Generating Power From Ocean Buoys and Kites

cheezitmike writes "Researchers at Oregon State University are testing a new type of wave-energy converter to generate electricity from ocean waves: 'Even when the ocean seems calm, swells are moving water up and down sufficiently to generate electricity. ... For decades the challenge has been to build a device that can withstand monster waves and gale-force winds, not to mention corrosive saltwater, seaweed, floating debris and curious marine mammals. ... In the most recent prototypes, a thick coil of copper wire is inside the first component, which is anchored to the seafloor. The second component is a magnet attached to a float that moves up and down freely with the waves. As the magnet is heaved by the waves, its magnetic field moves along the stationary coil of copper wire. This motion induces a current in the wire — electricity.'" Meanwhile, researchers at Stanford are working to design "turbine kites" that operate at 30,000 feet, where air currents flow much faster than they do close to the ground. Ken Caldeira, a Stanford associate professor, said, "If you tapped into 1% of the power in high-altitude winds, that would be enough to continuously power all civilization."

Comments

Consequences

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't this cause drag in the jetstreams... which are, you know, absolutely critical for weather - and thus life - on this planet? If we alter the jetstreams even slightly, aren't we going to cause major collateral damage down the line?

There's no such thing as free energy.

Re:Consequences

[blindseer]

Nonsense. Of you are looking to switch power generation because the current method will kill your grandchildren, then it's perfectly reasonable to point out that the purposed solution will kill your grand children.

There is no reason to switch to something more expensive, complicated, or convoluted if the end result is the same even if just by another means. We are looking to get off fossil fuels because it effects the environment and has the potential of destroying a lot of life, switching to something that does the exact same thing is fucking stupid.

I am not convinced that burning fossil fuels effects the environment. The complete combustion of hydrocarbons releases energy, water, and carbon dioxide. The amount of energy, water, and carbon dioxide released is so minute compared to that of the sun and sea life that I do not believe it is causing any thing detrimental to the environment. Water and carbon dioxide is what plants need to live, by burning fossil fuels we are essentially fertilizing the earth.

If we assume for the moment that carbon dioxide is a potent greenhouse gas (I think it is a greenhouse gas, just not as potent as people claim) then we can also assume that methane is an even more potent greenhouse gas. Right now we have oil and natural gas fields off the coast of California bubbling methane into the air and oil slicks onto the beaches. If you want to improve the environment then it would make sense to bottle up that methane before it reaches the atmosphere and convert it to a lesser greenhouse gas by burning it. That oil that is washing up onto the beaches could likewise be harvested before it pollutes. It doesn't have to be burnt, that oil could be used for the production of lubricants, tires, and plastics.

I'm not against fossil fuels nor am I really for it. One thing I dislike is seeing our nation's wealth being siphoned off for energy that we can produce ourselves. We can drill for oil here. We can build nuclear power plants, windmills and solar panels. The reason we need to get off fossil fuels is because it will not be economically viable in some future date. Until that time comes I see no need to artificially enforce the movement to an alternative. If people want to see the world stop burning fossil fuels then come up with a viable alternative FIRST then people will move naturally. By forcing people away from fossil fuels before a viable alternative exists is suicide. We need that energy to keep our standard of living, by reducing that standard of living people will die.

Every summer we hear about the large number of people that die from heat exposure with the implicit or explicit blame on global warming. First, I don't believe global warming is happening any more since, for example, Iceland has seen polar bears for three years in a row after a 25 year absence. Second, we have things like running water, shelter, and electricity in "civilized" society. Why is it that people are dying of heat in France when the temperature has reached 90F? That is not "hot" by my standards. I see that every summer around here, or at least I used to. The last few summers have been rather mild in comparison. The only reason I can fathom that people are dying from 90F heat in France is either from their own stupidity or because of poverty. With clean running water, shade, and an electric fan I would think that most anyone can survive 90F outdoor temperatures.

I don't believe that continuing to burn fossil fuels will kill your grandchildren. I do believe that not burning fossil fuels, before a viable alternative exists, will likely kill you before they are born.

Re:1% is such a small number

[Anonymous Coward]

Boy, you should go to work for the obama administration. You've mixed up enough of the facts for this to sound almost plausible.

Solar is a good idea and the way to go but you're overlooking a couple of BIG problems.

First you're going to have to transmit the power so it can't all be in one place. Maybe you thought about this but the 300km^2 you compute will need to be all over the world.

Second, efficiency shows up in multiple places. If you get 10% efficiency that makes 3000km^ OF SOLAR PANELS!!!!. Not just ground to put them on. Let's think about that. How much would 3000km^2 of solar panels of 10% efficiency cost to manufacture? How about the wiring? How about switch panels? Sure, you can tie into the grid, but you still need wire.

And last but not least, where are you going to put all this power for use at night? Yeah maybe wind helps but many of the same problems crop up.

Look, I'm not saying we shan't pursue this. Most likely we will have to at some point but wind and solar will not do it all. It just doesn't scale and the obama administration has become quite shameless in its ability to LIE (there, I said it) to us whenever it deems it expedient.

How about let's do this: 1) build about 10 nuclear plants around the US. Yes, you can put one in my area (would prefer that to the coal fired jobbies we have) 2) role out 10km^2 solar / wind hybrid "generators" in every state (gets you 500km^2) along with the transmission cabling, storage, etc.)

All this "stimulus" would have been better spent on that than all the crap it's been wasted on so far. We've all gone into generational debt so the rich that obama vilified could get there assets pulled out of the fire.

And don't get me started on health care that penalizes businesses for providing me coverage but exempts unions and union employees from the requirements that penalize everyone else.

Don't tell the CIA

[cryfreedomlove]

I'm surprised this was brought up publicly because everyone knows the CIA is hell bent to make sure any carbon neutral energy source never takes hold. It's oil and war forever for us, baby.