Slashdot Mirror


Microwind Generator For Low Power Systems

An anonymous reader wrote in to say that "Shawn Frayne, has developed Windbelt, efficient, cheap lowpower wind generator built out of taut kite fabric." Everyone has seen the video where the suspension bridge is ripped apart by wind- his idea was to use the same thing to generate power. I doubt I'll be running my desktop off it any time soon, but it's a cool idea.

49 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Macro wind power: Kite Gen by Sub+Zero+992 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And now for a really interesting renewable energy concept: kite gen. Would have made Newton smile :)

    --
    They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security - Ben Franklin
    1. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Didn't read the linked web page, did we? Come on, admit it.
      Seems to me vtcodger was not commenting on the article at all, but on the technology mentioned in SubZero992's post.

    2. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by StarfishOne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are certainly not the only ones doing pioneering work in this field:

      Laddermill from the Technical University of Delft is also working on it for a number of years now:
      http://www.lr.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=8d16d19a-e942-45aa-9b52-48deb9312e92&lang=en

      Publications:
      http://www.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=fe263f84-29af-4010-8222-2f1112c8f223&lang=en

      The more alternatives for environmentally friendly energy sources the better! :)

    3. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by lostsatellite82 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I like the idea, it's nifty but I see at least one major flaw in it.

      This would cause a circle of death above the power plant. Nothing could fly there (birds, planes, etc.) without getting chopped to pieces by extremely high speed wires flying about. I know some people who have experience with wind farms and they always mention the problems with birds - and yes, I've heard the statistics on these numbers but look a little closer and with a grain of salt - so uncontrolled, high speed wires in my opinion are far less green than modern coal plants.

    4. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by wvmarle · · Score: 2, Informative

      Traditional wind farms (using wind turbines) are apparently not much of a problem for birds. I recall a study done years ago in The Netherlands, where some environmental protection group wanted to see how much damage the wind turbines were doing. The startling result: nearly nil! The explanaition: birds will not fly into the turbines because they are warned by the noise.

      Now how that would hold up with the kites I don't know. My only experience is with kiting at the beach: we could sometimes see seagulls make sudden movements to avoid our line. I don't think they can see it, possibly they can hear it. I've never had a seagull or other bird actually hit my line when kiting.

      Wouter.

    5. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by slim · · Score: 2, Informative

      I find it hard to see how this "kite" technology works. At such a height, any movement from the air foil would be diminished to a few degrees or less at the generator on the ground. Check this paper (PDF) about neural net / genetic algorithms for steering power kites.

      "The common element between current proposed traction kites applications is that
      the aerodynamic forces developed by the kite are transferred via the lines to perform
      work at near-ground level. This could be either the direct acceleration of large masses
      such as cargo ships, or the turning of a dynamo as the taut lines slowly spool out
      from a reel."

      For the reel dynamo, you'd have a power generating reeling out phase, and a power draining reeling in phase -- but for the latter phase you can depower the kite so you make an energy profit overall.

      I find the idea of massive cargo ships towed by arrays of huge power kites much more thrilling, however.

    6. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by Futile+Rhetoric · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's a bit of a stretch, simply because birds do not need to become smarter to avoid wind turbines, and because wind turbines do not form a huge hazard to bird populations. Over time, in the event that wind turbine use undergoes extensive growth, birds that tend to fly at greater heights might survive relatively longer and produce more offspring; the same argument goes for, say, birds that are relatively more apprehensive of mid-air movement -- and so on. The evolutionary path towards intelligence is anything but obvious; this much is evident from the lack of intelligent species in an otherwise abundantly variable collection -- and it's not like environmental hazards to living things are a new phenomenon.

    7. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by 0111+1110 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Birds are not noted for their advanced intelligence.
      Au contraire mon ami Aussi. Convinced yet?
      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    8. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Funny

      In the case of giant kites, one would hope they'd be warned by their eyes. But even if birds are getting killed by windmills and kites, at least they're mainly killing off the dumb and the weak. Sort of like air sharks. Eventually only the smart and/or skilled fliers will be left, aside from the odd case of down syndrome (pun intended), and this whole issue will be moot.

    9. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Awesome. This could also be used to capture electricity from lightning strikes!?!

    10. Re:Macro wind power: Kite Gen by Whiteox · · Score: 2, Informative

      Australian pigeons have been known to hitch a ride on cars going through Sydney city tunnels. Sp I don't see why birds can't avoid windmills.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
  2. Sub-100W generators are very interesting... by DamonHD · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...but it is not at all clear what their efficiency or $/Watt or manufacturing cost will be. Although absolute efficiency is maybe not critical for many applications given that the wind is free, cost is important in, for example, third-world deployments.

    See the discussion here for example: http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/10/13/9445/4984

    Much as I'm intrigued by this let's not get into perpetual motion machines nor "beating Betz" just yet! In particular the "30x as efficient as the best microturbines" claim in TFA is particularly suspect: I have a VAWT made from a cardboard cereal packet in my back garden that probably extracts 10% of the available energy.

    Rgds

    Damon

    --
    http://m.earth.org.uk/
    1. Re:Sub-100W generators are very interesting... by conureman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are you kidding? I could build one of those! Well, maybe. Anyways the cost is magnitudes different from what I saw, and it looks to be user-repairable. Probably doesn't kill birds, either. Regarding the claimed efficiencies, I am not a scientist, but I learned from Tesla that efficiency increases with frequency. That thing was humming.

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    2. Re:Sub-100W generators are very interesting... by Smidge204 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll steer clear of the efficiency claims, but the cost would definitely be a bargain.

      All thing else being considered equal, compare a modern turbine:
      -Mast
      -At least two (Usually three) airfoil blades (engineered composite materials)
      -Gearbox (fairly complex device)
      -Generator head (fairly complex device)

      To this thing:
      -Mast with gap in middle
      -Length of strong, flexible material (metal, plastic)
      -Permanent magnet
      -Coils of wire

      That's dead simple and could probably be supplied in kit form and assembled with absolutely minimum tools... like nothing but a large hex wrench.
      =Smidge=

    3. Re:Sub-100W generators are very interesting... by flyingfsck · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, the simplest way to build a wind generator, is to buy a 3 foot diameter 36V cooling fan for a large stationary diesel motor and mount that on a post. Add a big diode and hook it to a 12V battery. If you are a bit more careful, then add an over-voltage cut-out switch. To power a sea/lakeside cottage, this is all you need. A 36V fan will charge a 12V battery better in low wind (It won't ever get to 36V, not even in a storm with no load). The post bearing is just a pipe slid over the mast, it can be a loose fit, add some grease to eliminate squeaks, add a vane at the back and run the cable down loosely with a plug, so you can unwrap the wire once a month. KISS.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    4. Re:Sub-100W generators are very interesting... by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A modern wind turbine can also be supplied in kit form and assembled with absolutely minimal tools... like nothing but a large hex wrench.
       
      Yes, the parts are complex, but the interconnections between them are not.

  3. 'Taught' material? by Alicat1194 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What did they teach it? Um, Editors, I think the word you're looking for is 'taut'.

    --
    You can learn a lot about a person if you just take the time to inject them with sodium pentathol
  4. Units by springbox · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everyone has seen the video where the suspension bridge is ripped apart by wind- his idea was to use the same thing to generate power.

    So will the power output be measured in bridges per minute?

  5. Prior Art, 1964 by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    (In fiction at least) The Subways Of Tazoo, Colin Kapp, 1964. In the story, it was strings rather than ribbons. The story involves an alien race that killed themselves by climate change. Tsk, what science-fiction twaddle!

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  6. Dupe, sortof by Snefru2 · · Score: 2, Informative

    This turbine was one of the items mentioned few days ago on Slashdot in another post. See: http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/11/212243

  7. Wrong solution by bogaboga · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I wonder why [some] westerners always come up with their pet projects and think these projects will solve third world problems. To the shown apparatus generates too little power to be of any use at all.

    The only sure way to help countries of the third world is for countries like the US to open up their subsidized markets. The corn market in the US for example is subsidized to an extent of almost 10 billion dollars in 2005!

    If third world countries got just half of that market, a lot of lives would be changed.

    1. Re:Wrong solution by blahplusplus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "The only sure way to help countries of the third world is for countries like the US to open up their subsidized markets. The corn market in the US for example is subsidized to an extent of almost 10 billion dollars in 2005!"

      Subsidies are necessary, you're not thinking about how the world works. A country should never let a large proportion of it's food production all be outsourced. What happens in case of war or political/trade fallout? Yeah I thought so too. Whle free-market apologists will cry "protectionism" the US was BUILT by protectionists. They understood from gaining their independence that you need to have control over industries that are of strategic value in case of war/disagreement/embargo/etc.

    2. Re:Wrong solution by bogaboga · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A country should never let a large proportion of it's food production all be outsourced. What happens in case of war or political/trade fallout?

      Here is the problem: When the Australians, Japanese and Europeans do exactly that, the US screams "subsidies, subsidies, subsidies...", as if the US is any innocent.

    3. Re:Wrong solution by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A country should never let a large proportion of it's food production all be outsourced. What happens in case of war or political/trade fallout? Here is the problem: When the Australians, Japanese and Europeans do exactly that, the US screams "subsidies, subsidies, subsidies...", as if the US is any innocent. The U.S. is the bigger market, therefore it can negotiate trade agreements that are in its favor. Chances are, the Australians want access to the U.S. market a lot more badly than the U.S. wants access to Australia's; therefore, the U.S. can keep its subsidies and make other nations get rid of theirs.

      Life is not fair.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    4. Re:Wrong solution by Angostura · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wonder why [some] westerners always come up with their pet projects and think these projects will solve third world problems.


        Because said Westerner knows that he can have little impact on international trade policy, but does have a potentially nifty, cheap approach to micro-generation? Don't let me stop you from looking that gift-horse in the mouth though.
    5. Re:Wrong solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I like how you're faulting "western" inventors. Are you American by any chance? Or at least from a western nation yourself?

      I've seen your kind of reaction turn up in the Slashdot discussions about the OLPC project. Here's a summary of what I see as being your argument:

      "This is a waste of time -- a worthless solution -- because it doesn't provide the power and performance that I, as a westerner, demand from technology."

      If that's an accurate summary, I have news for you: if you've spent a lifetime living on the edge of civilization, having a power source that can turn on a few LEDs at night or run a radio, or having a "worthless, underpowered laptop" can mean a real improvement in your life.

      I'm sorry if this windbelt doesn't provide you with enough power to run your home's AC unit, your 62 inch plasma display, your 100+ halogen and assorted incandescent light bulbs, and that server room in your basement. The thing is, this solution isn't meant for you. I know that's hard to handle -- that someone might be thinking about people other than yourself -- but please try to accept that possibility. If you find that overly taxing, just crack open another beer and take your Hummer out for a drive to the gas station.

      Believe it or not, there are people out there who can get by with a lot less than you, and for them, something like this will be a big deal.

    6. Re:Wrong solution by edwardpickman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm against corn subsidies but why is the solution to all the third world problems the gutting of US industries? The point is the Euro is stronger so why doesn't some one ever mention Europe opening up more to foreign markets? The US has exported a large percentage of it's industrial production and it's importing more food from foreign countries than ever before. The US produces more food than any other country in the world and generally countries want more food exports from the US not the other way around. The irony is if the US increased food imports from third world countries the complaint would be we were buying food that the country of origin needed. I've already heard this complaint about some crops. It's a no win argument but the US is an easy target and saying the US could do more doesn't get the rest of the first world off the hook. Most of the first world has subsidies. That was actually the biggest sticking point to creating the European Union was all the pet subsidies each country had.

    7. Re:Wrong solution by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The US was created as a rebellion against England's protectionism. The US grew in spite of , not because of, protectionism. Economic efficiency always demands using the least expensive of equivalent alternatives, and that means no protectionism.

      Protected industries grew; their customers failed to grow because of the higher prices. The net effect was inferior to free trade.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    8. Re:Wrong solution by jcr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only sure way to help countries of the third world is for countries like the US to open up their subsidized markets.

      That's not the biggest problem that most of the third world has, not by a long shot. Sure, they'd benefit even more than we would if our tax money wasn't spent on keeping farmers growing more of a given crop than the market wants them to, but the biggest drag on any third world country today is the local kleptocrats who hand out monopolies to their cronies, and use aid money to buy weapons.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    9. Re:Wrong solution by Dunbal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, I was just using metaphor to point out WHY we can't all get along. This world consists of those who want to fuck, and those who get fucked (even if they don't want to be). THAT is why we can't get along.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    10. Re:Wrong solution by Belacgod · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or, as C.S. Lewis put it, the world is "divided between wolves who do not understand, and sheep who cannot defend, the things which make life desirable."

    11. Re:Wrong solution by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What you free trade types eternally fail to grasp is that people aren't nice, don't always play by the same rules, and frequently use their economies to damage each other. To me, it seems like you have a rose-colored world view that is simply not borne out by history and current events. Yes, competition is good, it keeps companies on their toes, and certainly excessive protectionism has negative consequences in that regard. No argument from me there. But you have to understand, the converse also has negative effects. That's especially true when dealing with a culture and economy such as China, which doesn't have the slightest conception of Western business ethic, and sees nothing wrong with eliminating the competition by any means whatsoever. Very efficient from their perspective, downright disastrous for us.

      I have news for you: raw industrial efficiency is not the only measure of a successful economy. How a nation's economy provides for its people, long term, is an equally important metric. I would say, a far more important one. Throwing away domestic manufacturing in favor of cheap imports from inimical foreign powers is not a good way to serve the needs of your people. In fact, free trade, so far as the United States is concerned, is doing exactly the opposite. We are transferring massive amounts of money to China in exchange for cheap imports, while simultaneously losing the ability to provide for ourselves. What good are these customers of whom you speak, when there are no longer any American producers of those products? Explain to me how this is good, how it grows our economy?

      The original poster in this thread was correct: if you have any sense of self-preservation whatsoever you protect your key industries. If you don't, and someone takes them away from you (as is happening with virtually every manufacturing sector in the United States today) you are vulnerable at every level. I'm not saying that means exclude all foreign competition, but it does mean that you make damn sure that foreign competition isn't allowed to operate in a predatory manner. Unfortunately for us, our government and corporate leaders sold us out for a song. Now, I don't know exactly what's going to happen over the next few years, but if what I read about American manufacturing being down to 1950's levels is even close to being true, we are in deep shit.

      This is not a joke, this is not some philosophical issue with no real-world effects: when a major economy falls people get hurt. Ours is heading for a fall of Biblical proportions, and it's you Free Traders that will bear a significant responsibility for that event.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    12. Re:Wrong solution by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Doesn't change the fact that a lot of people would probably rather have access to a little bit of electricity without having to rely on fiendishly expensive solar cells than hope that at some point in the future industrialization will come and make their lives better.

      If you can't make large improvements that doesn't mean you can't try to make small ones. Not everyone gets to save the world, but some people can make it a slightly better place. Even though this device won't make Tanzania export leader I'm pretty sure that, if deployed, it could improve the lives of a number of people.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    13. Re:Wrong solution by ibbey · · Score: 2, Informative

      To the shown apparatus generates too little power to be of any use at all.

      None, huh? So why does he show the device powering a radio and a clock in the video? You're right, 40mW isn't much power, but according to the video the device costs $2-$5. For that price, you can easily build a few of them & you start to get to a more useful amount of power. But even 40mW is enough to do things like maintain the charge on a cell phone or charge a flashlight. I'm sure someone with more knowledge of low power systems could come up with even more useful ideas. Is 40mW enough to power a small water filter? I bet it is if it's designed properly. And remember, the generator can run 24/7 (wind permitting, at least), so it can be used to charge a battery for times when you need more current for short periods of time. Seems like it might have some use after all...

  8. A bit more detail by AndroidCat · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  9. Re:Nah, this is dumb by confused+one · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not too dumb. He was designing it for use in Haiti. While I suspect there are places where nothing is tenable, a thin ribbon under tension is a whole lot simpler and cheaper to manufacture and maintain than a rotating wind turbine. It doesn't have to be mylar, you could use scrap cloth, although mylar may last longer and be easier to keep under tension. LED's were for the demo. You could use the thing to run any light; or better yet charge a small battery so you have power on demand.

    He made another good point in the article: If you break this you have something that a local can fix. If you break a solar panel, your stuck with a broken panel (which is trash). What he didn't mention is that this would run at night too, as opposed to a solar panel that only works during the day.

    while I agree with another poster's comment that the 30x improvement in efficiency over a microturbine is probably not real, I think it's fairly interesting. Enough so that, since IAAAP (I am an applied physicist), I'm thinking about building one myself to get some numbers and see how well it scales. I know some people in Africa who might be interested in something like this...

  10. Not a Single Engineering Reply by BoRegardless · · Score: 4, Informative

    There was not any engineering detail to go on from the video, I agree. But trashing the idea without getting the numbers is bad science, more akin to the nightly news.

    The whole concept is interesting, because it can work with wood and cloth instead of mylar and aluminum. The "first world" part would be the magnet, coils and the DC rectifier/converter to allow a user to likely charge a battery.

    How many of these generators and how big they would be to extract a usable 10 watts of charging power in a 5-10 mph wind hasn't been defined, but with a couple models, that can be determined.

    You never learn anything by bitching. Buckling up and testing is the way this & other ideas will be understood and improved. For the 3rd world, just a minimal LED lamp array can make the difference between studying at night or not.

    1. Re:Not a Single Engineering Reply by Bucc5062 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Fine, then make one and truly answer the parents post. He/she talks about how people were trashing the idea, but not by applying actual effort to prove or disprove, just unsubstantiated opinion.

      I am not an engineer, I do not think I could build this, but were I capable I'd try it out and start to look at the numbers.

      1 - It was said it would not work in low winds (5/10 mph) because the demo used a fan. Prove it I say. it may be a combination of material tension and mass of the magnet.

      2 - It was said it would buzz. Prove it. Build one and measure the decibels produced. Can the sound be dampened without losing efficiency.

      3 - It was said it was not 30x efficient. Prove it. Build one and compare it to other micro wind generators (though the video indicated there were few out there)

      I know this is /. and most times we don't read the article, we have varying opinions, but it does surprise me that out of all the eggheads on this blog list, there are not some who could duplicate the experiment and show results. until proven differently, my opinion is that this device is a cool idea worthy of more review, and an example of genuine innovation.

      --
      Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
  11. Re:Nah, this is dumb by ezavada · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What he didn't mention is that this would run at night too, as opposed to a solar panel that only works during the day.

    Sure, but this will only run when there is wind. In any case you are going to need some kind of energy storage, whether batteries for small scale use, or pumped water for larger scale.

    With a small scale system like this, you could also combine it with solar panels and a battery and get luggable power generation that would work in most places.

    I'm thinking about building one myself to get some numbers and see how well it scales

    Cool! I'm sure a lot of people would love to see a project page for a DIY wind generator of this sort!

  12. Re:We've been doing this for years. ;-) by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2, Interesting
    TFA shows LEDs lit by a single generator. Output voltage is proportional to (magnet strength) times (magnet velocity) times (number of turns in the coil). Pick your output voltage and build accordingly.

    My guess is that generators in series can't easily be synchronized, but generators in parallel would tend to self-synchonize (assuming near-identical construction and side-by-side location).

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  13. Another oscillating generator by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's so Popular Mechanics. Another resonant oscillating generator.

    This is an old idea, but the usual form is a free-piston engine. Popular Mechanics was hot about that one back in 2004. For something that will light two LEDs, that thing looks big and expensive. Note the machined aluminum frame. For comparison, here's a toy wind generator kit ("convert a plastic bottle to a wind generator!").

    Notice how the guy with the vibrating ribbon generator demonstrates it in front of an electric fan. On high. That's probably because it only works in a strong wind. People generally don't live where winds are regularly that high. Wind speed in Port-au-Prince has been between 9 and 12MPH all day, so something that cuts in around 9MPH is needed for use in Haiti.

    The classic cheapie generator is taking an oil drum, cutting it in half, and using that as a Savonius rotor. Then you get an alternator from a car, and there's your actual generator. The axle sticks up into the air, where the halves of the oil drum collect the wind and turn the alternator. Here's a smaller version.

    1. Re:Another oscillating generator by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can also make them from Pringles cans:

      http://shorterlink.org/3266

      Or heating ductwork:

      http://shorterlink.org/3267

      As for the frame you're referring to that could easily be made of local materials like wood or recycled plastic or almost anything that will put tension on the material. And the repair on this object is considerably cheaper than replacing something like the spindle bearings of a oil-drum wind generator which will wear out over a long period of constant use.

      --

      "Bah!" - Dogbert
  14. Re:And how exactly does the science work? by ashitaka · · Score: 3, Informative

    The reference to the Tacoma Narrows bridge is very relevant. Galloping Gertie showed that even without hurricane-force winds a very heavy ribbon-shaped strip can me made to move in an extreme fashion due to mechanical resonance. Even a small strip would have the same kind of resonance so that large relative movement can be extracted from even light winds.

    Haven't you ever made a blade of grass whistle between your thumbs?

    --
    If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
  15. Um, did you not read the article you linked to? by SIIHP · · Score: 2, Informative

    "but now I see from the Wikipedia article that resonance has nothing to do with it"

    Did you read the whole article, because you seem to have missed this part,

    "The wind-induced collapse occurred on November 7, 1940 at 11:00 AM(Pacific time), due partially to a physical phenomenon known as mechanical resonance."

    --
    I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
  16. To the naysayers: by SeaDuck79 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not saying that this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, BUT... Those who think a thing to be impossible should shut up and get out of the way of those who are doing it. You can waste your time cursing the darkness, but it's probably not going to be as productive as trying to light a candle. Or an LED.

  17. Re:Nah, this is dumb by Artifakt · · Score: 2, Informative

    You could use the thing to run any light; or better yet charge a small battery so you have power on demand.

    I got a couple of battery re-chargers for AA - C and 9 volt, and started recharging for all my flashlights, MP3 players, and such a few years ago. Last year, I rigged them to a small solar array, so those apps are now completely off the grid. I cold probably have used a very small wind turbine just as well, or an adaptation of a widget like the one in the article. With a good supply of batteries, I can afford to wait a bit for a sunny day, so solar's what I went with. I doubt I'm saving the environment much, if at all, given manufacturing costs of the devices, but I keep seeing the whole idea dismissed on the basis of that one argument about ecological fitness, or related argeuments about scaling.

    Meanwhile, if the local power grid goes down for a day or three, I have some things which will still run, including a bit of light and an emergency radio.

    It's like another, 1,000 year older tech adaptation. I also have a fireplace in my house. I don't heat with it on any regular basis, but I have a hinge mounted, cast iron widget with a hook on the end that can swing over the fire, so I can cook over it pretty expediously. The fireplace is never going to be an energy efficient way of routine heating for millions of people now using gas or electric heat. It doesn't fix any of the current problems related to old infrastructure, global warming, and overpopulation. Scaling arguments are actually negative (if we all go back to burning wood, we'll screw up the environment more, not less), but my fireplace will keep a few people warm or a very cold night without power, and even give them some hot soup or cocoa. If we do have a lengthy outage in the winter, The chimney's clean, I have a couple of ricks of wood already cut, and an axe if I need more, and we'll probably not just manage for ourselves, but put up the little old lady across the street on our couch, take some hot soup to another neighbor or two, and so on. Plus the radios mean I'll know what sort of problem it is early, and can plan. I'll know if the problem is expected to last long enough that I'd better conserve the chainsaw for real emergencies, etc.

    I'm not even sure but what that IS a potential huge net ecological savings. People who cope on their own if the big, gridded systems go down aren't as likely to be a drain on emergency services. What's the carbon footprint of a helicopter rescue operation?

    I'm starting to think scaling arguments are mostly rubbish anyway. Whenever we start addressing scaling, we're talking about getting up to sizes where someone can centralize the production, and rent services to the common people. A stable, long term sustainable, ecologically sound system shouldn't assume centralized control is desirable, in fact, all other things being equal, it's a bad thing.

    --
    Who is John Cabal?
  18. BS: slashdot should be ashamed by linuxvolts · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wind power is very well understood. The power in the wind is (1/2)*p*A*v^3. Where p is air density in units (kg/m^3), A is the swept area in units (m^2) and v is the velocity of the wind in units (m/s). This is intuitive from a physics perspective if the energy of a moving object is (1/2)*m*v^2 then p*A*v is mass. Albert Betz proved that the maximum efficiency of a wind generating device is 59%. Many small wind turbines can achieve an efficiency of over 30%. From the article it says "his device [is] 10 to 30 times as efficient as the best microturbines" That would put the efficiency of the device at at least 300%. Not only is that higher than the betz limit it is higher than the energy available. A quick example. Lets use an air density of 1 and a swept area of 1 (for a rotary turbine this would be a blade radius of .56m), a wind velocity of 10mph (4.47 m/s) and an efficiency of 30%. This will make 13.4 watts of power. That would be enough to power several small led light.

  19. Re:Nah, this is dumb by ByteSlicer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Probably, but the mass and viscosity of the water would dampen out the vibrations, making it not very efficient (very low frequency).

  20. Re:Nah, this is dumb by Invidious · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One of the neater aspects about this project is that you can build it out of trash you have laying around. Salvage magnets from headphones or speakers, salvage magnet wire from a motor, build the frame out of whateverthehell you have laying around, and use a strip of waxed silk or something for the ribbon. You need a little bit more know-how to turn that into DC, but that's also very basic, and the components could also be salvaged from just about anything. Hell, same thing with LEDs. Let's face it, people in the third world are superb scavengers -- look at the sudden proliferation of satellite dishes made from hammered-out cans that popped up in Afghanistan after we toppled their regime.