Car batteries for POWER?

hey all. i heard one guy from here talking about how you can you use car batteries as a source of power 4 your grow op, and charge them every so often... as anyone actually ever tried this or know of this?? that sounds like an interesting way of getting power to me.....

Well I don't know, are there 12 volt grow lights? If you were using an inverter to give you 120 volts you'd need a hell of a big stack of wet cell batteries to give you enough wattage to do any good, and I"d expect big lithium batteries to be way too expensive. Doesn't sound really practical to me but I've been wrong before,,

sounds like an idiot,that doesnt know the basics of electricity.if it would work(but it wont!)it would be cool and cost effective.

dont go doin that,u will start a fire

And where is there a saving? It would actually use more energy to charge the batteries than you would use just plugged into the grid, due to losses in the charging. You have to look at the whole picture after all not just one part. Your day to day electrical use would drop sure , but at the end of the billing period it would have undergone an increase in total usage because of the high draw during charging. I personally can't see any rational reason to do this unless you are off the grid and are using a hyrdro-electric turbine, wind turbine or solar panels. Sorry to ramble on, but this question made me think a bit.

gotcha...it was jus a thought since somebody brought it up b4 but never rily elaborated on it. tx guys

i've always foundthat unless you're growing a small jungle.....the elec bill ain't that bad. i run 8 separate 250w hps as well as a 600 hps and a 600 mh.....never been over 350-375.....while not cheap, its not what i expected

marksantiago1968 said:

hey all. i heard one guy from here talking about how you can you use car batteries as a source of power 4 your grow op, and charge them every so often... as anyone actually ever tried this or know of this?? that sounds like an interesting way of getting power to me.....

Click to expand...

Yes, of course it will work, but, it is not practical. I grow weed and chase sparks for a living. So, I can tell you this, a home with about 110 percent of the needed PV cells will cost $30-50K. In a remote area or a home business the excess energy can be worth while. But trying to cut you cannabis culture cost by $50 a month is not a real possibility.

If you wanted a hobby, you could buy a 45 Watt PV array for about $200. Add a car battery and some 12 volt DC CFLs and away you go. It would probable grow 1 healthy plant at a time, if your weather is good.

you could run fans and pumps from a car battery.

paddy510 said:

you could run fans and pumps from a car battery.

Click to expand...

Sure you could do that. But, would it be practical? Also, remember, with 12V batteries you introduce an explosion hazard. So you really want to think this out before you proceed very far.

wouldnt have to worry about the pumps not working in a power outage.

paddy510 said:

wouldnt have to worry about the pumps not working in a power outage.

Click to expand...

Halftime score update....

AC - 129
Car battery - 1

wouldnt have to worry about the pumps not working in a power outage.

Click to expand...

No, then you have to worry about your battery failing instead, added explosion hazards, etc...

Save the money and buy a generator for times of no power.

you think its not a good idea to use a batt to run something like a fan or a pump?
you really think the risk of a car batt exploding is worth worrying about?
why would they put them in cars if they were that dangerous that you couldnt use one sitting on the floor?
a generator with a tank of fuel is less of a risk?
not worried about noise?

It's during charging that a wet cell battery is an explosion hazard. I have seen one explode , a mechanic was smoking near a charging battery , and it blew up. Pieces of vucanized rubber case went through a wall. The guy was burnt severely too.

I designed an almost effortless perpetual electricity source ages ago,one of my many stoned inventions that seem to just appear in my mind
I never actually drew it or anything but i did test the theory with 2 marbles.

Being the kind of person i am here is the idea for you all to have if you want it.
I am not an engineer so i do not know how large the plate and the balls would have to be to power a household.

I would imagine that they would have to be pretty large and that you would probably need 1 truck battery per room and 1 large version of the ball generator.
In my mind i think that balls the size of snooker balls would easily be sufficient to constantly charge 1 truck battery.

Ok so heres my idea that i kind of tested.
I take 2 marbles and glued them together and then started them spinning on a saucepan lid.
As you can see they spin fairly quickly on their own once glued together.
Now when i take a small straw and blow on one of the marbles the speed is increased,a lot.

So basically in essence the marbles will never stop spinning as long as they are blown on for a few seconds every 60 seconds or so.

So now we have perpetually spinning marbles and we want electricity from them so take theory to another level and using much larger steel balls that have been expertly welded together and then drilled down through the middle.

We then get a shined steel plate and expertly weld a copper(i think)rod to the exact centre of the plate.
Large steel balls go down onto the top of the copper rod.
The hole in the balls would have to barely touch the rod so that they can rotate freely and unhindered from the rod.

Now we need another unit to blow on the left hand ball for just a few seconds and we want it to blow every 60 seconds or so,this does not have to be a huge strong blow so minimal power would be used by the blower.
The friction from the balls moving can be used to create a dynamo effect which can be collected and stored or used to perpetually charge batteries.

In any case in theory the balls dynamo would charge the blower battery forever or as long as the battery lasted anyway so the balls would never stop moving.
And you could charge plenty of other batteries at the same time.

As i said before i am not an engineer and i only have a very basic working knowledge of electricity and i am sure there would be plenty more things needed.
One thing i am 100% sure of is that the balls would never stop moving so therefore i can claim to have invented a perpetual and free energy source.

Heres a small video so you can maybe see what i mean.
I release this idea to the world for free,the same as all of my other ideas.
For all i know someone else has already invented it and i just didn't know about it

The second you attempt to place a load on those spinning balls, they will slow down and stop.

So basically in essence the marbles will never stop spinning as long as they are blown on for a few seconds every 60 seconds or so.

Click to expand...

If you keep blowing on the balls to add back in the energy you are removing, then yes, it will keep going. But then why use the balls at all? This is the way standard pumps and pretty much every motor works.

There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine. Yes spinning balls have very little friction due to the small surface area that actually makes contact, but NO, they are not some kind of magic free energy device.

--edit--

I see you make mention of using this to charge batteries, but that makes no sense. You talk about using something to blow on the balls, that takes energy. So where is this energy you will need to constantly add into the balls come from? The power grid? Solar Panels? No matter which option you take, you are getting LESS energy then you started with.

You weren't kidding when you said you aren't an engineer. Not to be mean, but aparently you haven't take science classes either.

From Conservation of energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"In physics, the law of conservation of energy states that the total amount of energy in any isolated system remains constant but cannot be recreated, although it may change forms, e.g. friction turns kinetic energy into thermal energy. In thermodynamics, the first law of thermodynamics is a statement of the conservation of energy for thermodynamic systems, and is the more encompassing version of the conservation of energy. In short, the law of conservation of energy states that energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another."

Your ball plan will end up producing less energy then what is being put into it as the balls will transfer their kinetic energy into thermal energy via friction.

nitrobud said:

The second you attempt to place a load on those spinning balls, they will slow down and stop.



If you keep blowing on the balls to add back in the energy you are removing, then yes, it will keep going. But then why use the balls at all? This is the way standard pumps and pretty much every motor works.

There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine. Yes spinning balls have very little friction due to the small surface area that actually makes contact, but NO, they are not some kind of magic free energy device.

Click to expand...

Oh thanks for letting me know bwhahahaha
Oh and by the way your wrong.
OH and the basic equation is that the amount of energy created by the balls is much more than the energy used to create the spin.
So EU=1 EC=2.

You don't seem to understand at all but thanks for trying to make me look like a fool,it always amuses me greatly to hear people that only think they know what they are talking about talking lmfao

natmoon said:

Oh thanks for letting me know bwhahahaha
Oh and by the way your wrong.
OH and the basic equation is that the amount of energy created by the balls is much more than the energy used to create the spin.
So EU=1 EC=2.

You don't seem to understand at all but thanks for trying to make me look like a fool,it always amuses me greatly to hear people that only think they know what they are talking about talking lmfao

Click to expand...

No, I know what I am talking about and have previously seen these experiments.

also, EU & EC? Is this suppose to stand for Energy Used and Energy Created? I don't see any equation there. or is it E*U=1 E*C=2. In which case, what is E? Or is E=MC^2

It is IMPOSSIBLE to get more energy OUT then you put IN.
If you have found a way to get around this, please, get on the phone NOW and contact everyone you can, because this is a history first. I'm sure your local high school or university physics class would be willing to help you.

I will say it again, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PERPETUAL MOTION (without input). Your need to blow air on the balls is the energy losses from friction being added back in.

--edit--

the basic equation is that the amount of energy created by the balls is much more than the energy used to create the spin.

Click to expand...

This alone violates the Laws of Physics. Where are you getting this information from?

nitrobud said:

No, I know what I am talking about and have previously seen these experiments.

also, EU & EC? Is this suppose to stand for Energy Used and Energy Created? I don't see any equation there. or is it E*U=1 E*C=2. In which case, what is E? Or is E=MC^2

It is IMPOSSIBLE to get more energy OUT then you put IN.
If you have found a way to get around this, please, get on the phone NOW and contact everyone you can, because this is a history first. I'm sure your local high school or university physics class would be willing to help you.

I will say it again, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PERPETUAL MOTION (without input). Your need to blow air on the balls is the energy losses from friction being added back in.

--edit--



This alone violates the Laws of Physics. Where are you getting this information from?

Click to expand...

Why don't you see how fast they spin with a little straw in the video and never forget that people of your ilk once also thought the world was flat