Slashdot Mirror
English Market Produces Energy With Kinetic Plates
Johnathan Martinez writes "Sainsbury's market in England has installed 'kinetic energy' plates in the parking lot of its store in Gloucester. The plates are an experiment with a newer energy producing technology. The plates create as much as 30 kWh of energy as cars drive over them. The weight of the cars puts pressure on the plates creating kinetic energy to run a generator. The current is used to power the store and will lower the energy consumption of the market."
You are not stealing any energy from the car at all. This argument is ludicrous. It is using the force of gravity to push down the plates.
The car has to climb on to the plate. It uses energy to do that.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
It's not leeching. The cars are slowed down at the point at which the cars should be slowing down anyway - they're coming into the car park. The 'kinetic energy' device helps where the vehicle's brakes would normally be doing all the work. Bin the TFA, see this insightful article from yesterday's Guardian.
Wait, so the plate drops down and it makes some power, how does your car get out of the now slight pot-hole? Why it has to drive forward, which (considering you are driveing up a very brief and very small hill) uses a tiny amount more fuel.
There is never, and WILL never be a free ride, all power comes from somewhere.
...
Perhaps they only install these at the entrances to the car park, where you expect everybody to be slowing down - the excess kinetic energy might as well be siphoned off somewhere useful rather than being wasted as heat in the brakes.
However, I agree with your analysis that the numbers, as presented, make no sense (and the picture with illustrates the article is only a few mm thick, so 238,000 crossings is probably a rather conservative estimate). Another article on the topic says "The kinetic road plates are expected to produce 30 kWh of green energy every hour" (so that would just be 30kW, then) but I can guarantee you that a supermarket is not going to get a quarter of a million visitors in an hour (or to put that another way, more than 60 every second).
It's all just meaningless posturing, and it takes attention away from anything which might actually be useful. Any journalist reporting this as a green initiative ought to be ashamed of themselves.
Technically, you're right. Practically, cars waste such vast amounts of energy that the energy drain for this thing (about equivalent to driving over a small bump) probably couldn't even be measured.
People don't understand just how much energy cars use, because car engines are typically measured in horsepower rather than in kilowatts. But it's the same quantity --- they're dimensionally equivalent. It's instructive to play with Google's units converter a bit: the Tata Nano, the world's cheapest car, has a crappy little engine producing 33 horsepower. That's 25 kilowatts, which is slightly more than the entire electrical supply to my house. A typical racecar produces about 400 kilowatts. A medium model wind turbine (with a 50m tower) produces about 600 kilowatts.
There is no magic there - energy comes from somewhere. Unless this whole exercise is done when vehicles break (speed bumpers?) then it is just a tax on those driving there. It may be small but it does not mean it is not there.
If you put the plates on a downhill ramp, then the car need to move vertically anyway. So instead of having to use the brakes to convert energy into waste heat, they can convert it into electricity.
Then it would be more efficient to build a conveyor belt or a lift for descending cars only... But still more efficient is to cut of fuel - all modern cars do that - AND use some regeneration - some more expensive/advanced cars do that already.
BTW, e=m*v^2 has nothing to do with it, that's just the kinetic energy stored in a moving body, it can be converted to potential energy and back, as in a pendulum. What you are looking for is force x distance: F*s (or mass x gravitational constant x vertical distance: m*g*h)
The original idea is silly from a thermodynamic point of view, but bright from ecological theatre point of view, I think.
From their FAQ:
Q1. Doesn't the ramp just steal pennies from our petrol tanks?
A1. The ramp is designed to be situated in parts of the roadway where vehicles are having to slow down, for example on downhill gradients, when approaching traffic lights or roundabouts as well as replacing sleeping policemen and traditional traffic calming measures. In the these situations, the kinetic energy of the car is being dissipated into heat (i.e. through the braking system) anyway; the ramp at this point scavenges a degree of kinetic energy as the car passes over it, but this is far less than is lost through other mechanisms.
Seems to me like it probably works if it's deployed in the right place. So the idea seems OK.
But what about the numbers? The website claims it can generate 5-10kW. Looks like at least one of the plates moves about three inches (7.5cm). So, lets use their numbers:
10kWh = 36MJ. Taking your 18.1kN force from your 2 ton car, that requires a distance of about 2km. 2km / 7.5cm = 26700 crossings in that hour. Thats 7 per second. No, still doesn't add up.
Best you could reasonably hope for is a car every two seconds. That would give a distance of 7.5cm * 1800 = 135m in an hour. Your 2-tonne car falling 135m would generate 2.4MJ in an hour, so that's about 670W average. And that's assuming 100% efficiency. Likely this thing can power a streetlight or two.
But is it cost effective? Lets say it operates at that rate for 10 hours a day (pretty optimistic for a car park, but maybe on a busy road). 670W gives 6.7kWh per day, or 2400kWh per year. Electricity costs maybe 7p/kWh, so that's GBP171 (or $270). No, this doesn't seem cost effective anywhere where you can get mains electricity.