Slashdot Mirror


New Jersey Turnpike As a Power Source?

New Jersites writes "New Jersey, home of the eponymous Jersey barrier, is considering wind turbines powered by the breeze generated from traffic on the Jersey Turnpike. The wind turbines won't be built on the side of the highway. They will be built inside — what else? — the Jersey barriers. By replacing sections of solid concrete with Darius turbines, they might be able to harvest enough energy to power a light-rail line."

20 of 264 comments (clear)

  1. Drag? by Graham+MacRobie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not a physicist, but won't the turbines cause a drag effect on the cars, resulting in the cars burning more fuel? Is so, aren't they just moving the problem from one place to another? There's no such thing as free energy, right?

    Truly curious - I'd love an explanation if someone knows why this isn't the case.

    1. Re:Drag? by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah. Without the extra drag from the turbines, that "breeze" would be reducing drag on the cars. They're basically using cars as generators. Brilliant strategy there, given how inefficient ICEs are.

      --
      No, she's fine. My associate is vomiting for a totally unrelated reason.
    2. Re:Drag? by arivanov · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Absolutely. This is not a free energy at all. What I find more interesting is that the system uses the same turbine design as Quiet Revolution turbines. AFAIK this design is still under a couple of patents so they will have to shell out a very sizeable license fee. Pity Quiet Revolution is not public, this would have been a good time to play with its shares.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    3. Re:Drag? by deek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not a physicist, but won't the turbines cause a drag effect on the cars, resulting in the cars burning more fuel?


      You've got it right. The turbines would take energy from the air being pushed around by the cars, leading to the breeze around the car slowing down, and therefore exerting more drag on the car.

      At the same time, this is a rather ingenious way of creating a virtual toll for roads. If the power gathered is then invested into a public transport system, then you'll end up having drivers subsidise public transport. The fuel savings with public transport may well offset the extra fuel burnt through the turbine induced drag.

    4. Re:Drag? by dbIII · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yes, insightful for a given value of insight - however moving the turbines a short distance away from the things instead of doing something stupid will give you both the wind to spin the turbines and no extra drag on the vehicles. Ducting is also possible to get a lot of wind to the turbines if they are far away without reflecting much back on to the vehicles.

      I know it's not exactly high school stuff but if you think of it as simple 2D water flow it still is not difficult - the ripples from an obstruction only travel a finite distance upstream.

    5. Re:Drag? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 5, Funny

      A better idea would be to try to harness the anger and frustration of those of us who drive the NJ Turnpike. You could really support the power grid with all that wasted energy.

    6. Re:Drag? by Alioth · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not quite.

      The air moved around by the cars is being absorbed and dissipated anyway by the objects surrounding the road. All the turbines will do is instead of the airflow from the cars going to swish the surrounding grass, trees and bushes - it'll spin a turbine. The energy is already being absorbed by the surrounds of the road.

      It's like putting a turbine over a kettle - you won't cause the kettle to use more energy to boil the water by allowing the steam coming from it to pass through a turbine - you'll just extract some of the energy that otherwise would have been used up by the environment of the kettle.

      If it's designed correctly, it won't increase drag.

    7. Re:Drag? by name*censored* · · Score: 4, Funny
      >>A better idea would be to try to harness the anger and frustration of those of us who drive the NJ Turnpike. You could really >>support the power grid with all that wasted energy.

      >>but won't the turbines cause a drag effect on the cars, resulting in the cars burning more fuel? Is so, aren't they just >>moving the problem from one place to another? There's no such thing as free energy, right?

      Putting two and two together.. wouldn't harnessing the anger make people ANGRIER? There's no such thing as free anger!
      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
  2. Finally... by ZiakII · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finally something I have to be proud about in NJ besides the Devils....

  3. yawn by User+956 · · Score: 4, Funny

    y replacing sections of solid concrete with Darius turbines, they might be able to harvest enough energy to power a light-rail line.

    That's boring. Wake me up when they can power a light rail gun.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  4. Why's the train not running? by rmadhuram · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh wait, there's a traffic jam!

  5. The barriers are supposed to be solid. by deopmix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This might work until somebody decides to use the barriers for their original purpose(separating traffic). When the Powers That Be realize that the only thing separating two lanes of traffic moving at each other at 140 mph is a few turbines they may decide that this is a Bad Idea.

  6. An excuse for speeding... by xrapidx · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...this will create a good excuse when pullled over for speeding . You were only trying to do your part to power the light-rail line.

  7. Drag's not the full story. by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The energy must come from somewhere, so it must be ultimately coming from the gas powered car. However, if it is being taken in the right way it is energy that would otherwise be converted into waste heat/sound.

    In other words, if the car drag is causing a wind of sorts, that wind would normally dissipate its energy as friction against the surfaces it blows along - causing the energy top be lost as heat. Now we're just providing an alternative energy soak that extracts the useful enrgy.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  8. "New" Jersey Barriers by Akron · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before everyone decides to start bashing good ole NJ. I would like to point out that the actual article says nothing about the NJ Turnpike. The current concrete barriers are called Jersey barriers, and all we have here is a new barrier with turbines...thus the name "NEW" Jersey Barrier.

  9. Yes: Drag. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Informative

    But the cars are the wind generators, not the turbines. If a turbine generated any significant wind itself, then it wouldn't be a very effective generator, would it?

    The stream of cars generates an air motion along their path. Like geese (though through a different mechanism) the leading cars reduce the amount of air drag experienced by following cars. This improves their fuel economy. (The phenomenon is even more pronounced with semi-trucks. "Drafting": following another truck closely to save even more fuel, is a common practice.

    A smooth central barrier separating the two directions of traffic improves the situation by letting the two sides of the freeway have separate airstreams traveling in opposite directions. The barrier reduces energy lost to turbulence, improving the airflow.

    Replacing the barrier with turbines will suck energy out of the air streams on both sides to generate electricity. The result will be to decelerate the airstreams that had been giving following vehicles an advantage.

    While some of the power comes from captured crosswinds and some from capturing energy that would have been lost to turbulence anyhow, a large portion of it comes from increasing the drag on following vehicles by putting friction on the "following wind": Fuel economy for the trailing vehicles in a bunch is reduced to something near that of lone or leading vehicles.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  10. But there's plenty of power to be had higher by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Informative

    By the way:

    There's PLENTY of power to be had WITHOUT disrupting the traffic airflow and canabalizing the fuel of the cars.

    A freeway or toll road is a clear area and there will be plenty of winds ABOVE it that are essentially unrelated to the airflow near the ground. They're also faster - with energy going up with the CUBE of the airspeed.

    By building a wind turbine that starts significantly above the ground the turbines can avoid disturbing the flow at traffic level while collecting plenty of energy.

    Also: A Darrieus wants linear airflow THROUGH it. It would be great for salvaging power from crosswind, but rotten for snagging power from opposing winds on the two sides of its axes.

    And they're a major hazard: Darrieus turbines fly at tip speeds of about 7 times the wind speed and their narrow blades experience drag loads about equivalent to a wind barrier with a cross-section the size of the swept area - reversing twice per rotation. This has tended to produce fatigue in their materials, sometimes ending with the mill coming apart in high winds some years after construction, with massive pieces flying around at a goodly fraction of the speed of sound.

    A savonius-derived design (like the Sandia configuration) would be a better choice. Though it only collects about 2/3s as much power for a given swept area, it rotates at about an eighth the speed and has broad blades that can be much more solidly constructed.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  11. Rediculus by rizole · · Score: 5, Funny

    As has been pointed out already this is a stupid idea. It would make much more sense to put the turbine on the train so it's forward motion can generate electricity. That way the train is self powering. Much greener.

  12. Re:Yes: Drag. by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 4, Funny

    The phenomenon is even more pronounced with semi-trucks. "Drafting": following another truck closely to save even more fuel, is a common practice.
    I assume this aerodynamic phenomenon miraculously turns into a cushion in the event that the truck in front has to stop real damn quick?
    --
    Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  13. Newsflash! by fury88 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Tonight at 11. Commuters leave roadways to ride new rail. Not enough power to run the rail."