience the Smog problems of LA, London, Beijing, and other big cities -- Problems directly attributable to the use of Fossil Fuels and large numbers of the Internal Combustion Engine.

The quicker that Safehold can move past a mistaken reliance on fossil fuels to fusion and electric power, the better for the entire planet.

Unfortunately it was the Internal combustion engine that helped end the smog problems in most big cities. Key parts of the smog is from low temp combustion as produced in cooking fires. It was the change from wood and coal for cooking and heating in 1870 to nearly universal electricity, gas and oil (or fractions between home heating oil and methane) for those purposes that eliminated much if not all of the smog problem in the US. Cities also smelled better as they no longer has large quantities of horse manure to remove. The big advantage that helped sell the oil and gas systems was that they were more time efficient, requiring less time to heat up, and not requiring stoking on a regular basis. That they were more fuel efficient was just a nice bonus.

Castenea wrote:Unfortunately it was the Internal combustion engine that helped end the smog problems in most big cities. Key parts of the smog is from low temp combustion as produced in cooking fires. It was the change from wood and coal for cooking and heating in 1870 to nearly universal electricity, gas and oil (or fractions between home heating oil and methane) for those purposes that eliminated much if not all of the smog problem in the US. Cities also smelled better as they no longer has large quantities of horse manure to remove. The big advantage that helped sell the oil and gas systems was that they were more time efficient, requiring less time to heat up, and not requiring stoking on a regular basis. That they were more fuel efficient was just a nice bonus.

LA had dire smog issues in the 1960s, and Beijing has dire smog issues now, in large part due to cars. Not as dire as wood or coal, but you still get smog. Detonation in an internal combustion engine is inherently less complete combustion than an external combustion engine's continuous burner.

Best combustion automobile yet, smog wise, is still the Stanley Steamer.

Weird Harold wrote:

Zakharra wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the push for stirlings on this forum are from those who kind of want Safehold to advance differently. So even though there is already a well documented history of steam engines, they're pushing for the stirling because its different (and coming up with reasons why it would be better), at least that is the impression I'm getting. /shrug

I think Safehold SHOULD advance differently; OWL and Merlin have documentation on the way Terra developed including all of the mistakes and dead-ends Terra endured.

Safehold already has advanced differently going from "Only Wind, Water, and Muscles" to High Pressure Triple Expansion Steam Engines in Iron Hulled Warships in less than a century.

It is advancing differently by being able to avoid the mistakes that took us nearly 200 years to figure out.

Weird Harold wrote:

Zakharra wrote:It seems like the most efficient way to advance Safehold is to follow the Terran example, and having the history and technical information they do, they can cut out a lot of the mistakes we made. Going for the stirling would be going into much more uncharted territory.

Included in that history and technical information is the drawbacks and penalties of an over-reliance on burning fossil fuels and the alternatives the 24th century Terran Federation came up with when the oil finally ran out.

I guess it boils down to what each poster considers a "mistake." There is no reason that Safehold should ever experience the Smog problems of LA, London, Beijing, and other big cities -- Problems directly attributable to the use of Fossil Fuels and large numbers of the Internal Combustion Engine.

The quicker that Safehold can move past a mistaken reliance on fossil fuels to fusion and electric power, the better for the entire planet.

Unfortunately it's not possible to just skip past those, especially with the restriction on electricity. Having a period of dependance on burning fossil fuels to power industry and electricity, and the internal combustion engine IS necessary since it allowed us to build the machines to be able to start to advance past our current point. Like it or not, fossil fuels such as oil and coal, and the IC engine has allowed us to considerably advance our civilization. You and others might consider it a mistake, I consider it a necessity until reliable technology can be developed to take the place of oil and natural gas.

Safehold will be able to pass through it faster, but I seriously doubt even if the OBS is removed as a threat, that Safehold will be at the stage of technology we have now. There is a limit to how fast it can advance and be created on Safehold. It's been barely 5 years since Merlin showed up and they went from oar driven galleys and muzzle loaded muskets to being about to launch the first steam powered steel hulled warship on Safehold and drawn cartridge smokeless power rifles and cannon ammunition. Even with help that is a hellacious amount of technological progress, and remember that the plan is to take centuries if necessary to advance Safehold's technological base to Federation levels then beyond.

Weird Harold wrote:

Zakharra wrote:Considering that Merlin's desire, his mission is to get Safehold to Federation tech levels as fast as safely possible. It doesn't make sense to skip using steam engines for the stirling which was far less used or useful at that point in time.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Steam be replaced by Stirling Engine technology contemporary with any given Steam tech. What they're suggesting is skipping over the low power, inefficient Stirling engines that lost out to Steam and Otto Cycle IC engines, to Stirling Designs that push the bleeding edge of Safehold's materials tech but avoid many of the drawbacks to Steam -- like the need for frequent water replenishment.

Personally, I agree that Stirling technology should be skipped over along with virtually every fossil fuel based technology that replaced Steam in OTL.

That's not possible. They have to go through the fossil fuel using step of technological development, albeit at a faster pace. Skipping it isn't possible.

And with the more advanced stirling engines, that would be unexplored grounds for Safehold and Merlin and OWL even. There simply isn't the technological base or history for stirling engines that there is for steam engines. Like it or not, steam engines are the better answer and right now they are the bleeding edge of Safehold material technology (along with artillery shells, cannon and the new warships). Steam engines are a well known factor that despite any drawbacks, \work with what Safehold has. Especially for the average person. The average peasant can understand a steam engine, something like the stirling would seem like magic because there are no moving fluids or anything like steam.

Graydon wrote:
LA had dire smog issues in the 1960s, and Beijing has dire smog issues now, in large part due to cars. Not as dire as wood or coal, but you still get smog. Detonation in an internal combustion engine is inherently less complete combustion than an external combustion engine's continuous burner.

Best combustion automobile yet, smog wise, is still the Stanley Steamer.

I will disagree with you about how much of Beijing's Smog problems are due to cars. A very large percentage of people there still cook their food and heat their houses with coal burning stoves, mostly natural draft I believe. Large scale hot blast boilers driving steam turbines are thermally nearly as efficient even for heating with electricity, and have lower emissions even before scrubbers are installed, and are more likely to have any emissions controls.

As for LA, it has somewhat unique geographical constraints, and car pollution was ended by two different and complementary pathways. Removing the sulpher from the fuel at the refinery, and by catalytic converters to deal with the unburned hydrocarbons and NOX.

Castenea wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:Included in that history and technical information is the drawbacks and penalties of an over-reliance on burning fossil fuels and the alternatives the 24th century Terran Federation came up with when the oil finally ran out.

I guess it boils down to what each poster considers a "mistake." There is no reason that Safehold should ever experience the Smog problems of LA, London, Beijing, and other big cities -- Problems directly attributable to the use of Fossil Fuels and large numbers of the Internal Combustion Engine.

The quicker that Safehold can move past a mistaken reliance on fossil fuels to fusion and electric power, the better for the entire planet.

Unfortunately it was the Internal combustion engine that helped end the smog problems in most big cities. Key parts of the smog is from low temp combustion as produced in cooking fires. It was the change from wood and coal for cooking and heating in 1870 to nearly universal electricity, gas and oil (or fractions between home heating oil and methane) for those purposes that eliminated much if not all of the smog problem in the US. Cities also smelled better as they no longer has large quantities of horse manure to remove. The big advantage that helped sell the oil and gas systems was that they were more time efficient, requiring less time to heat up, and not requiring stoking on a regular basis. That they were more fuel efficient was just a nice bonus.

The smog in LA dates from WW2 so it certainly wasn't caused by 'cooking fires', unless the Californians were seriously overdoing barbecues. That smog was cured by new regulations on IC engine emissions. Guess what was causing it?

The 'vastly increased' take up on Electricity for cooking and heating had virtually nothing to do with the IC engine. London smog was due to overuse of poor quality coal and was cured by regulations on 'smokeless' coal for home use, and the increasing use of electricity and gas. However the latter predated widespread use of the IC engine by a good way and the gas being used was not 'natural gas' from oilfields, but 'town gas' processed from coal. To the extent that when the North Sea Oilfields came onstream and British utility companies changed over to natural gas, there had to be a very large scale campaign to convert people's cookers, gas fires, etc etc,to run safely on the new fuel. In the case of London better industrial anti-pollution laws helped a lot too.

I'm just not seeing that your contention that the IC engine was instrumental in removing smog, was actually valid anywhere I know about. I suspect that even for the USA you are going to have to argue that sourcing fuel for the IC engine drove the oil industry which produced gas heating etc, which is dubious given some of the posts about kerosene up thread.

Randomiser wrote:I'm just not seeing that your contention that the IC engine was instrumental in removing smog, was actually valid anywhere I know about. I suspect that even for the USA you are going to have to argue that sourcing fuel for the IC engine drove the oil industry which produced gas heating etc, which is dubious given some of the posts about kerosene up thread.

Instrumental, no, but it was a part (primarily in transportation). Probably contributed to the research that gave improved injectors, atomizers and alloys that are parts of the improved cooking and heating systems.

The heart of my argument is that the smog problem was never caused by IC engines in the first place.

This is interesting and educational.
But, I believe that what Safehold needs is someone thinking outside the box.
Roob Gueldbyrg.
Now there is a dreamer!