Yes,there are many water falls and dams worldwide,natural and artificial.

The biggest falls under water,with falling heights up to several thousands meters and huge water mass : beside Groenland/Gibraltar.

                                    But there are several doubts about mobility and portability .

To get a water powered engine http://www.overunity.com/watermotor/index.htm is not the problem,
to get a complete energy transforming device,
which gives a "total system OU-performance" under generator/consumer no-load/half-/full-load and poor bemf is more complex,
including the load inrush current phase.


"How get the electron gas (= Plasma,electricity) stimulated to reach a total system OU break-even !?? "
L.A.S.E.R.,M.A.S.E.R.

What happens on the surface from photo-/phono-voltaic cells and on/in the npn pnp-layer ? chain reaction : electron gas flow

What happens on/in a coil/foil (un-/treated(coated) ?

To All"   I will try to explain this as simply  as I can and as I have envisioned it.   
Forget the water buckets for now.  I am starting with a set of weights, separated by a little bit from each other.  I am using those weights to force a step up gear system to run a generator at optimal speed so as to maximize the output power.   I am getting say 5,000 watts from this driving weight to electrical power ratio.  As long as the weight stays the same I will be running the generator the same speed and the power output will remain the same.  Now when the first weight  gets to the bottom it must be sent back to the top and reapplied to the system to continue the same operative functions, and the power to do that is built into the system through the weights already on the rotating line.  It has all the weight it needs on one side to make every thing run and enough weight to also bring the bottomed out weight back up to the top on the other side with a fast motion so no loss in rotation from weighted side has occurred.   Perfectly balanced and choreographed motion.
  Now In my perfectly balanced system I would not need any power to send the weight back up to the top because it would already be in the initial weight plan allowing for that motion to occur.  Thus, at that point it would be self rotation (or self sustaining).  But, since I have losses, which all of you have pointed out, being caused by the "work", (such as drag from the gears, chains, bearings, gravity, etc.) the system must be supplemented to compensate for those losses to keep the system operating  or the weights will not be able to keep up with the losses and the operation will slowly come to a stop. 
 Now enters  the generator which is steadily putting out 5,000 watts of power with nothing to do.  Just wasting away.  I propose to utilize that power to compensate the losses of the system By having it add as much more weight to the system as it should need to keep it moving at its designated speed.  (say for imaginative purposes, filling  a bag of sand or whatever at the moment of need and adding it to the weighted side).
 So I have adjusted my first balanced system plan to allow for your imputed must do's.   ( Though to be honest, my simple brain cannot figure out why if the system is running itself throughout the whole process from the use of the weights why I would need to compensate anything.  It is already functioning through the full cycle). Repetitively from the weights.    I see that if I used the generator power I might get a drag effect from that as it try's to slow down from the draw.  That's one you might know of. 
Like I said in earlier post there are generators no with little or no cogging effect.  But if that was already built into the weights at start up then that would not be a factor. 
So I just don't get why you say it can't work. 
Say I was pulling a lunch wagon.  If he never fed me I would eventually have to stop.  But if the man kept feeding me I could keep pulling the wagon.   And If I could not pull the wagon due to not having enough muscle I would just add more muscle.    Same principle.

P.S.  I used the word conservative as in "preservative",  Not to use any more than is necessary to do a function.  And also to find the most efficient methods and materials available to create as little drag  on the system as possible.
Webby1:
Back to the water buckets. 
 Your idea of just one pump is very practical and (conservative).  I could have enough starting weight driving the system to allow for more water going back up than necessary and just bleed off the unnecessary amount  and there by sustain the system without stealing from the generators power.   

Water is easy to work with.  So I chose water to power the system through a bucket conveyor.  It is easier than moving solid materials.  I can put any amount of water into a bucket system and have as much torque as I need for driving any "work" I need to.   I used a Rope pump assemble  to draw water to the top to resupply the bucket system, also being powered by the bucket system.  So if I need more water to maintain the system at any point I feel I could just add more water weight in the buckets to power the extra need at the start.  Like I said it all starts with more than enough water driving force to supply the motion of the assembly.  The buckets also are driving the step up gears which in turn are driving the generator.  So all the power from the buckets are driving the entire system completely.  AND a little extra water coming to the top from the initial power drive to enable fine tuning the systems needs. 
So if you say it won't work then we stand at a point of disagreement, only a build will cure. 
     

I gave up on this 4 years ago.. and so it's back .. I hope it will work as to "your" formulation...

 Why the GAIA ROSCH buoyancy power plant
 (kinetic power plant) will never work
 
 
 
http://gaia.ws1.eu/mmr_en.php
 
 
http://gaia.ws1.eu/index_en.php
 
http://www.overunity.de/1797/rosch-auftriebskraftwerk-gaia-auftriebs-kraftwerk-wie-es-funktioniert/3585/
 
Acca..
 
p.s. It’s the numbers …that are real..
 
 However if you use a permanent magnet rotor generator China type.. Strange effects happen … Who knows ?? [/font]

Cogging is just a result of uneven distribution of forces. Cogging or not does not change the final outcome.


Vidar

Sorry again but it can't work.  The water pressure at the bottom of the tank will force the water back up the tube instead of letting the air flow out to fill the buckets.  Also air will flow into the tube that is supposed to be filling the buckets and this will then let the water in the higher side flow over to the other side and out onto the floor.

Get a container of water and a plastic disposable cup.  Fill the cup completely full of water and then with the open end down raise it until most of the cup is above the water level.  Now poke a small hole in the cup down from the top a little.  Watch what happens.  Did water flow out of the hole?  Did air go into the hole and water ran out the open end of the cup?

I admire you wanting to do something and you have some original ideas but you really need to get an education in basic physics.  I am sure there are some online classes you could take to help you.

Respectfully,
Carroll

citfta:   I just did a remodel according to your specification of the problem areas.  I know you all think it won't work any way but I did address your issues.  Scan 22 is the fix.   Thanks.

bw100007; 
      Yes I think I addressed that issue of back flow with a ball valve.  I just didn't put it in the drawing.  It is just a basic sketch.  I figured I would get more thoughts and decided to wait for further impute before doing a final draft.  I think I will go with a back ward curved, radial type impeller blade centrifugal pump.  And as you say, a one way valve, or else the water will just flow (equalize) down and out the open end of the tank. 
      I don't see how an Archimedes screw can be sealed good enough.  Well maybe, if I had it totally submerged and it only forced water through the pipe with a one way valve to stop the air sucking back in.  Possible.  But that is doing the same thing as the centrifugal pump but longer application. 
      I will use the power of the water buckets  to drive the water pump.  I can set up a system similar to  bicycle step up gearing to get proper rpm on the pump and so by doing that, get the needed  flow rate of water to refill the buckets. 
      I already addressed the leveling effect of water already.   I also did not put a one way valve on the air pump side in the sketch as yet either. 
      It is going to be difficult for me to draw up another total system sketch like my original starting design as I don't have,(as you can see), good skills in mechanical drafting.  But if no one has any further impute into my design and  or possible flaws, I will attempt to do one more complete revised sketch.  But, it will only be different in that I have  tried to enhance  the bucket line to maybe get more thrust with the addition of the extra tank.  Giving it an added air flow power enhancement.  AND, saving a lot of power by pumping the water from the top of the tank instead of the bottom, thus, saving a lot of wasteful energy with the water pump. 
       And I am dropping the rope pump assembly all together.  With the addition of the second tank It is not needed. 
       Still looking at the under water drag of the buckets.  By possibly using collapsible  buckets.  (Maybe leather bags).  To alleviate more of the under water drag.  I am trying to streamline it in every way I can. 
      The math is unknown in this system as yet.  There are to many things like water drag on the buckets.  How much actual lift you get from the air in the rising buckets. the loss due to gears and shafts,  the force needed to turn whatever generator you will be using, etc.  So I can only build the basic model and  see through experimentation how big and how many buckets it will require to run the system. 
       If I were as smart as  the majority of people on this site are,  I could probably get pretty close. 
     
     

Hi Brutus,

I didn't comment on your latest design because it is clear you refuse to believe that it will take just as much energy to get the water back to the top as you can get out of it falling.  And with the normal friction losses you will lose energy.  It doesn't really make any difference HOW you raise the water to the top it is still a losing situation.  You just can't beat gravity at it's own game.  But until you prove it to yourself I think the rest of us are wasting our time trying to convince you.  So I am done here.   Good luck.  I would love to see you prove all of us wrong but really don't think it will happen.

Carroll