Which Is Higher? Atlantic Ocean Or Pacific Ocean?

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Sea level doesn't really exist. It is a theoretic tool that enables relative comparisons

Duh. Nobody ever said that every piece of the Pacific is always at the exact same level.

Do you get your rocks off stating the obvious?

Were you drinking? That was very aggressive.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Though a difference of 6 metres over ~60 km is a dumbass way to generate hydro...

Surely the fall would happen right at the turbine/dam just as in a river?

[TCO]

Originally posted by GePap
IN fact, the locks are mainly to get ships high enough to traverse the Canal, which is at a higher level than either Oceans.

In essence, ships come from either side, get lifted to cross the artificial lake over the highlands, get to the other set of locks, they are brought down, and the trip continues.

I like those wheel things that move ships.

[TCO]

Let's blast a new canal through Nicaragua and have competition...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by TCO


Were you drinking? That was very aggressive.

I'm trying to be more like you.

[SpencerH]

Wouldnt the counterclockwise spin of the earth mean that all bodies of water would be higher on their east side (in direction of spin) than west (against spin). So, of course, looking at a cross section across the Isthmus of Panama the Pacific ocean will appear higherthan the Atlantic.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


I'm trying to be more like you.

Aaah...very tongue in cheek. You were actually making a point against me rather than the person involved.

[KrazyHorse]

Whyy? It's not like the earth's spin is accelerating...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by TCO


Surely the fall would happen right at the turbine/dam just as in a river?

Yes, but that means you have to transport all that water the 60 km across the isthmus.

[TCO]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Yes, but that means you have to transport all that water the 60 km across the isthmus.

Ever seen a lake behind a dam? Seriously the head loss in the channel will not be that high. (I mean look at the TVA lakes). Of course, the whole thing assumes a clear cut.

[Dis]

yes, most dams have lakes behind them. The level is pretty constant. It doesn't matter if the entire elevation is constant through 59.9 km. Just the act of releasing water through a dam (via the turbines of course) would create a void allowing water to fill the space recently vacated.

So yes you could have it completely level and then drop 6 m. I'm not exactly sure how much power that would create. There isn't much potential energy. But yet, you are essentually holding back an entire ocean. .

[Dis]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Wouldnt the counterclockwise spin of the earth mean that all bodies of water would be higher on their east side (in direction of spin) than west (against spin). So, of course, looking at a cross section across the Isthmus of Panama the Pacific ocean will appear higherthan the Atlantic.

The things that gets me is the oceans are connected at the bottom. The Indian is connected to the pacific, and the pacific is connected to the atlantic on the southern tip of s. america. And the atlantic is connected to the indian ocean via the tip of s. africa. You'd think the level would even out. But I guess I could see how the level could vary near the equater.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by TCO


Ever seen a lake behind a dam? Seriously the head loss in the channel will not be that high. (I mean look at the TVA lakes). Of course, the whole thing assumes a clear cut.

Exactly. All for a 6 metre gain.

The nuber of places you could put a hydro dam which wouldn't require such massive effort for such minimal reward is very large...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Dissident
yes, most dams have lakes behind them. The level is pretty constant. It doesn't matter if the entire elevation is constant through 59.9 km. Just the act of releasing water through a dam (via the turbines of course) would create a void allowing water to fill the space recently vacated.

So yes you could have it completely level and then drop 6 m. I'm not exactly sure how much power that would create. There isn't much potential energy. But yet, you are essentually holding back an entire ocean. .

Ocean or no ocean the water will only flow through at a rate which is proportional to the cross-sectional area of the narrowest point of the channel.

most hydro dams use a drop of something like 50 metres or more, and they don't involve tunnelling 60 km through a mountain range to do it.

[KrazyHorse]

Roughing out a few figures, even assuming no loss from interaction with walls of canal (assuming the water was accelerated instantaneously to its final velocity and that it managed to travel from one side of panama to the other without loss), if we kept the width and depth of the canal as it stands today, we would generate a maximum (assuming 100% efficiency of turbines) of 400 MW. For comparison purposes, the amount of hydro power generated by Niagara falls is something like 5000 MW