Slashdot Mirror


Pavegen To Tap Pedestrians For Power In the UK

An anonymous reader writes "Several years ago Laurence Kembell-Cook unveiled Pavegen floor tiles, which capture kinetic energy from footsteps and convert it to electricity. Now after two years of product testing and picking up a slew of awards across the U.K., Pavegen has received its first commercial order — to light up the new Westfield Stratford City Shopping Centre."

197 comments

  1. Laws of Thermodynamics... by niftydude · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Energy doesn't appear out of nowhere for free.

    Walking on these floor tiles requires more energy than regular floors.
    So are they going to start paying brits for all the extra food that they need to eat in order to power these things?

    --
    You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    1. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by onion2k · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Perhaps walking on these tiles costs the same amount of energy as regular tiles, but some of the energy that is normally wasted as heat and sound is captured and turned into something useful...

    2. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bring on the FATTIES!!

    3. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arancaytar · · Score: 2

      Even if that were true (instead of the tiles just using the energy already dissipated as waste heat and sound), people in developed countries consume far more energy than they expend. The remainder is stored in fat reserves or excreted as waste. That's where this would come from; it'd be an exercise opportunity.

      (Come to think of it, it would be worth a thought to install generators in gyms for the same effect.)

    4. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by deek · · Score: 2

      Two thoughts come to mind:
      * This may be a good way to reduce obesity levels in society.
      * Shopping centers with supermarkets and/or food courts will make a killing.

      Rule #1 of supermarket shopping: never shop while you're hungry.

    5. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by edalytical · · Score: 1

      Have you ever walked in sand?

      --
      Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
    6. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by lxs · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm all for fatties working harder, but spare a thought for the elderly with limited mobility. It would be a shame if they couldn't go out shopping.

    7. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Energy doesn't appear out of nowhere for free. Walking on these floor tiles requires more energy than regular floors.

      The second point does not follow from the first. Walking expends energy. Since the process is nowhere near 100% efficient, it follows that energy can be extracted from the process for useful purposes without requiring more energy to be expended or impeding movement in any way. Energy that would necessarily be expended in any case is put to use instead of being wasted as normal.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    8. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Patch86 · · Score: 0

      The energy is already there- it just currently dissipates as wasted energy, and does nothing. That would be like saying that the wind has to blow harder if you put up a wind turbine or maritime sail- the wind blows just the same, it's just you're capturing energy that would otherwise have been wasted.

      The most you can say is that you're taking energy that would otherwise have been used to vibrate the concrete after every step, and are instead using it to power some sort of electrical generator. Which I suppose you could be cross about if you really like vibrating concrete.

    9. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by neyla · · Score: 1

      Most people would be *extatic* to learn that walking around somewhere now burns more calories than it used to.

      Weight-loss is a billion-dollar-industry, people pay trough the nose for the priviledge of having calories burnt.

    10. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by niftydude · · Score: 1

      The Pavegen floor tiles flex a slight 5 millimeters when stepped on

      That's an extra half cm against gravity for each step - so I don't think it is energy that is normally wasted as heat and sound - that is energy that you are being forced to supply.

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    11. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by niftydude · · Score: 0

      Even if that were true (instead of the tiles just using the energy already dissipated as waste heat and sound)

      It is true - see my reply to a poster above about the half cm flex these tiles do.

      , people in developed countries consume far more energy than they expend. The remainder is stored in fat reserves or excreted as waste.

      *some* people in developed countries consume far more energy than they expend. What about the elderly? the poor? the injured or disabled?
      I guess they'll just to shop somewhere else.

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    12. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by flimflammer · · Score: 2

      A 5 millimeter flex is not even remotely comparable to walking in sand.

    13. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arlet · · Score: 2

      The energy is already there- it just currently dissipates as wasted energy, and does nothing

      Uh, no, in order to tap energy from pedestrians, the tile needs to give or flex a bit when you step on it. This takes more energy than walking on a perfectly rigid tile. When walking on rigid tiles, the body stores some of the landing energy in muscles and tendons by stretching them out. When the leg is lifted, the stored energy is released.

    14. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Nursie · · Score: 2

      Think of it as a public service - most tubby city workers could probably do with some more energy expenditure in their day.

    15. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arlet · · Score: 1

      Make a separate entrance for fat people. Problem solved.

    16. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the topic of walking, I think you may need to exercise your mind a bit more...

    17. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since the process is nowhere near 100% efficient, it follows that it's theoretically possible that energy can be extracted from the process for useful purposes without requiring more energy to be expended or impeding movement in any way.

      FTFY.

    18. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's certainly true if you'd walk with less than 5mm clearance, however, most people probably don't.

    19. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by docilespelunker · · Score: 1

      Woo! Diet tiles:O) I should buy mum some for Christmas!

    20. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come to think of it, it would be worth a thought to install generators in gyms for the same effect.

      Good idea. Let every gym in the land be a power plant. Now if there was only a way to store the energy for the times people weren't exercising. Something like what to do w/ solar power during nights

    21. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the elderly? the poor? the injured or disabled?
      I guess they'll just to shop somewhere else.

      In the shopping malls I've seen, the injured and disabled are normally not a regular part of the crowd.

      The poor are rarely differentiable and, at least in the United States, normally still eat fine unless they are incredibly under the poverty line or very bad at using food stamps. In which case they probably aren't shopping at malls in the first place.

      The elderly are the only complaint you have that I find even remotely applicable, but even then, the elderly are still a tiny part of the number at shopping malls.

      In fact, I'll agree with you. The elderly, poor (who don't eat enough), injured, and disabled should all be given 10 dollars discounts whenever they enter said shopping mall.

      Everyone else can just walk since they could probably afford to use a little bit more energy or are those who probably don't care enough to complain.

      (Next you'll say that when people use public or private transportation, heavy people should pay more and light people should pay less since heavy people use more gas)

    22. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Amouth · · Score: 1

      or not step on the green tiles.. from all the pictures i've see it looks like they use them as designs rather than blanketing them. If it is that much of an issue for them they can just not step on them

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    23. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Woo! Diet tiles:O) I should buy mum some for Christmas!

      A proper present for piezo pedestrians.

      It might even provide power to cameras.

    24. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by edalytical · · Score: 1

      Of course not, but both require a relative amount of extra work. Sand if just a great deal more. An example that someone would surely agree takes more energy to walk on is needed. Then by extrapolation the tiles take more emery too. Albeit less.

      --
      Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
    25. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by paziek · · Score: 1

      It is. Just look at how much 5mm is. It sounds small, but for walking its pretty annoying.

    26. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by DrXym · · Score: 1

      It's clear from the photos that these stones are clearly visible (they're green with a light in a middle) so someone could choose to walk around them if they wished. Though anyone landing their foot on one is hardly going to care that their foot sunk a miniscule amount.

    27. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Green tiles are isles while white tiles hide snide, idle crocodiles, liable to deprive you of your life, leaving a wife in strife with a crying child. (Is there a Peter File?)

    28. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      No it isn't. Every time you step, you lift your foot (more than 5mm!), move it, and then place it down. Your weight is transferred to the new tile. If anything, this is going to be better to walk over than a hard floor, because it reduces the amount of stress on your knees from the impacts on the ground. You're not moving another 5mm, you're just encountering resistance 5mm before your foot hits the real ground.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    29. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      With that small amount of flexing, it's not the energy stored in the muscles and tendons, it's the energy that's dissipated by grinding the cartilage in your joints against your bones. It's equivalent to walking in air-sole trainers, not walking in sand...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    30. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well look at it this way, if they make it too strenuous for people to endure, they can literally vote with their feet and go shop somewhere else. As metaphors go that's a pretty elegant one :)

    31. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by delinear · · Score: 2

      Indeed, some amount of flex is actually more comfortable, so long as it's not too deep. This could well be an improvement for some people over a harder alternative (particularly those who have difficulty with high impact surfaces, like the elderly).

    32. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And make it too small.

    33. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arlet · · Score: 1

      It's a bit of both. Of course, we're talking about very small amounts of energy robbed from the body, but we're also talking about an even smaller amount of energy that the tile produces.

      The energy to produce the tile, plus the energy to produce, package, and distribute the extra food needed to power them will not be gained back by this "green" tile in its entire useful life.

      Basically it's just a feel-good project with no tangible benefits.

    34. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Markizs · · Score: 1

      So, question is - how many more calories will people burn due to walking?

    35. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      That it requires more energy is an added upside to the tiles, it's a selling point.

      With the current health issues people have with not enough exercise and hyper-caloric diets, having these is actually a (very mild) health benefit for the people. People who are already getting enough exercise won't mind the tiny bit extra, so the only people left who will complain about this are lazy fucks.

      And I hope you're not telling everyone on slashdot that you're a lazy fuck, are you?

    36. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by gandhi_2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Man this kind of argument pisses me off.

      "5 isn't even remotely comparable to 1000".

      Sure it is. It is 1/200'ths as much. Plenty comparable.

      5 mm flex is not even remotely comparable to world peace, chuck norris, or boreal toads. a flexible floor IS comparable to walking in sand.

    37. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arlet · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, if you're walking on regular tiles, and step on this flexing tile, without properly anticipating the different feeling, it may throw a person off-balance.

    38. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Mindflux0 · · Score: 2

      You have to push through that resistance. That uses more energy. As to other posts about heat/vibration/sound energy, some of that will be gathered I'm sure but that's a minuscule amount of energy.

      The extra energy may not be noticeable and may result in a more comfortable floor though, like you said. Walking on a thick carpet would probably make you use more energy than these plates and people pay extra for them.

    39. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - Why, in my youth we walked, uphill, both ways!

      - But dad, on these tiles we are walking now practically uphill, both ways.

      !

      Think of the tiles as shock absorbers. They take energy but don't give it back. Just like when walking uphill, you must place your front foot higher, but still lift your back foot from lower point.

    40. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are comparing 5 _with_ 1,000, not _to_ 1,000.

    41. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arlet · · Score: 1

      Only if people aren't compensating the extra energy by eating more.

    42. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      You have to push through that resistance

      Have you ever even tried walking? You don't push through resistance on the ground. You place your feed above it and then your weight pushes through the resistance. The energy you put in is in lifting your foot and transferring your weight to it. You push downwards into the foot that you are stepping off, but that one will already be on the solid ground with the switch depressed.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    43. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by delinear · · Score: 1

      In the shopping malls I've seen, the injured and disabled are normally not a regular part of the crowd.

      You're in the US so I'm not sure what the situation is over there, but here in the UK we have laws to enable access to facilities for the disabled and it's quite common to see disabled shoppers. Of course, I don't know if they would cover having to expend extra physical effort in order to shop there. I mean, a ramp causes a wheelchair user to expend extra energy but it still satisfies the letter of the law (as opposed to making the store owner put in elevators or lower the whole building a few cm), so this might actually drive a few of the disabled away while still not being illegal.

    44. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by delinear · · Score: 1

      There are lots of ways to store the energy. The issue has always been that, compared to cheap electricity, they're costly, cumbersome and not particularly efficient. It's only the prospect of a bump in prices that's suddenly making these alternatives appealing, so it's something we might see in the near future.

    45. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by AC-x · · Score: 1

      So are they going to start paying brits for all the extra food that they need to eat in order to power these things

      I don't think there's any problem of people eating too little food over here, in fact it might even help with the current obesity problem...

    46. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      It's like comparing apples and oranges.

      Apples are green.
      Oranges are orange.
      Apples are not oranges.

      There; comparison succesfully completed.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    47. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Does climbing stairs require more energy that walking on a flat surface?
      This is like climbing 5mm high stair steps.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    48. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Only if these tiles somehow improve the energy efficiency of walking itself.
      Otherwise the energy will be extracted from an equally unefficient process.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    49. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Mindflux0 · · Score: 1

      Have you ever even tried walking?

      Nope. I must not know what I'm talking about. What a perceptive reader you are.

      The energy you put in is in lifting your foot and transferring your weight to it.

      Yes, and expending energy in "transferring your weight" to a higher position on the plate is not at all like pushing through resistance. Or, since gravity provides a resistive force against you moving up and the plate depresses through resistance to produce electricity, is analogous to it in not just one but two ways.

      I bow down to your superior analytical skills. I'll burn my physics degree later when I get the chance.

    50. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      So are they going to start paying brits for all the extra food that they need to eat in order to power these things?

      No, quite the opposite! It is a shopping center, after all.

      Not only will people be providing electricity to help power the area, they'll be forking over more money into the center's restaurants and food stands from working up an appetite.

    51. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. To put it another way: This is sneak taxation.
      And I will send them an invoice for walking on those things.
      Also they can prepare for a lawsuit, since they have to provide normal pavements without that shit

      But if I were Pavegen, I'd sell it to US cities as "weight loss sidewalks". ^^

    52. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by impossiblefork · · Score: 1

      Jevons paradox would indicate that one if one can walk easier than another would expend more energy on walking than he would, so to in this way make walking more strenuous would probably reduce people's total energy expenditure on walking (this small amount of walking might be healtiher if these machines make it strenuous enough though).

    53. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by daem0n1x · · Score: 1

      No, they eat too much anyway.

    54. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Physics, do you understand it? You can't get something for nothing. You WILL exert more energy walking on these tiles, how little that might be is irrelevant. They are getting power for free by exploiting people.

    55. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 2

      without properly anticipating the different feeling, it may throw a person off-balance.

      Your mother was a woman who worried alot, wasn't she?

      --
      I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
    56. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be *ecstatic* if you learned to spell.

    57. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get real! A lot of people need to lose weight. Are you going to allow them to use the tiles for free?

    58. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      Hey, I'm all for fatties working harder, but spare a thought for the elderly with limited mobility. It would be a shame if they couldn't go out shopping.

      But think of all the chubby chicks who will get hotter.

      Fewer sad old people on the street vs. more hot chicks...I think you see my point here.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    59. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Think of it as a public service - most tubby city workers could probably do with some more energy expenditure in their day.

      People in London are, on average, thinner than the rest of the UK. Although children in London, on average, are more obese.

      Walking to and from a station, somewhere at lunchtime, and maybe somewhere after work on the way home is hardly a lot of walking, but it's more than people who drive to work and park right outside. (Conversely, city children perhaps spend less time outside, but I can't find figures for this.)

      (I'm surprised the official website for the new shopping centre has "Getting Here by Car" above public transport. That doesn't look very "green". Their other London location has 60% arriving by public transport, so purely on that number it makes sense to have the various local stations higher on the page.)

    60. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yay! Perpetuum mobile!

    61. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by blackfrancis75 · · Score: 2

      It's a common turn of phrase by which the writer means the comparison is meaningless due to the extreme difference in magnitude.

      If this was a troll rather than just extreme pedantry, my apologies to the rest of the /. audience for replying.

    62. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oranges are often green when harvested, depending on the weather. They are "degreened" by exposure to ethylene prior to going to the supermarket.

    63. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      hmmm.... need a way to increase gravity in fast food restaurants.

    64. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by AI0867 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, a softer (energy-absorbing) surface is more comfortable to walk on, provided it doesn't absorb excessive amounts.

      The plastic tracks in stadiums are softer than asphalt, which again is softer than concrete. Guess which one people like to run on best?
      Some athletes from poor countries practice on alphalt and find they run slower in a stadium. Concrete would be even faster, but it tends to wreck your knees unless you have good shoes, which, again, absorb energy.

    65. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by qeveren · · Score: 1

      Go for a walk on a trampoline sometime.

      --
      Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
    66. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Now all you need to do is determine what the difference between "can" and "it's theoretically possible" are. Except in the smallest of details, I expect the answer is "none".

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    67. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Politburo · · Score: 1

      How little that might be is certainly relevant, because this thread started with a guy asking if the mall will pay for the extra food that people will eat due to the calories used in that 5 mm difference.

    68. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Errr... you might also be using gravity to work the tiles. You know, by putting a human-sized weight on them. The human is not going to notice the difference.

    69. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should just do it in America where we eat too much anyway.

    70. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by malkavian · · Score: 1

      If you're disabled and in a wheelchair, as long as the ramp is sane (it needs to be) there's no reason why you're any different to anyone else. Got a few friends who are wheelchair bound, and some of them are a damn sight fitter than I am!
      They're not invalids. They just have a disability, and these wouldn't bother them at all.

    71. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by AJH16 · · Score: 1

      That assumes that there is no waste involved in walking. There is a lot of waste in walking. Notably you land with more force than necessary and usually your body absorbs that energy as shock. If the floor tiles absorb that instead, it actually makes it easier on you to walk on it while harnessing the waste energy. There is no free energy, but there are ways to recover waste energy and sometimes that is a mutually beneficial thing.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    72. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      And that orange spray paint they use.

    73. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      The assumption that people will eat more because they walked around this mall is false. They may simply walk around at home a little less and sit down or go to bed earlier. There's plenty of energy being wasted on frivolous actions when you're talking about action of the human body and we usually respond to small amounts of extra exercise by resting rather than minute changes in the amount of food we cook for our meals. The amount we cook is usually binned in set amounts rather then being a continuous variable we carefully adjust and extra is thrown away or consumed needlessly more often then not. OTOH your point about production costs sounds reasonable but do you have any numbers to back up the idea that the energy used for mass production will be more then is reclaimed over the entire life of the tile?

    74. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arlet · · Score: 1

      The assumption that people will eat more because they walked around this mall is false

      Got anything to back this up ?

      rather than minute changes in the amount of food we cook for our meals

      Or, maybe once a year, when you were already somewhat hungry, the small extra effort in the mall makes you decide to get a slice of pizza that you wouldn't eat otherwise.

    75. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by danlip · · Score: 1

      Rubberized tracks are springy, i.e. they store a little energy and return it to you. Good shoes do the same. This surface would not - I would think it would feel mushy.

    76. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by danlip · · Score: 1

      I don't think so. When you climb stairs you are increasing your gravitational potential energy. When walking over these tiles you are not. I think it is more like walking on a thick carpet or sand.

    77. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      But irradiating food to kill pathogens is considered unsafe... *sigh*

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    78. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      It doesn't really matter because in the end since humans are trending towards fat, lazy blobs that travel about in Wal-Mart scooters.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    79. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      It is like climbing 5 mm high stairs: you step off the tile you are currently standing on (which is 5 mm lower due to your weight) on to the next tile which is up at ground level, 5 mm higher.

      When you're climbing actual stairs, you gain gravitational potential energy because you're going up, but on this contraption you sink back down 5 mm with each step, and what would have become your potential energy is now harvested to power the lights, or whatever they plug into it.

    80. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      The tiles are extracting 5mm worth of potential relative to the level of the floor. 5mm that the person has to climb out of to regain what was extracted to be once again level with the floor. 5mm can really add up. Especially when you're a fat, lazy, American. Assume a storey is 5m high, now assume an average human makes two strides for every meter or 10mm climbed for every meter traveled. That means after walking 500m they've climbed the equivalent of a flight of stairs. Are you really telling me that the Wal-Mart scooter culture is not going to care about climbing a few flights of stairs that they'd normally take an escalator for during their trip to the mall?

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    81. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Fair point- although I question if the difference in "flex" between walking on these tiles and walking on concrete is going to be much more than the difference between me walking in trainers and me walking in hard-soled shoes.

      So onto the second point- when the UK (as with most of the Western world) is staring down the barrel of an obesity crisis- is it a bad thing if walking on these surfaces gives your calf muscles a bit of a work out? Would people really eat more, or would they eat the same but be a (very very tiny) bit fitter?

    82. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your foot sinks into the pad *after* you've already lifted most of your body onto it. It is resistive to your weight, afterall, or it wouldn't be able to produce energy. So effectively you are walking an incline equal to 5mm for every step you take, when walking on this surface.

    83. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Arlet · · Score: 1

      Would people really eat more

      It would be hard to demonstrate either way, since the differences in energy are so small, they'd be considered noise.

      Despite that, we can agree that ultimately, this energy is provided by food calories, which are highly inefficient.

      For each food calorie, we use about 10 fossil fuel calories for growing, processing, packaging and transporting the food. On top of that, muscles are only 25% efficient, and the electric tile probably doesn't exceed 50% efficiency in recovering the energy. All in all, it's a very inefficient design compared to putting a solar panel on the roof, and using that to power some LEDs.

    84. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might be thrown off balance... with a 5mm change.

      God help you if you ever step on a pebble. Or sweet merciful god, what would happen if you stepped from the sidewalk onto grass?

      Blood. Everywhere.

    85. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by slackbheep · · Score: 1

      It's a small shift,just a few millimeters. That's comparable to walking in light snow. A tad more work to be sure, but I can't see most people caring as they get to feel "Green". Also, in case you hadn't read the article they seem to space the tiles fairly widely, so walking around them is an option in light traffic at least.

    86. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by tibit · · Score: 1

      If they walk as much as 500m on their entire shopping trip, I'd consider it a success :) Mostly they park as close to front entrance as they can, then zip to the nearest electric scooter. Then load up a pallet of two of pop into the cart :( There are plenty of poor families who still drink only pop and nothing else.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    87. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Jpnh · · Score: 1

      It could be comparable to Chuck Norris's...you know...

    88. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by tibit · · Score: 1

      The tiles cannot tap a whole lot into energy "wasted" as heat and sound without replacing part of our musculoskeletal system, or at least part of our shoes. Those losses are, after all, produced by work done inside of our body and in the shoe, not within a solid floor! The only way they could possibly tap some of that otherwise lost energy is if they had a fine-tuned dynamic response that exploits nonlinearities in our musculoskeletal system. They'd have to take our lower limb through a slightly different path, and because the body's response is nonlinear, this could (and only this!) reduce losses. I don't think this is feasible when you're constrained to vertical motion only. The tiles would probably have to slide as well as sink! The tiles, though would have to spring back to original height at least, otherwise they can't but also extract energy from gravitational potential energy of our body, and that's cheating -- you make a virtual incline.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    89. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by tibit · · Score: 2

      Since the "body" is nonlinear, taking it through a slightly different path when in contact with the "floor" may in fact transfer some of the energy that would be otherwise wasted -- our body only got so many degrees of freedom, and a moving tile could supply virtual degrees of freedom that potentially make our gait more efficient, and then simply bring the efficiency back down by retrieving the energy that's now not wasted in our musculoskeletal system. This requires a completely active system, though, with the tiles actuated probably in all 6 degrees of freedom (3 translations and 3 rotations). I'm thinking that whatever energy could be retrieved this way is less than inefficiencies in the actuators and their control electronics, though, unless you optimized the heck out of the tile. It'd be one expensive tile.

      To do it with a tile that only moves in one direction (vertical) is a pipe dream -- you can only simulate a virtual incline, and add extra effort to walking. You're not recovering any energy that's wasted, you're adding extra effort and recovering that, the losses remain same in absolute sense. Now be careful with cheerful marketing, because if you look at losses in relative sense (say as % of total calories expended), it may well be that the losses decrease as a percentage -- while the total energy needed increases! But it's just that -- happy marketing, as the losses in the absolute sense have not decreased at all, but actually increased!

      To get any sort of real recovery of "wasted" energy, you'd have to replace parts of our musculoskeletal system. Perhaps bypassing instead of replacement would work OK enough, but that still implies an exoskeleton, and those aren't particularly efficient at the moment either.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    90. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, then would you object to them doing the same thing to the roads? Will you be willing to foot the bill for the extra fuel required over time?

    91. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      without properly anticipating the different feeling, it may throw a person off-balance.

      Your mother was a woman who worried alot, wasn't she?

      HATER NIIIB- THIS IS COOL AND I WANT ONE!

    92. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      Well. What won the last US election?

      "Yes, we CAN!!" or "Yes, IT'S THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE!!"

    93. Re:Laws of Thermodynamics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a walk in your average shopping centre. Look at the people around you. Does it not strike you that many of these people would benefit from a bit of extra exercise?

  2. Excellent idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    These should be in all heavy footfall places

  3. Errors in article by Zouden · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was curious how much energy these things produce:

    The Pavegen floor tiles flex a slight 5 millimeters when stepped on, capturing kinetic energy which is either stored in lithium polymer batteries beneath its surface or converted into 2.1 watts of electricity and distributed throughout surrounding lights.

    It produces 2.1 watts for how long? 1 second? 100ms? I guess it could make some LEDs flash.
    Also:

    Kembell-Cook is now in the running to win the Shell LiveWIRE Young Entrepreneur of 2011 Award which would give him 10,000 lbs to use towards his invention.

    Wow. Will his prize be in the form of a giant cartoon-style weight with "10,000 lbs" written on it? Perhaps they'll drop it on his house.

    --
    "A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
    1. Re:Errors in article by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Also:

      Kembell-Cook is now in the running to win the Shell LiveWIRE Young Entrepreneur of 2011 Award which would give him 10,000 lbs to use towards his invention.

      Wow. Will his prize be in the form of a giant cartoon-style weight with "10,000 lbs" written on it? Perhaps they'll drop it on his house.

      You do have to wonder if that journalist has ever been outside of the US.... or maybe he was assuming that the original definition of "pound sterling" was still in use?

    2. Re:Errors in article by dutchd00d · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It produces 2.1 watts for how long? 1 second? 100ms?

      For as long as you keep walking, I guess. As long as you produce a Joule each second, you're producing 1 Watt.

      The potential energy in a gravitational field is m * g * h, so if you sink 5 mm with every step, you're producing 9.81 * 0.005 = 0.04905 Joule for every kg of body weight at each step. If you take p(ace) steps per second while walking, you're producing p * m * 0.04905 Joules per second, i.e. Watts, as long as you keep walking. So an 80 kg (~160 lbs) person who walks at 2 steps per second could theoretically (i.e. at 100% efficiency) produce 2 * 80 * 0.04905 = 7.8 Watts. So 2.1 Watts means a 30% efficiency. Doesn't seem unbelievable to me.

    3. Re:Errors in article by atisss · · Score: 1

      It produces 2.1 watts for how long? 1 second? 100ms? I guess it could make some LEDs flash.

      Watt has nothing to do with time. If you take 50W light bulb, it uses 50 Watts whenever it's on. If you keep it on for 1 second it will use 50 Ws (watt-seconds).

    4. Re:Errors in article by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It produces 2.1 watts for how long? 1 second? 100ms? I guess it could make some LEDs flash.

      Just as well. It needs some way of powering the light in the middle of the floor tile.

    5. Re:Errors in article by captainpanic · · Score: 1

      It produces 2.1 watts for how long? 1 second? 100ms? I guess it could make some LEDs flash.

      RTFA - it's even better than you think.

      The Pavegen floor tiles flex a slight 5 millimeters when stepped on, capturing kinetic energy which is either stored in lithium polymer batteries beneath its surface or converted into 2.1 watt-hours of electricity and distributed throughout surrounding lights. (emphasis mine)

      TFA says it produces 2.1 Watt hours for every step someone takes on the tike. Since 1 Wh is 3600 J, we can conclude it produces about 7.5 kJ at every step (according to the website)... and it takes this kinetic energy from the human shoppers.

      7.5 kJ of kinetic energy, in a human... hmmm... what are the shoppers doing? Freefalling from 500 m altitude onto those tiles? Jumping off speeding trains into the tiles?

      The problem is that 7.5 kJ of kinetic energy, for a human of 80 kg, would require this human shopper to run at 14 m/s. I did a quick Google search, but it seems Usain Bolt only achieves about 12 m/s.

    6. Re:Errors in article by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      2.1 watts! We could power... a few LEDs! Or... a calculator!

      Seriously, what idiot bought this?

    7. Re:Errors in article by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the number is in aggregate for the whole installation? What would I know, I'm not reading the article.

    8. Re:Errors in article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watt has nothing to do with time.

      Zouden wants to find out how much power was created, because watts doesn't tell you power. You need watt-hours or watt-seconds to get power. You need to know how long those 2.1 watts last. You need time!

      If you take 50W light bulb, it uses 50 Watts whenever it's on.

      50W is the heat rating for the light bulb and is there for fire prevention. A 50W light bulb can use no more than 50W, but might only use 25W.

    9. Re:Errors in article by galanom · · Score: 1

      I think that Imperial System unit "lb" is called "pound" which is also the currency of the UK.
      So it is 20,000 GBP.

    10. Re:Errors in article by galanom · · Score: 2

      As for 2.1W, if you look carefully, it says "2.1 watt-hours" (obviously per step)

    11. Re:Errors in article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, pound is the currency in the UK, but it us usually donated with a "£" or the currency code GBP, in the UK "lb" refers exclusively (as far as I have ever seen) to the weight measurement. So the article was incorrect in using "lb", and they have now changed it to a "£", but placed it after the amount, where it should be before the amount.

      WRT your second comment, the article seems to have been updated since the parent did quote the article and unless he doctored the quote it didn't say watt-hours when he quoted it. But if you look at this comment from earlier in this thread for an estimated of the amount it is possible to generate from a step, then 2.1 Wh per step is clearly wrong and absurd. In context, 2.1 Wh is 40% of the capacity of my smartphone's battery, would be good if it was true, but that does seem like too much energy to generate from a single step.

  4. its just a stock /. article ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... used to generate a miniscule amount of usable energy.

  5. Interesting ... by slydder · · Score: 0

    ... use of and everyday source of kinetic energy. Now if he could just figure out how to embed this in the streets we could have something really interesting going on.

    1. Re:Interesting ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Embedding this on the sideways should be as easy as in a mall (assuming it is weather-proof). Driving cars over the tiles is pointless as you'd just recapture (a fraction of) the energy from the car's fuel.

    2. Re:Interesting ... by Kuruk · · Score: 2

      Not pointless if installed on down ramps of car parks. Where is save the car owners brakes.

      It would tax a cars fuel on flat ground or ramps uphill. Going downhill your using brakes not fuel.

  6. A step towards green energy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and walking will need more energy, so people who go shopping get a gym membership for free!

    1. Re:A step towards green energy... by outsider007 · · Score: 1

      It's only green if the food you eat is cheaper than oil.

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
  7. The power source is made out of people by TouchAndGo · · Score: 1

    "Pavegen To Tap Pedestrians For Power In the UK" I've seen this movie trilogy. It didn't end well. No, seriously, it REALLY didn't end well

    1. Re:The power source is made out of people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soylent Pavegen? Doesn't really have a ring to it... Pavegen Green?

    2. Re:The power source is made out of people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Pavegen To Tap Pedestrians For Power In the UK"

      I've seen this movie trilogy. It didn't end well. No, seriously, it REALLY didn't end well

      The middle was pretty bad as well.

    3. Re:The power source is made out of people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw the first part of that trilogy. It also didn't begin well or progress well. Poor acting, ill thought-out plot. Lame slo-mo effects.

  8. entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There have been very few interesting inventions in the UK since the '80s, and when they are the authorities / marketroids / everyone are so keen to say "LOOK BRITAIN ISN'T DEAD YET!" that every so often there's a hilarious amount of hubbub surrounding nothing.

    Thatcher taught the current 30-somethings that there is no personal gain in actually producing anything (and it's still communist to do anything other than for personal gain): if you want to get rich, become a middleman. So that's where most of the intelligence has gone.

    Upscaling, this is the real reason why we have the financial crisis[tm] in much of Europe: we have neither the production nor sufficient means of production any more. Germany was careful to maintain its own, thus retaining a now dominant economy - they've taken over Europe in a far more rational and subtle way than earlier last century. The rest of us, taught by the worst, have been spending the last couple of decades moving numbers around, signifying nothing.

    1. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The unions had a pretty big helping hand in this too.

    2. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously the most important CPU to modern computing isn't important.

    3. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumb journalists and dumb managers make the world look dumb. The UK probably has more than it's share of intelligence and wealth, but the problem is the same as what happened in America--security crazed right wingers shutting down the "liberal" left wing schools, or at least scaring people enough to let the stupid harmless idiots start calling the shots. And then you end up with this.

    4. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      The ARM? It is, but ARM is a company from the 1980's who had their key success with the original CPU.

      I agree that there are still plenty of examples of British innovation but I think you need a better example.

    5. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      The first prototypes appeared around 1986. My ARM2 desktop dates from '88 or '89. The decade itself was full of interesting academic developments because the education system hadn't yet been broken thanks to the tying of higher education with private investment (Acorn was the result of money following brilliance - today brilliance must follow money), the repurposing of polytechnics, the introduction of the one-idiot-size-fits-all national curriculum and the sell-off of exam boards to private publishing houses.

    6. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      How's that? The unions, while they may have been overzealous about it, were all about the working man getting paid a fair wage for his work, emphasising that productive work has intrinsic value. And perhaps most of that overcompensation was just a response to the knowledge that the management was going to try and bargain them down as much as possible anyway.

      Thatcher went out of her way to break the back of the unions. That should be a great sign that what they stood for runs counter to the rabid capitalism that has fucked over most of the Western world.

    7. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      I blame political correctness to a certain degree as well. Apparently it's no longer acceptable to celebrate ability differences in school, and all children are praised relentlessly regardless of whether they sit there reproducing the works of Einstein or just barely managing to navigate the boogers to their mouth.

      "The Incredibles" pins it right to the mat....

      When everyone's super ... no-one will be!

      Why would you bother to succeed if you're getting the rewards (praise is like crack to a 7 year old) without any effort?

    8. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1

      Well ARM is gaining a lot of importance *now*, regardless of their history. Besides ARM is improving their product continuously - as you have to when you want to compete in such a fast-changing market. Anyway, Britain is still one of the leading industrial countries in the world. Whether it's living up to its potential is another matter.

      Being German I also have my doubts about our supposedly "dominant economy". We don't train anywhere near enough engineers, we have a lot of unemployment etc ... the grass always looks greener on the other side.

      The Pirate Party made it into its first state parliament in Berlin though, so yay us.

    9. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      To the best people, praise and money are distractions at worst, tools at best. Achievement is its own reward.

      Praise and money are only useful - and perhaps wasted - on the mediocre.

    10. Re:entrepreneurialism in the UK dead since '80s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about the world wide web - formalised in 1990. Or the consortium of UK/USA organisations that have done some astounding work in genertics in the last 15 years, including mapping the human genome and groundbreaking research in health, particularly cancer and mapping cancer genes - I guess you think the Americans were just carrying their UK counterparts? Or the centre who have done some amazing work creating high yield "domesticated" wheat crossed with drought resistant wild cereals that could mean some amazing things to drought stricken parts of Africa. Or the collaboration that used cell technology to restore sight to a blind man. No, not your definition of interesting? Sure, most of these aren't big engineering type inventions so they might skip you by (if you want that - look at the Falkirk Wheel), but there's plenty of invention happening, even if it's happening in a science lab or a computer model.

  9. 10,000 lbs prize by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    WOW, that's more than four tons! But of what?

    1. Re:10,000 lbs prize by ben_kelley · · Score: 1

      Probably of feathers, because on the moon they would fall at the same speed.

    2. Re:10,000 lbs prize by Issarlk · · Score: 1

      Of pounds!

    3. Re:10,000 lbs prize by SmlFreshwaterBuffalo · · Score: 1

      Who cares? Just think of all the energy you could produce by dropping it on the tiles!

    4. Re:10,000 lbs prize by Captain+Hook · · Score: 1

      a british £1 coin weighs 9.5g (I had to look it up).

      Which is 0.02 lb which means 10000 lbs of £1 is equal to £500,000 which is a very impressive prize fund.

      £1 coin contains 70% copper, 5.5% nickel, 24,5% zinc

      Copper = $3.1640/lb = ~$0.04/coin
      Nickel = $8.3801/lb = ~$0.01/coin
      Zinc = $0.8484/lb = ~$0.005/coin
      Total ~$0.05 of material in a coin

      --
      These comments are my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the other voices in my head.
    5. Re:10,000 lbs prize by Syberz · · Score: 1

      Feathers, it's lighter.

      --
      ~Syberz
  10. How much wattage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you sit on a patent laywer and slam their head into one of these over and over-
    Can you charge your smartphone at the same time?

    I, for on am starting to fucking love this whole green movement thing.

  11. Greenwashing... by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    so the shopping centre can say "look at what we're doing for the environment"... completely ignoring the energy and pollution costs of making these tiles... we have one of those energy recovery plates in the entrance drive to Sainsbury's in Gloucester... they claim the energy from the cars goes into powering the checkouts.. pure greenwash to make the customers feel slightly happier about the fact they've driven to the store... and effectively they're stealing the energy from the customers as the cars are slowed by the plate... they'd have far more effect on the environment by making it harder to drive to the store and easier to use public transport and bicycles etc. to do the shopping with... PS. the one in Gloucester is positioned in a bad place where people are actually accelerating OUT of a corner into a straight... to be friendly to the customers, it should have been positioned just before a bend to reduce the braking needed

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    1. Re:Greenwashing... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Did you read the article? It talks about the energy cost of making the tiles, and the recycled truck tyres that go into them among other things, as well as keeping the production facilities closer together to minimise transportation costs during construction.

    2. Re:Greenwashing... by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      Yeah, people always forget to factor in the energy required for manufacturing. It's important to quantify it in all "green" tech, but for energy harvesting applications it can completely outweigh the benefits.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  12. VC catching net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmmm, 5mm of flex is a noticeable amount of give, I suspect people may walk on the first tile, wonder why it flexed and then avoid walking on all the others.

    I'm not convinced this is anything more than a venture capital catching net, it's shiney, it sounds cool and probably has no problem attracting VC money but in practice I suspect it could take several years for each floor tile to repay it's initial build, installation and ongoing costs, I can't imagine the internal mechanisms of one of these tiles can survive that long without some form of ongoing maintenance, I suspect this is going to end up costing considerably more than the value of the energy it produces.

  13. Wouldn't roads be better? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    Trucks are heavier than Oprah and friends.

    1. Re:Wouldn't roads be better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, think of all that wasted fuel! At least this way some people will get more exercise.

    2. Re:Wouldn't roads be better? by blackfrancis75 · · Score: 1

      I believe the problem here is the durability of the materials; (much) heavier loads and resistance to environmental factors (this walkway is in a Mall) would be much more expensive to withstand.

    3. Re:Wouldn't roads be better? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Tapping people like this can be spun as a health-benefit, exercise is widely believed to be beneficial for most people. The fact that it is inefficient is of little concern as the source is so cheap.

      Tapping cars on the other hand leads to the consumption of more fuel, increasing carbon emissions, and is basically one of the least efficient ways of generating electricity that anyone takes seriously.

  14. 10000lbs by __Paul__ · · Score: 1

    ...you've just got to love the US-centric journalist or sub-editor who doesn't know what the UK's currency is.

    Maybe it's time to employ some people who have a little more worldly experience than the dolts they have there right now?

    --
    worldmobilenet.com -- World Prepaid Wireless Internet plans
    1. Re:10000lbs by Intropy · · Score: 1

      Oh right, they're metric. They'd give him 44,000 Newtons over there.

    2. Re:10000lbs by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      The UK is only semi-metric. Our packaging labels are metric courtesy of an EU directive, but most people over about 30 still think in imperial measures for many quantities, and many of our goods and services are still customarily measured in imperial.

      Our customary beer order (and milk bottle) is the pint (a proper imperial pint of 20oz, not your pansy-arsed 16oz American pint). We discuss people's height in feet and inches, and their weight in stones and pounds. We're probably more likely to ask the greengrocer for 2 pounds of potatoes than a kilo.

      And we get what a quarter pounder is. We don't have a "Monarch with Cheese".

      Happily the more old fashioned imperial measures, like the chain, rood, rod and perch have all fallen out of common use. I think the most recent measure to bit the dust was the gill - spirit measures in pubs used to be 1/5th of a gill, but they were converted to ml. Not that anyone cares, because it's all "1 measure" anyway, and the 25ml increment that replaced it is marginally more than 1/5th of a gill.

      PS : Converting mass to force depends entirely on the local gravity. Easier to convert pounds to kilos.

    3. Re:10000lbs by locofungus · · Score: 1

      In England the spirit measure was 1/6 gill which was smaller than the new 25ml but in Scotland it was 1/5 gill which was larger.

      Tim.

      --
      God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
    4. Re:10000lbs by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      I'm from the UK, and I think you are 10 years off on your 30-ish limit for imperial measures - I'm well over 30, and everyone my age is pretty much metric only.

      The pint of beer is still a pint of beer because of an exception in the law for traditional reasons, the pint of milk isn't actually allowed to have the "1 pint" label larger than the metric label - and again the milkmans pint of milk is an exception to the law.

      Height and weight depends on where you are and who is taking the measurement, same goes for the greengrocers order (I'm more likely to ask for a kilo of something - and everything is marked up in metric).

    5. Re:10000lbs by galanom · · Score: 1

      I don't get it. Pounds measure mass, while Newtons measure force.
      The metric equivalent of pound is the kg.

    6. Re:10000lbs by Intropy · · Score: 1

      The pound is a unit of force (weight) not mass. It is often treated as a unit of mass informally and in some legal contexts under the assumption of 1 g of acceleration and is converted to kilograms with the same assumption. This usage is a consequence of distinction not being commonly made between mass and weight since most people never have reason to consider contexts other than 1 g. The corresponding unit of mass is the slug, which is rarely used.

    7. Re:10000lbs by Intropy · · Score: 1

      First, it was a joke. Second, the pound is a unit of force and so converts directly to newtons, which is why I used that unit. Converting to mass requires the assumption of 1g (or whatever acceleration fits your context).

    8. Re:10000lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was very surprised so I checked wikipedia.
      It seems that there is both mass and force called 'pound'.
      But at least on commercial use, all seem to consider pound as mass, 0.453kg.
      Under this calculation I'm making purchases from eBay for years...

      As for slug, never heard of it.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(mass)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound-force

  15. Such a waste by Kuruk · · Score: 1

    So they want to make eco friendly power. What do they do, make the floor tile light up when you step on it to show there appreciation for the effort.

    OMG. Talk about wasting power.

  16. Finally pulling their weight! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So fat people are finally paying back to society for the extra burden they place on the NHS...

    1. Re:Finally pulling their weight! by bbtom · · Score: 1

      Glad to see you appreciate people for more than just their contribution or lack thereof to social welfare programmes.

      --
      catch (HumourFailureException e) { e.user.send("You, sir, are a humourless idiot."); }
  17. The energy it produces is negligible by Hentes · · Score: 1

    The energy that can be captured from a few steps most likely won't even reach manufactoring costs in its lifetime.

    1. Re:The energy it produces is negligible by delinear · · Score: 1

      The point of this is so the shopping centre can market how green they are. Facts are irrelevant :)

  18. It'll benefit their joints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's like walking on grass/dirt/some other flexible surface instead of straight concrete.

    You're doing people's joints a favor.

  19. Waste of energy in manufacture by eastlight_jim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some quick back of the envelope calculations: FTFA, each tile generates "2.1 W" per step. If we assume a typical step time of 500ms based a pace of 120 steps per minute this could be interpreted as about 1.05J captured per step.

    The casing is made from stainless steel which required about 53 MJ/kg for production in 2004. If we assume a tile casing mass of 2kg that is 106 MJ required for the steel production alone.

    The shopping centre may be open around 10 hours a day with perhaps 20 seconds between each step averaged over a typical day. This is 1800 steps per day at 1.05J per step giving a total of 1890 J captured per day. Assuming 100% efficiency and a never-closing shopping centre, this gives an energy breakeven for the steel alone of around 56000 days or 153 years.

    I know that other factors are in play such as the potential to raise awareness of environmental issues but this is ridiculous. I noticed that the award that the guy is in the running for is sponsored by Shell and part of me suspects that they know that these things are crap but want to be seen to promote something like this which appeals to the public and appears "green".

    1. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 3, Informative

      You also have to take into account the amount of energy taken to make the ceramic floor tile that this replaces. It probably won't zero out the stainless steel energy, but grinding clay and baking it in a kiln uses some energy.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    2. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Rogerborg · · Score: 0

      Thank you. Virtual "+1, only comment that matters" from me.

      What boils my piss isn't s much that some retail clowns have fallen for the greenwashing, but that my Goddamn tax money is being used to subsidise this scam.

      Eventually we'll have to face up to the fact that most such "renewable" schemes are snake oil that effectively piss fossil energy away on creating very long term discharge batteries. I just hope that we do it before we're too reliant on them to engineer our way out of the cold, dark hole.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This so damn much. Discos, yeah, fine, gyms, yeah, fine, but a bloody sidewalk?

      Solar power, wind power, even those new advances with using low-level kinetic energy in the air produced from sounds, are better than this.
      And this isn't even speaking about the really efficient solar methods either, the stuff we have yet to mass-produce, really promising tech produced in labs, such as those pretty damn efficient windows that focus a considerable amount of the EM to the sides of the window where smaller solar panels are. Saves so much money, but still outperforms simply due to all the EM landing on them.
      Imagine a huge-ass sky-scraper, tending to be made out of your typical steel, glass and concrete, those things could power themselves and probably a few buildings nearby if they were covered in it.
      Wind on top of buildings should also be a priority. But they'll require more safety checks because we know these things can break pretty violently if not done right.

      This is quite literally scraping energy off the bottom of the bottom, almost like taxing the poor.
      I'd be surprised if we were even walking by 200~ years time. Teleporters here we come! Hey, I can dream can't I?

    4. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      How much energy does it take to make the tile that would otherwise be installed?

      Make sure you subtract that.

      I mean, we solved the green energy problem in the 50s - nuclear reactors. Lots of them. for some foolish reason, people have decided against them.

    5. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't judge ROI of marketing based on how much energy it saves but on how much publicity it generates. In the end that's all it is: a publicity stunt, like most of the "we're green"-labels corporations love to tack onto their products and projects.

    6. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting the opportunity cost of NOT having to make the normal tiles, which are going to have to be made regardless of whether or not we use these special energy tiles.

      The cost of producing these tiles should really be the cost of producing these tiles minus the cost of making a normal tile.

    7. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you can even take that a step further to say that you can't really produce useful energy anyways.

      Rounding to 1800 Joules captured per day, we have 10 hours * 60 min /hour * 60 sec /min = 36000 seconds that the mall is open; 1800/36000 = an average power output of 0.05 watts during mall hours.

      Soooo what can we power with 1/20th of a watt exactly?

    8. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The shopping center has bigger problems than floor surfaces if they only get 1800 steps of foot traffic per day!

    9. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't be the first case of something ineffective but highly visible being done as a publicity stunt. The most effective conservation measures are hidden - not many people would notice if they switched from mains water to rainwater collection to flush the toilets. The big shopping center near here does that. Actually it goes a lot of conservation things - it's built in the green belt, which is supposed to be off-limits to any major construction, so they had to really work on the eco-credentials to convince the council. I'm sure the prospect of huge piles of tax income helped too.

    10. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Energy requirements to create the product are irrelevant, except when noting energy conservation of nonrenewable resources. If sources are renewable resources, then the only factors are cost and efficiency.

    11. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      You can work out the energy like this:

      The height is 5 mm. Weight is, (we'll be generous) 100 kg. So the energy is at most 5 joules per step. Generating 2.1 W therefore needs 1 step every couple of seconds, which sounds like a reasonable maximum. So even the pathetic 2.1W figure is hopelessly optimistic.

    12. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to deduct the energy cost of the 'normal' flooring for which this is a replacement.

      If the current flooring were as costly as this new flooring (which is unlikely), the 'waste' would be zero.

    13. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by galanom · · Score: 1

      No!

      It says: "The Pavegen floor tiles flex a slight 5 millimeters when stepped on, capturing kinetic energy which is either stored in lithium polymer batteries beneath its surface or converted into 2.1 watt-hours of electricity and distributed throughout surrounding lights"

      It is 2.1Wh per step.
      And if you see the photo, it's a tile every 100 or so, it's green with a bubble thing in the center. Nobody will walk over it, except for kids.

      This is gonna be a failure...

    14. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have either intentionally oversimplified the equation or unintentionally forgotten quite a few variables:

      1) energy cost of producing alternate flooring
      2) different installation/transportation/maintenance energy
      3) different energy use in health/medical care of walkers as these floors have different bodily impacts (see much discussion above)
      4) future improvements in efficiency/manufacturing/transport/installation (this is cutting edge tech where future gains are only ignored by idiots)
      5) psychological/financial matters (publicity, goodwill, curiosity, etc)
      6) the great value to humanity of trying new things, even if they prove unsustainable or foolish

      Kneejerk resistance to "wasting" resources on novel technology is not a good thing. There is a place for crunching numbers, but that's AFTER something is well-tried and tested, not before.

    15. Re:Waste of energy in manufacture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a person living 60 years on a 2000 calorie diet uses 183,338,040 joules, sure it's all 'renewable' energy but assuming 1 trillion people
      183,338,040,000,000,000,000 joules for 1 trillion people to eat if they all carry it on their backs. and dress from byproducts of foodstuffs. my math is off i came to the conclusion that there was enough food to feed 2 million people (seemed wrong). or that there was enough energy to feed 1 trillion people (also seemed wrong). but the energy to move that food and the energy to light heat and cool and other stuff, and to consider that droughts destroy good land. not to mention it failed to consider things like computers etc.

  20. Oh great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As if shopping wasn't already a major energy drainer for me.

  21. Better for your feet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if this will ease stress on feet pounding on concrete? People suffer from shin splints over time.

    -D

  22. Cool! by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Unstable sidewalks to go with unstable, convex shoes to shape your butt and break your ankles! I assume these sidewalks will be right in front of hospitals and orthopaedic offices.

  23. Educated guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If weight of human is about 80kg and flex is 5mm, then about 80*10*0.005 = 4J could be generated per step. I guess system is not very efficient, so let's assume 2J. That gives 4W per person if he makes 2 steps per second.

    Also, if step width is about 0.5m, then equivalent angle is about 0.005/0.5 = 0.01 rad = 0.5 degrees. That is difficulty the person experiences is as walking uphill with 0.5 deg inclination, or raising 1 meter per 100m of road. I guess it doesn't make much difference.

    1. Re:Educated guess by b0bby · · Score: 1

      In other words, enough to power the little led in the paver for a little while. Not anywhere near enough to ever power the main lights in a mall, as the article suggests. It's a novelty, but not really green in any meaningful sense - amount of energy expended to create these things will never be recouped in useful light generated. Now, it's not a bad thing to have cool light up pavers, but these inhabitat articles never get beyond the breathless press release stage and actually look at what they're consuming vs what they're saving.

  24. Not a bad idea by Sqr(twg) · · Score: 2

    Yes, the average slashdotter can do the calculations in his head and deduce that this will not produce useful quantities of energy, but that does not make it a bad idea.

    This guy will get millions in venture capital while you guys are still slaving away at the bottom of the R&D department of some big corporation.

    And should the "green" venture capital ever run out, I'm sure he can re-brand this as a military application (power for smart landmines perhaps?) and get another billion from the ministry of defence.

    I've seen this done many times before.

  25. Tired shoppers will buy less. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So factor in the cost of some travelators.

    1. Re:Tired shoppers will buy less. by v1 · · Score: 1

      That is soooo true. It's not free energy. Walking on those tiles will be like walking on soft ground, their feet will get tired. They better install more benches for people to sit on in the mall, they're going to need them.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  26. Your math is very flawed by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    You have a huge flaw in your math here:

    "This is 1800 steps per day at 1.05J per step giving a total of 1890 J captured per day."

    Wrong. Depending on what your point of measure is (you don't say really), it is either 1800 steps per day PER FILE, or 1800 steps per day PER PATRON.

    Either of these would multiple the daily output by at least thousands of times.

    1. Re:Your math is very flawed by jimicus · · Score: 1

      If it's per-tile, it'd also multiply the energy involved in manufacturing the things.

  27. As the Beatles said in "Taxman" by Clueless+Moron · · Score: 1

    "If you take a walk I'll tax your feet".

    Prophetic words indeed

  28. Why have it lighted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Each tile has a small section that lights up when you step on it. This seems like a stupid waste of engergy. Why have tiles that are supposed to be generating power for other applications waste it by flashing a light everytime you step on it. I know that they are supposed to "engage" the pedestrians but lets be honest once you have done it once or twice who will notice or bother to think about it. Have it integrate into the existing floors with as little difference as possible and use the energy saved from these "engaging " lights for the actual purpose of really lighting the area.

    Also 5mm deflection is a heck of a lot, if you are walking up stairs a change in the average stair height of as little as 2mm can cause people to trip.(Sheldon said so (Big Bang Theory) and he knows everything.)

  29. Wow... by malkavian · · Score: 1

    And that's not to the idea of the tiles, which seems to me to be great and laudable, it's a "wow" to the nit-picky posts that seem to have proliferated about "oh, they're stealing my energy from walking, who will pay for the extra effort" and such like..
    Seriously people! The body is designed to absorb shock from walking (all that cartilage in the joints and such like). Hey, to improve on that, shoes were designed to help absorb impact, and let the joints last even longer. Anyone ever thought of asking Nike etc. to pay your food bills for the extra energy that's lost from the soles of their trainers/sneakers?
    5mm is a fair old deflection, but I very much doubt that this is a plan 'free fall' level; I'm anticipating quite a 'spongy' feel to it. Like treading on moss, or loosely compacted earth.
    Rather than slate, or go all evangelical about it, I'm marking it firmly in the "very interesting tech" drawer, and I'll be making a point of visiting that mall to try out out for myself, then make my mind up..

  30. energy cost to produce traditional floors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While your calculations seem good, you are forgetting one important thing. You are forgetting about the energy cost to produce a comparable traditional floor. All in all, I do not think it is a good idea.

  31. Go away, language nazi. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not at all what the guy was trying to say, which was obvious to everybody else on here except you.

  32. Opened 2 weeks ago and already 30M visitors a year by abies · · Score: 1

    From wikipedia
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westfield_Stratford_City
    The centre opened on 13 September 2011.

    From Pavegen article:
    With nearly 30 million shoppers a year, the Westfield Stratford City Shopping Centre has plenty of foot traffic.

    Somebody is doing far reaching predictions here and presenting them as facts.

  33. Airline and bus walkways by netskink · · Score: 1

    Cool if you used them on airline and bus walkways. No need to wire to batteries. Simply have leds and caps in the tiles.

  34. At last! by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

    A positive aspect about obesity! The UK fatties will now be lauded as heroes because their ample proportions will enable them to generate more leckie than the average skinny person.

    --
    http://www.acetonestudio.com
  35. comparable by formfeed · · Score: 1

    5 mm flex is not even remotely comparable to world peace, chuck norris, or boreal toads. a flexible floor IS comparable to walking in sand.

    5mm flex is to world peace as boreal toads are to chuck norris

    1. Re:comparable by gandhi_2 · · Score: 1

      meta-incomparable?

  36. how long before the vendors insist it be replaced. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If people stop jogging past our store the light go out and they cant but nuthin cause the registers go down, the aircon stops, all the food courts firdges have got to be replaced daily because the fridges stop workin at night and and and...