Slashdot Mirror


Fiber Optics Bring the Sun Indoors

Sterling D. Allan writes "Fiber optics transmit light, so why not take the light from outside and transmit it inside? According to an exclusive story at PESN, that is what Tennessee company, Sunlight Direct, is now doing. Their 4-foot-diameter solar dish will light 1000 square feet inside -- minus the harmful UV rays -- rendering a more natural lighting feel, which can be hybridized with florescent and possibly LED lighting to provide a constant light level, though the tone changes with the level of light outside. The GPS-based sun-tracking mechanism uses very little energy. Now you can save electricity, cut on heat emissions by incandescent, and improve the feel of your work environment. Beta testing began in June. Product expected in the market in 2007."

45 of 377 comments (clear)

  1. no by fmobus · · Score: 5, Funny

    we don't need light in our basements!! FP?

    1. Re:no by chiok · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think you meant "we don't need light in our parents' basements!!" This is slashdot after all.

  2. Very cool by JasonBee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the Australian interior (Coober Pedy and Lightning Ridge) they build many homes undergound...thsi kinds of thing would be perfect. Natural air conditioning and natural light sources.

    1. Re:Very cool by yobbo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This will be handy in the cities as well. A common problem with converting old office space to residential uses is the inability to get sufficient sunlight deep into the building. This technology could help alleviate the problem.

    2. Re:Very cool by melikamp · · Score: 5, Funny

      If we cover the Earth with enough quality fiber, we can probably channel sunlight 24/7 from the light to the dark side. I cannot imagine if that is ever going to become practical, but it sure sounds great for the environment.

    3. Re:Very cool by Radio+Shack+Robot · · Score: 3, Funny

      I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --

      Beep. Boop. Beep. You have questions. I have answers and your home address.
  3. Old News by sakusha · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Ark Mori Building in Tokyo had a fiber optic solar light distribution system installed something like 10 years ago. I remember seeing a video of the system. It's been out for 10 years, but nobody did anything to follow it. My conclusion: it's worthless.

    1. Re:Old News by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There's also a "more traditional" system that I've been seeing at the Home and Garden shows for a few years now. It's a small (about 8" diameter) clear dome 'skylight' mounted in the roof. It caps an ordinary round sheet metal duct that leads straight down into the home. The ductwork is lined with a reflective mylar sheet, making it a mirrored pipe. The inside end is pointed at a translucent diffuser. From inside the house, it looks like an ordinary recessed can light.

      Ultra low tech (no fibers) but it produces very nicely colored light in an interior room. I thought they were too pricey, though. Then I saw this article, where they want $8000! Wow.

      --
      John
    2. Re:Old News by sirket · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not worthless. The system works amazingly well. The problem? Cost. Fiber optics and installation were not cheap- at least when the Ark Mori building was built. These days however? Costs have plummeted and energy costs have risen. It is an ideal time for this system to make a comeback. And the light quality? Amazing from what I heard from a friend who visited the building while she was working in Japan.

      -sirket

    3. Re:Old News by pchan- · · Score: 4, Informative

      My parents have one of these in their kitchen. Works very well, actually, and the light is very white and pleasant. This is much better than a skylight for several reasons. The first is that the light is not directional, but very diffuse, giving good light all over. Second, you don't really have to clean the dome. Third, it goes through your insulation, and is sealed at both ends, keeping a decent separation of you from the hot/cold. Finally, it's pretty small and easy to install yourself if you're handy with a caulk gun. I'd definitely get one of these if I had a house.

      I've seen the Mori Building solar collectors (on TV). The idea was that they could transport natural light into areas of the building that are not near windows, and that sunlight seems to make people happier. And they didn't need GPS to do it because the sun is, y'know, fairly predicable.

    4. Re:Old News by starfishsystems · · Score: 4, Informative
      Ordinary reflective materials like mylar are quite lossy. That's not a big problem when the light path is fairly straight and only a few meters long, which I expect would be true in many residential applications. But if you want to go long distances or direct a lot of light energy around corners, you would need more efficient transmission.

      But you're right that light fibers aren't exactly big news for illumination. And they're not the only medium with low transmission losses, either. About 20 years ago, a friend of mine started up a company called TIR Systems to commercialize a light pipe technology that he developed in grad school. It works approximately like optical fiber but the prism light guide is much larger, and also requires less elaborate manufacture. The early materials that I saw were pressed out of large slabs of acrylic or something. At any rate, it seems much better suited to architectural application than bundles of optical fiber. And that's old news too.

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
    5. Re:Old News by Ray+Radlein · · Score: 4, Informative
      Never mind newcomers to the concept like the Aki Mori Buidling; if you want a real "Old News" version of it, look no further than Frank Lloyd Wright's Johnson Wax Heqadquarters, finished in 1939, which used Pyrex tubes to bring light inside the building.

      Of course, as (almost) always, Wright's vision was just a wee bit ahead of the materials science of the day; the whole setup used to leak like crazy. But what the hell -- it sure was gangbusters back in 1939, when the future was invented.

  4. Sounds like advertisement to me by helioquake · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A guy who works at "Pure Energy System" posts exclusive article posted on PESN (Pure Energy System News)? Isn't that the same as a free ad?

    Not that anything wrong with that...

    1. Re:Sounds like advertisement to me by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      " Isn't that the same as a free ad?"

      Funny how this question didn't come up while Slashdot was ooo'ing and aaah'ing over the Serenity teaser.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  5. step in the right direction by porksoda · · Score: 4, Insightful

    now slap some fucking soil and grass and trees on those concrete roofs and we're in business.

  6. Skylights are nice by ReformedExCon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even when raining, the outdoor light feels much more comfortable and natural than indoor incandescent lightbulbs. I imagine the idea has been around since Gog the Hut Thatcher fell through one of his creations and the hut owners just left the hole in the roof.

    Nowadays, they've got a nice system where the light is guided through a reflective tube that can be directed to any room in the house.

    http://www.solatube.com/

    It was only natural that the techonology would progress to where we are splitting the sunshine into fiber optics and redirecting them all over the house. However, 2007 is a pretty long way off for what seems to be a relatively simple application of existing technologies.

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
  7. These have been around for a while... by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I remember seeing pictures of these on Japanese office buildings in the early 80s. They were called "Sunflowers", and they were mostly prototypes I think, and had a honeycomb set of collectors which piped the sunlight into the building.

  8. Photonic Storage? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is there any way to store the photons in sunlight? Not convert them to electrons, then reemit them, but "trap" the photons in some medium, then emit them at some arbitrary later date? Without transforming some amount of their energy to heat or other mechanical energy. For retransmission later, like when the sun goes down.

    Maybe a nanomaze of fiber, a few wavelengths in diameter, twisting its way around inside a cubic centimeter? If such a "photon trap" were millions of meters in length, it might be able to absorb photons for a while, before the first ones trapped finally made their way around the loop to the surface, during which time the trap could be closed (with a mirror, cycling the photons through the circuit until it was opened again. Or maybe an input window that's mirrored only on the inside, trapping photons continuously, until another mirrored facet is removed. Or a spiral maze of MEMs mirrors which send light around the cycle, until one is tilted away from the cycle, towards the output.

    Is there any kind of work on "photonic storage"?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Photonic Storage? by renehollan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Google for Slow Glass.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    2. Re:Photonic Storage? by deglr6328 · · Score: 3, Informative

      In short. No. The trouble is in the absorption of photons by your reflective trap. See, even the most perfectly reflective surfaces we're capable of making (~99.999% reflective) are not good enough to do this. There is a technique for measuring the reflectivity of these (VERY) expensive mirrors called cavity ring-down where a laser pulse is injected into a cavity created with a highly reflective mirror and you watch how quickly that light pulse decays and this tells you very accurately the reflectivity of the thing. After only some tens of microseconds you are left with mere fractions of a percent of your original pulse. So in short, even with super reflective walls, your photon storage unit will still very efficiently convert those initial photons to heat in short order.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    3. Re:Photonic Storage? by Alomex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How do you get the light in? The refractive index of glass is such that the angle of an incident light beam gets closer to normal (perpendicular to the interface plane), compared to the source.

      This is a geometric problem which has been solved by mathematicians. The light trap looks like an egg with part of the lateral wall removed. The "egg" itself is made of portions of a paraboloid and an ellipsoid. The light gets trapped in the ellipsoid, bouncing on a trajectory ever closer to the major axis of the ellipsoid, i.e. the line joining the foci.

    4. Re:Photonic Storage? by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are methods of storing photonic energy (is that a real term?) as chemical energy. It is called glow paint ;~) But yeah, I think that falls under 'convert to electrons', or close.

      Seriously though, there is no possible way to do what you want using mirrors, because there is no perfect mirror. And saying 'fiber' just means using mirrors (fiber reflects light down its length). What you want would be a lossless (or really damned close to lossless) method of focusing light: that method is gravity. One could conceive of (probably not implement though) a system where you had a perfect gravitational loop (e.g. by moving stars around to suit your purpose) and one could add light into this loop by aiming a laser properly, or a deft us of mirrors (you would only use the mirror for one reflection, gravity does the rest).

      The reason this wouldn't REALLY work is that while light (photons) doesn't/don't have mass, it has momentum. So changing the direction of a whole boat load of photons would in fact wreak havoc on the perfect circle of a gravity well you created (the stars would be moved). I think. That, and good luck moving stars around ;~)

      So, short answer to second paragraph: Won't ever work. Cool thought though.

      Short answer to first paragraph: It's called a black hole :~) And you CAN get the energy back. But probably not in the same frequency of light that went in.

      But then, if we have a stable black hole to play with, we certainly would have no need of storing photons :~) Toss in a bit of matter, catch the high-energy radiation as it gets ripped to shreds, convert to as much energy as you could possibly desire. More efficient than matter-antimatter, and far more efficient than a fusion reaction. I have about a 60% certainty level on the matter-antimatter part of that statement; verification would be wonderful. I can't remember where I read it, if in fact I really did :~)

      Cheers

  9. Re:Filter the UV rays by shobadobs · · Score: 5, Funny

    RTFS!

    God. Why does stupidity exponentiate when people desire to get an early post on a story?

  10. Re:Filter the UV rays by IconBasedIdea · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Both the first paragraph of the article AND the description answer your concerns about harmful rays. Good job paying attention...

  11. Re:Filter the UV rays by bobhagopian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why is a company that chooses not to filter UV any more liable than a government that chooses not to install a giant pair of Oakley sunglasses over the entire U.S.? I agree that filtering UV is a very, very good idea, but I don't see why not doing so merits a lawsuit.

    Incidentally, the most efficiency you can hope to acheive with a solar panel is around 10% or so, and even that's an optimistic estimate I believe.

  12. That's why it's called 'natural light' by maxrate · · Score: 5, Informative
    There is a reason why it's called 'natural light', because it's natural, not artificial.

    I moved my office from a building where we had NO windows. Productivity has gone up tremendously. We don't feel as worn out at the end of the day, and we don't feel like we missed out on anything.

    I saw this on the Discovery channel, and it's fantastic for commerical space as you can distribute 'natural' light all over the office where windows can't be located. It saves on energy use as well. As yes, there are UV filters.

    I wish it was a little more affordable, i'd do it in a heart beat.

  13. Freakin Laser Beams by maxrate · · Score: 5, Funny

    Blast a thinkgeek laser beam in reverse from your cubicle fiber port and wake up some alien race.

  14. During the cold war... by Rhinobird · · Score: 5, Funny

    During the cold war there was much competition between American and Russian office productivity. The Americans spent millions delevoping a system to direct sunlight into buildings. It was awesome in its capabilities. The sun tracker used very little energy, the interior of the building was laced with miles of fiber optic cabling. All in all a wonder of modern engineering triumph.

    When face with a similar problem, the Soviets used a "window".

    --
    If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
  15. This is not exactly news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Here's an article from 1999, which notes:
    "Sound like science fiction? It's not. One such product, the
    Himawari, has been commercially available for nearly 15 years ..."

    http://www.sun-tek.com/Docs/ArticleDaylighting.htm

    Slashdot: 20-year-old news for nerds. Sigh.

  16. The author also wrote about alien technology! by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not to bash this solar lighting system or anything, but the author of the article is a bit of a nutcase-- she wrote a whole article about how we're all doomed because of the impending Magnetic Field Revesal, and another article about a scientist was killed in a conspiratorial fashion because of his "new energy" discoveries, which apparently came from space aliens.

    So take this article with a big grain of alien-free salt.

  17. It does... by KingSkippus · · Score: 3, Informative

    The article specifically says that it does:

    The system's 48-inch primary mirror concentrates light into a secondary mirror, which strips away the infrared and ultraviolet components, and directs the visible light into the receiver.

    As for the solar panels, I would think that they'd be a lot more expensive. (Disclaimer: I haven't actually checked.) The systems I've seen require large banks of batteries to store power, and there are a lot of expensive system components.

    One nice thing about solar lighting is that there's really not much else other than a mirror and a bunch of fiber optic cables. It's a pretty simple system made of relatively cheap parts.

    Also, one of the selling points of the company's Web site is that the lighting is all natural, not artificial, which is supposedly preferable for happy attitudes and such.

    Of course, not having any lights at night or on cloudy days would totally suck. The article mentions that the system can be integrated with supplimental artifical lighting. Perhaps a combination of solar panels and solar lighting would be the best system if one wants cheap, eco-friendly lighting that is also mostly natural for happy attitudes.

  18. I'll keep my windows thanks. by sdfad1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Errr, wait a minute, something's not right here. First we build a structure- wind, quake, water, sun, (and even fire)-proof, then we build another gadget to bring the sun into our buildings. I'm no architect, but the buildings we can see all around us are convincing proof that we can ensure natural sunlight reaches most parts of the interior of our buildings - we have sun roofs, open areas, North facing buildings (in the Southern hemisphere), even simple windows.

    This gadget is just a bunch of boys' toy, and will be forgotten in a few years. I suggest we pay more attention to the architects who are building our environments to ensure we never need such devices in the first place. A bit of design in the beginning saves plenty of effort later. For example, you won't need to crack your brains figuring out safety regulations, building codes and installation hassles for a fibre optics light and heat guide...

    1. Re:I'll keep my windows thanks. by erbmjw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not all buildings can ensure that natural light will get in as far as you might think. Even taking into account multiple windows, sun roofs, solar pipes and the building's facing. Then take into account multi-floor buildings like offices and malls. Products like these can bring more natural light further into large area buildings easier than normal windows and will likely cause less structural problems and maintanece than multiple skylights and solar pipes. Not that I am endorsing this particular product. Oh and, No I'm not an architect ... my wife is :)

  19. Arcology lighting by davedx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This would be fantastic for lighting the insides of Arcologies. Something I've always thought was a big negative for city sized buildings is whereas you have a huge volume for everything you have relatively less surface area for windows, and as someone else posted here lack of natural light can be really bad for you... in a large-sized arcology you'd have huge sections with no windows...

    Just a random thought on an application.

    --
    "This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time."
  20. sun blocking machine by RevengeOfPoopJuggler · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's just more ransom money in my pocket when I complete my sun-blocking machine...

  21. Let's do some maths. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    $US8000 for one of these systems, capable of lighting 1000 square feet. That's $US8 per square foot; I'm Australian, so let's work in Australian dollars: around $10 Australian per square foot. A typical fluorescent light bulb (to replace an incandescent bulb) uses 15 watts of electricity.

    Looking at my latest electricity bill, I'm charged 13 cents (Australian, roughly) per kilowatt hour. Ten dollars is 77 kilowatt hours; that's equivalent to running one of those things for 5,000 hours (again, roughly).

    Working period is 8 hours a day, five days a week -- forty hours a week. 5,000 hours is therefore 125 weeks, or about two and a half years. Multiply that figure by the number of square feet a standard bulb can illuminate (it'd be, what, about 50 square feet at a guess?), and you have a break-even point of 125 years.

    If they're replacing incandescent bulbs (which use four times the electricity), break even comes down to about 30 years.

    Points to consider:

    1. My pricing for electricity is residential rates. Industrial and commercial rates are probably different. Anybody have solid figures?
    2. I'm guessing with the 50 square feet per bulb. If a bulb can light more area, the time to breakeven increases accordingly. If less, it decreases.
    3. Businesses typically use fluorescent tubes, not bulb replacements. I don't know how much energy those use, nor how much area they can light.
    4. Does this price include installation? If not, there's an added expense before break even is reached.
    5. You'll also need other lighting to supplement this system on badly overcast days, and at night, reducing the payoff.
    The price will have to drop a bit based upon my back-of-the-envelope calculations before this becomes viable. If anybody has better figures than the ones I've given, please, speak up -- I'm genuinely curious. In particular, I don't know how much electricity costs a business in the USA; that is the single biggest factor in determining payoff time.
  22. GPS Tracking? by uberdave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why would they need GPS tracking? It's not like the building is going to move. I suppose they are using the time/date signal to compute where point the dish. Good luck fumbling around in the dark when the military scrambles the GPS in response to a terrorist threat though. Why don't they simply use a set of phototransistors instead, no computing required?

  23. Geomagnetic reversal happens, but aliens don't by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Informative
    she wrote a whole article about how we're all doomed because of the impending Magnetic Field Revesal

    a)the earth's magnetic field does reverse every so often, b)we're overdue (by a huge margin) and c)we probably would be slightly fucked, because during the flip, we'd have no protection from cosmic and solar radiation.

    NOVA

    Wikipedia Article on Geomagnetic Reversal

    As for the aliens- yep, she's off her rocker on that one, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    1. Re:Geomagnetic reversal happens, but aliens don't by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sure, the field will reverse some day. But what does that have to do with alternative energy sources?

      I can prepare for Magnetic Field Reversal like I can prepare for a really big comet-earth collision. I'd rather focus on the more likely tangable problems.

      In my experience, Magnetic Field Reversal is a story mostly used by crackpots to sell survival equipment.

      I went to College with people who fled to the hills to prepare for the eventual Magnetic Field Reversal-- that was supposed to happen around year 2000 (I told them that magnets don't follow the Christian calendar) Now it hasn't happened, so they moved the date to 2012, which is a signifigant date on the Mayan calendar.

      In High School, I knew people who stocked up on supplies to prepare for Revelations, which they thought would start in 1996.

      I'm not kidding.

    2. Re:Geomagnetic reversal happens, but aliens don't by bm_luethke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One can pretty much conclusivly say that we aren't that fucked - why you ask? Well, it has happened so many times in the Earths history (while we had life on the planet) that if we are "fucked" we wouldn't be here discussing it.

      This reminds me of what we were taught in middle school and high school (I graduated in 1993). That the entire lifecycle of many plants were dependant on the honey bee to polenate and continue to breed in a diverse enough fashion to live. If they died off then the plants couldn't breed, plants would die, oxygen would not be produced, and we would all die, or at least become a desert as the plants couldn't breed. Now, since we still had honey bees I couldn't say this was wrong, though I figured that if the entire ecosystem depended on a single species we wouldn't have made it to now and was quite sceptical.

      Well, in about 2000 there was a mutation in some type of bacteria that pretty much eliminated the honey bee in a large part of the south east US (just now recovering from it somewhat, since 2000 I've seen less than 10 honey bees, 6 of them this year - typically we would not really want to walk barefoot for fear of stepping on them). Now, since I am still sitting here typing this I can assure you that all of our plants didn't die. Since I still see plenty of clover and flowers I can figure that the whole world didn't depend on the life of the honey bee. Seems we were either lied too or thier research was vastly flawed.

      I highly suspect (but because it hasn't occured I can't say for sure) that an event that has happened thousands upon thousands of times will not cause the total collapse of the entire ecosytem and mass destruction (unless, of course, you can show it did everytime this occured).

      Personally I wouldn't worry about it too much even were it to happen in our lifetime, but what ever floats your boat I guess. Maybe I'm wrong and this time the timid ant-mouse (or whatever species, genus, or family is key) will die off and that is the key to our entire ecosystem and we will all die. I can't say you are wrong until that event happens, until then I will look to the past and be reassured.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
  24. Coober Pedy, AUSTL: 29s01, 134e43 by weighn · · Score: 5, Funny

    sorry I couldn't see it on maps.google - probably due to the buildings all being underground :)

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  25. Here's a thought by dtfinch · · Score: 3, Funny

    Install some glass windows and skylights. More sunlight for a fraction of the price. Want to be able to turn it off? Just install some blinds.

  26. Yeah... as if windows were out of fashion. by Vo0k · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know, using thermonuclear fusion to desalinize water in oceans and use it for watering agricultural terrains is pretty old too. It's called rain.

    --
    Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  27. Re:This is new? by Baby+Duck · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, the Japanese called this "piped sunlight" and was featured on the early 80s TV show "Ripley's Believe It Or Not" hosted by Jack Palance.

    It was also used to grow gargantuan tomato plants. Like bigger than twice my house.

    --

    "Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins

  28. Re:This is new? by Baby+Duck · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ah, yes, I should have googled this first.

    Particularly interesting experiments were conducted by the late Dr. Kei Mori of Kao University in Tokyo. Dr. Mori raised plants under special light that filtered out IR and UV radiation. His unique process of fiberoptic sunlight collection and transmission, called "Himawari Sunlighting", is now marketed worldwide. At first Mori feared the filtered light would be detrimental. But after extensive experiments he claimed it could promote healing and "because the ultraviolet is blocked, this sunlight does not fade fabrics or damage skin." (Gilmore, Elaine, "Sunflower over Tokyo," Popular Science, May 1988, p. 75.) One long-lived tomato plant was grown in a special nutrient-rich solution to be exhibited at the Japan Expo '85. Under piped sunlight and controlled atmosphere, this tomato tree grew over 30 ft high and yielded more than 13,000 ripe tomatoes during the six months of the Expo! (Hiroshi, Koichibara, "Tomatomation," UNESCO Courier, March 1987.)

    Read More ...
    --

    "Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins