Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Rollercoasters and the environment

^ As I said earlier, Freischütz is the first coaster in the world that uses Regenerative breaking, so we might see a lot more of that in the future (especially on launch coasters)...
 
^I thought Superman The Escape, and presumably Tower of Terror, also did?

There was a TV show ages ago that said it did.
 
^ Maybe they do but not in the same way, the main difference between the two is that STE and ToT might put the energy back on the main electric grid, where as Freischütz have a super capacitor (like a massive rechargeable battery that can handle big power surges) that get all the charge while braking and then is used for the next launch.
I know that they use the LSM to brake the rides but not sure what they do with the energy though...
 
^ You mean putting the energy back on the grid?
It would be doable, most modern trains do that as well...
 
-lofty- said:
**** sake. Sorry but this topic is ****. Seriously, if parks/rides were this bad on the environment and/or energy consumption of the national grid, they'd have been stopped by now. The thing is, with the amount of money parks make for the government, they don't exactly care, some parks are also known to produce some energy and feed it back into the National Grid/Electric Grid.
Click to expand...

There is actually a point in this toipic...
It's not that parks use too much energy, it's how they can get more money by saving energy so they can buy more additions to the park!

Would a theme park get an 'energy discount' by feeding energy back into the grid? Otherwise it would be pointless...
 
loefet said:
^ You mean putting the energy back on the grid?
It would be doable, most modern trains do that as well...
Click to expand...

No, I mean using it for the next launch.

Why would they put it back on the grid, just to use MORE energy off it next launch? That's... retarded.
 
^ Well super capacitors are a pretty new development for amusement rides, especially at these load levels, it's much easier to put it back on to the grid instead. Since I'm pretty sure that they have a contract that balances the input and output which in the end makes the energy cost be the difference between the two.

If you can find the clip you are talking about or some other reference about the launch system then I'll believe you...
 
-lofty- said:
Gazza said:
^ Actual lol.

These ideas all sound like Troll Physics.... Oooh I have one, a wave energy generator in the splashdown lagoon of shoot the chute rides.
Click to expand...

Um. You couldn't tell I was being sarcastic on that last sentence? Obviously they don't do that, why on earth would they feed it back to the National Grid if they could use it for their own needs? :roll:
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was on an iPhone, I thought Furies cat post was the last one.

Also:
DAWERKEN.MM.jpg
 
Gazza said:
-lofty- said:
Gazza said:
^ Actual lol.

These ideas all sound like Troll Physics.... Oooh I have one, a wave energy generator in the splashdown lagoon of shoot the chute rides.
Click to expand...

Um. You couldn't tell I was being sarcastic on that last sentence? Obviously they don't do that, why on earth would they feed it back to the National Grid if they could use it for their own needs? :roll:
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was on an iPhone, I thought Furies cat post was the last one.

Also:
DAWERKEN.MM.jpg
Click to expand...

Um. Do they feed that energy back to their government or keep it stored for their own use?

Possibly during the off-season they may actually offer it to the government, but when the park is running. I HIGHLY doubt it. I mean, that more then likely wouldn't even produce enough energy for the whole park to use...
 
^I reckon it'll b the same as nearly EVERY private wind turbine, when it's producing more power than is required it feeds the excess back onto the grid. That way the grid has to produce less energy. Then when the demand is higher than what the turbine can produce, they simply 'buy-it-back'. It's how it's worked for years as it's a much better system than trying to store vast amounts of energy.
 
Ben, while browsing the IntraSys web-page yesterday I found a really interesting article about the launch system they use on the Intamin reverse free-fall coaster. In which it said that the standard configuration were to burn of the power generated by braking with the LSM's. Which I think is pretty daft, they have an optional extra that will take that excess power and return it to the net or their energy storage system which is a massive flywheel. Nothing about super capacitors as I was talking about...
Also the original document was written in 2002, with the revision found on-line is from 2006. So who knows how much they have added since they first opened StE and ToT, these developments regenerative braking and energy storage may have been engineered later on, so they might not be a part of the drive system on those coasters. But I would also guess that they could have been added later on as upgrades to make the ride more energy efficient...

Have a read through the document, since it's pretty interesting: http://www.intrasys-gmbh.com/at/LSM_0205.pdf
 
I guess both coasters and wind turbines go in the category of "tall, noisy and generally in the way", so I guess there would be no harm in building a wind turbine in a park. Next to the coasters, that is. If you've already got approval for building a huge noisy steel structure on your land, why not put up a couple more, which actually save money/the environment? Easy to get sponsored, and imagine the advertising factor!
 
^But if you already have lots of 'steel structures' then why not use them to support the turbine?

Imagine a wind turbine next to KK or TTD with a viewing platform...
 
^Because both of them will produce their own vibrations, and neither are built to withstand the vibrations of the other. It's better then to have them as separate structures (Expedition Everest would be an example of this in action. The coaster, the mountain and the yeti all have their separate structures intertwining with each other. As a result of this, they couldn't repair the yeti once it broke without taking down the entire mountain AND the coaster).
 
^I think that depends on what frequency you're talking about. Either way, a coaster is generally quiet at night. Wind turbines make a steady hum around the clock.
 
CoasterCrazy said:
^But if you already have lots of 'steel structures' then why not use them to support the turbine?

Imagine a wind turbine next to KK or TTD with a viewing platform...
Click to expand...
Wind turbines need to be clear of nearby structures, because these weaken the flow of wind going through the turbine.
 
Pokemaniac said:
^I think that depends on what frequency you're talking about. Either way, a coaster is generally quiet at night. Wind turbines make a steady hum around the clock.
Click to expand...

It's not nearly as loud as a lot of people think... There's 17 of them at one of the local casinos, and even standing 50ft. from one the humm is light.
 
Oh, I got an idea!

Lets attach a mini wind-turbine to TTD's train! Maybe we should build a dam on Loggers Leap! Oh even better, lets rebuild Intimidator 305 completely out of solar-powered track!

Seriously, I like what you're trying to do with this topic, but this is one step closer to an excuse for eco-nutters to start hitting on the theme park industry...

I honestly thought this topic would be related to Wild Eagle, but I guess not. :(

I'd love to see them transform a wind turbine into a flat ride though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top