Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Models Human Blood System To Build Solar Power Prototype

Posted by samzenpus on from the solar-in-your-veins dept.

coondoggie writes "IBM today said its researchers are developing a solar power system that concentrates solar radiation 2,000 times by using a human-blood supply modeled way of cooling and converting 80% of Sun's heat into useful energy. IBM says the system can also desalinate water and cool air in sunny, remote locations where such systems are often in short supply."

87 comments

  1. Welcome to the Matrix! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 0

    \subject

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Welcome to the Matrix! by click2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

      In other news, IBM is selling their new Blood Solar Division to Lenovo.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  2. APK... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    A corrupt slashdot luser has pentrated the moderation system to downmod all my posts while impersonating me.

    Nearly 230++ times that I know of @ this point for all of March/April 2013 so far, & others here have told you to stop - take the hint, lunatic (leave slashdot)...

    Sorry folks - but whoever the nutjob is that's attempting to impersonate me, & upset the rest of you as well, has SERIOUS mental issues, no questions asked! I must've gotten the better of him + seriously "gotten his goat" in doing so in a technical debate & his "geek angst" @ losing to me has him doing the:

    ---

    A.) $10,000 challenges, ala (where the imposter actually TRACKED + LISTED the # of times he's done this no less, & where I get the 230 or so times I noted above) -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585795&cid=43285307

    &/or

    B.) Reposting OLD + possibly altered models - (this I haven't checked on as to altering the veracity of the info. being changed) of posts of mine from the past here

    ---

    (Albeit massively repeatedly thru all threads on /. this March/April 2013 nearly in its entirety thusfar).

    * Personally, I'm surprised the moderation staff here hasn't just "blocked out" his network range yet honestly!

    (They know it's NOT the same as my own as well, especially after THIS post of mine, which they CAN see the IP range I am coming out of to compare with the ac spamming troll doing the above...).

    APK

    P.S.=> Again/Stressing it: NO guys - it is NOT me doing it, as I wouldn't waste that much time on such trivial b.s. like a kid might...

    Plus, I only post where hosts file usage is on topic or appropriate for a solution & certainly NOT IN EVERY POST ON SLASHDOT (like the nutcase trying to "impersonate me" is doing for nearly all of March/April now, & 230++ times that I know of @ least)... apk

    P.S.=> here is CORRECT host file information just to piss off the insane lunatic troll:

    --

    21++ ADVANTAGES OF CUSTOM HOSTS FILES (how/what/when/where/why):

    Over AdBlock & DNS Servers ALONE 4 Security, Speed, Reliability, & Anonymity (to an extent vs. DNSBL's + DNS request logs).

    1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program). A truly "multi-platform" UNIVERSAL solution for added speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity to an extent (vs. DNS request logs + DNSBL's you feel are unjust hosts get you past/around).

    2.) Adblock blocks ads? Well, not anymore & certainly not as well by default, apparently, lol - see below:

    Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option

    http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/12/2213233/adblock-plus-to-offer-acceptable-ads-option )

    AND, in only browsers & their subprogram families (ala email like Thunderbird for FireFox/Mozilla products (use same gecko & xulrunner engines)), but not all, or, all independent email clients, like Outlook, Outlook Express, OR Window "LIVE" mail (for example(s)) - there's many more like EUDORA & others I've used over time that AdBlock just DOES NOT COVER... period.

    Disclaimer: Opera now also has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc..

    3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF (non-mozilla/gecko engine based) family based wares, So AdBlock doesn't protect email programs like Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows "LIVE" mail & others like them (EUDORA etc./et al), Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM M

    1. Re:APK... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Fact: it takes amost 2 hours for windows to load a 645,000 lines HOSTS file into the DNS cache. While loading, all DNS queries are blocked. That is neither fast nor efficient.

      Eat your words ("big fail")

    2. Re:APK... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you feed the troll it'll take that much longer for it to fuck off back under its bridge. Please don't feed the trolls.
      Do not feed the trolls.

    3. Re:APK... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      $10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

      * POOR SHOWING TROLLS , & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!

      Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.

      Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?

      Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.

      If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.

      I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.

      Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.

      Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.

      I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.

      If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!

      You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his ba

  3. Bigger Problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Normally if your blood is being exposed to 'solar power' you have bigger problems (eg, you're bleeding).

    1. Re:Bigger Problems by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

      Somehow I don't think that this has actually anything to do with solar power at all...if this stuff is actually "inspired by the hierarchical branched blood supply system of the human body", it's probably just something like street hierarchy, only applied to heat flow instead of car traffic. It doesn't matter where does the heat come from.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Bigger Problems by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, it applies to the function of blood to transfer excess heat out of the body. If you didn't have this function in your body, your insides would cook and your skin would be cold.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    3. Re:Bigger Problems by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Actually, it applies to the function of blood to transfer excess heat out of the body.

      You're repeating what I'm saying.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Bigger Problems by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Somehow I don't think that this has actually anything to do with solar power at all...if this stuff is actually "inspired by the hierarchical branched blood supply system of the human body", it's probably just something like street hierarchy, only applied to heat flow instead of car traffic.

      It's a cooling system for a HCPV solar cell. Instead of just releasing the heat into the air, they made use of it, similar to CSP solutions. In doing so they've combined 2 products into one and they get more energy out of the same installation.

      It doesn't matter where does the heat come from.

      Try telling that to the guy who has to keep that HCPV cell running...

    5. Re:Bigger Problems by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      It's a cooling system for a HCPV solar cell. Instead of just releasing the heat into the air, they made use of it, similar to CSP solutions. In doing so they've combined 2 products into one and they get more energy out of the same installation.

      You may not have noticed, but I know all that. I was just reacting to the GP's insinuation that this has anything to do with exposing anything blood-related to solar radiation.

      Try telling that to the guy who has to keep that HCPV cell running...

      The heat conductor actually doesn't care where the heat came from, or whether or not it passed through a PV cell on its way. In the same vein, the PV cell doesn't care how the heat is dissipated, as long as it is done somehow. Engineers usually call this "mix-and-match approach".

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re:Bigger Problems by erroneus · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced of that. There's more to temperature regulation than merely cooling things off. There's also the portion of the system which generates the heat in the first place. Reducing the systems and functions which create the heat can also be used to regulate body temperature... think metabolic variations and the roles dietary content play in this. I have been all through hacking my metabilism to get the results I was after and it worked quite well.

      In bother approaches, there are limits to the results which can be achieved in the human body. There are limits to the what can be achieved through metabolic controls and limits to what can be achieved through respiratory, perspiratory and circulatory controls. As I said in another comment, I'm not sure modeling a system after human systems are a great idea. In the end, humans adapt best through the use of his brain rather than through his body.

    7. Re:Bigger Problems by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      You may not have noticed, but I know all that. I was just reacting to the GP's insinuation that this has anything to do with exposing anything blood-related to solar radiation.

      Your fault for responding to AC without quoting. He got down-modded below most of our filters.

      Try telling that to the guy who has to keep that HCPV cell running...

      The heat conductor actually doesn't care where the heat came from, or whether or not it passed through a PV cell on its way. In the same vein, the PV cell doesn't care how the heat is dissipated, as long as it is done somehow. Engineers usually call this "mix-and-match approach".

      ...and you miss at sarcasm too.

  4. Remote Locations?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about non-remote sunny locations? I desperately want to ditch PG&E.

  5. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This development is soon to be delayed by politicians, warring factions in third world countries, corrupt governments, and corporate interests intent on developing the best method of monetizing the new prototype.

  6. But they found out iron in the blood by Spy+Handler · · Score: 4, Funny

    causes rust accumulation on components, so they substituted with copper. And the green-blooded IBM became very cold and inhuman.

    1. Re:But they found out iron in the blood by idontgno · · Score: 1

      It is only logical.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:But they found out iron in the blood by Jade_Wayfarer · · Score: 1

      I think we really need a "+1 Scary Insightful Funny" mod here.

      --
      Absence of proof != proof of absence.
  7. Cray 2 by simonbp · · Score: 1

    But can you power a Cray 2 with it?

    1. Re:Cray 2 by Aguazul2 · · Score: 1

      You need blood from horseshoe crabs to power a Cray. Human blood is only suitable for IBM solar power plants.

    2. Re:Cray 2 by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

      A Cray 2 requires 200KW. The panels claim 80% efficiency, so you'd need 200/0.8 = 250KW. Sun intensity, ignoring atmosphere and with optimal panel orientation, is around 1.3KW/M^2. So you'd need 192 M^2 of panels. In practice you'd need space for panel orientation gear, plus atmospheric attenuation would reduce power, so you'd need rather more than that, but it's entirely practical. However, no running the Cray at night.

      The Cray 2 had 1.3GF of floating-point processing power. A single i7 chip has 109GF, double-precision. The Cray 2 was without doubt one of the coolest looking computers ever built, but the technology is rather dated. You could comfortably emulate it on a modern desktop.

      *European, not handegg.

    3. Re:Cray 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, but the Flourinert coolant used for the Cray 2 *was* an artificial blood substitute.

    4. Re:Cray 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sun intensity, ignoring atmosphere and with optimal panel orientation, is around 1.3KW/M^2.

      [citation needed]

      But let me help you with that, since most solar power advocates can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that there is a physical limit to the amount of solar radiation that makes solar power a non-starter for baseload power generation:

      Insolation article on Wikipedia

      The relevant excerpt, with the critical information in bold:

      Over the course of a year the average solar radiation arriving at the top of the Earth's atmosphere at any point in time is roughly 1366 watts per square metre[3][4] (see solar constant). The radiant power is distributed across the entire electromagnetic spectrum, although most of the power is in the visible light portion of the spectrum. The Sun's rays are attenuated as they pass through the atmosphere, thus reducing the irradiance at the Earth's surface to approximately 1000 W /m2 for a surface perpendicular to the Sun's rays at sea level on a clear day.

      The actual figure varies with the Sun angle at different times of year, according to the distance the sunlight travels through the air, and depending on the extent of atmospheric haze and cloud cover. Ignoring clouds, the daily average irradiance for the Earth is approximately 250 W/m2 (i.e., a daily irradiation of 6 kWh/m2), taking into account the lower radiation intensity in early morning and evening, and its near-absence at night.

      So, 1.3 kW/m^2 if you can stick a solar panel at the top of the atmosphere and use a really long power cable; 1 kW/m^2 if you happen to be directly underneath the sun at sea level; but 0.25 kW/m^2 on average in general on non-cloudy days over all 24 hours - or, equivalently, 0.75 kW/m^2 per hour over 8 hours of reasonably direct sunlight.

    5. Re:Cray 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *European, not handegg.

      Was there a point to this, or did you just feel like throwing a super clever insult around for the fun of it?

    6. Re:Cray 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he accidentally the whole sentence.

    7. Re:Cray 2 by Anon-Admin · · Score: 1

      You may want to give up. I dont think the average couch potato will ever get it, they all think solar is the way of the future. Most seems to believe we will someday put a simple put a 2m^2 panel on your roof and get all your power needs.

      You know what, I take that back. Most could not tell you how big two square meters is. They are expecting one of them blue panel thingies will some day power the house.

    8. Re:Cray 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, if solar power is useless then how the fuck did I get to brake even with my investment in microgeneration even without accounting for state support (with state support I'm paying, on average, both the solar panels and the electricity bill with some money to spare) ? It's obvious it doesn't take only a single panel to power a house, but if you don't live in an apartment I most parts of the world you'll have enough land to carry your weight on average, of course you still need other sources of power, but solar power also has the advantage of producing more power on the hours it's most needed.

    9. Re:Cray 2 by H0p313ss · · Score: 2

      You could comfortably emulate it on a modern desktop.

      You could comfortably emulate it on a modern cellphone.

      I like pointing this out to anyone who'll listen, today for a small monthly fee any cell company will GIVE you a device that 20 years ago would have cost millions of dollars.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    10. Re:Cray 2 by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      You're quite right: I didn't account for atmospheric attenuation. I mentioned that. I just gave very rough calculations. I also didn't account for cloud cover. But even if you need ten times my estimate, that's still only 1,920 M^2 of panels. It'd be far more expensive than grid power, but if for some reason you feel the need to run a cray 2 off of solar (I cannot imagine why you would) then it could be done. You won't need to pave over a continent, bankrupt a country or anything like that. Maybe as an art project. Any eccentric multi-millionaire could do it on a whim.

      You did make a mistake yourself. The 'directly underneath the sun' part. Doesn't actually matter at all - you'd need more land for your panels at higher lattitudes, but the panel area remains the same, and the panels make up most of the cost. You just tilt the panels to keep them perpendicular to the incoming sunlight. You do get higher atmospheric attenuation when the sun is low.

    11. Re:Cray 2 by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      As is traditional, I converted the measurement into football fields. Once I saw how small a fraction of a field it would take, I took the conversion out. I neglected to remove the footnote specifying which 'football' field I'd used.

    12. Re:Cray 2 by Anon-Admin · · Score: 1

      First, I did not say it was useless, I said "I dont think the average couch potato will ever get it"

      Assuming you are an average couch potato, I would suggest that you did not break even. You simply did not understand the math. :P

      Doing some rough math I come up with the following.

      Checking my local electric I am paying $0.06 per kWh and if I feed electric back to the grid they pay $0.03 per kWh
      Checking current prices and using the optimum output from the system a $28,000 system will produce 16,755 kWh a year. (The average American uses 11,280 kWh a year)

      If you take the maximum output of the system multiplied by 10 years (The life expectancy of the system) then divided it by the cost to come up with a cost per kWh of $0.16

      Then subtracted the kWh above the average American usage as a net gain of 5,475 kWh multiplied by $0.03 per kWh as the electric company pays you for that, then multiplied it by 10 years. (Total $1,642) to be deducted from the overall cost of the system.

      This brings the electric cost to $0.15 per kWh on the system (Remember it cost me $0.06 per kWh from the grid)

      The sales brochures will often extend the life of the system out to 15 years in order to reduce the TCO and show you making a small net gain.

      All of the above is based on the system working at peek efficiency. The truth is you will average 8,000 to 9,000 kWh a year from the system not the 16,755 kWh as the real world never gives peek efficiency. Add to that the chance of the system lasting 10 years with out damage and costly repairs is slim, one hail storm (We have them here ever 5 years or so) will total a system are require replacement of the panels.

      Now, the reason I did not say it was useless is because there are a lot of uses for Solar. I have researched it because the cost of solar is well worth it, if and only if you use it in a manner that get the best bang for the buck so to speak. A small hunting cabin in the woods is a great example. It is not used as a daily place to live, you can design the cabin to be extremely electric efficient, and because you are not there all the time the solar can take days/weeks/months to charge the batters while you are not there so that when you are, you have electric on demand. Add to that the cost being far less than paying to have electric lines run miles out to your cabin and you have major net gains using it in that instance.

    13. Re:Cray 2 by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 1

      Ok, if solar power is useless then how the fuck did I get to brake even with my investment in microgeneration even without accounting for state support

      Okay, let's figure this out. According to the EIA, the average USA home uses 940 KWH per month. Dividing that by 30, you've got an average of 31.333 KWH per day of needs. Now, assuming that you get 250 watts on average from each 1 square meter, than you would need 5.222 square meters of solar coverage per house to collect enough power to average out over the year. Since the average home has +80 m^2 of roof space, I'm sure the average person could find 5.222 m^2 of space facing the correct direction. Now, obviously, you'd have to oversize it. Depending on where you live, you'd have to go bigger to cover the higher AC usage. You'd also want to have more capacity to cover possible expansion. So lets assume that you'd need 7 square meters of panels. That would give you a good buffer. Unfortunately, you'll have to buy a !#$( ton of batteries to store all of that power for night time. Sure, you could use the power company as a "battery" of sorts, but if everyone did that, the electric company would go belly up. So lets assume that you have your own batteries. I'd be willing to bet that most people wouldn't want to oversleep their alarm clock because their daughter left a couple lights on over night, and the power ran out. Or maybe you had a slightly hotter day than average, and your AC used up more than it's fair share of electricity. So lets add more panels, and more batteries. Before you know it, you're spending a metric shit ton of money on panels and batteries. Lest we not forget that until a http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-04/solar-panels-now-make-more-electricity-they-use>few weeks ago, solar panels took more energy to make than they generated.

      Now, even if a solar panel would be a good investment for someone who lives in Arizona, I assure you that we don't get nearly as much sun in Michigan. If I put up solar panels, even after I cut down several trees (raising my cooling costs), I still wouldn't get nearly as much sun as necessary to heat my house. I also have an East/West slopped roof. I'm assuming that would be less than ideal for solar generation. I'm sure that there are some people that solar makes sense for, and maybe you're one of them. For the rest of us, it's a stupid idea, and it will take a long time to even out.

      Oh, and these numbers used all assume that you're getting the efficiency mentioned in the article. The average CURRENT panel gets 15-20% efficiency, so you're talking about .066 KWH per 1m^2, which means you'd need > 20 m^2 to cover the average American home needs.

  8. I've Been Moved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Are these "IBM researchers" in constant fear of losing their jobs? If not, how did they get such a sweet deal?

  9. "are often in short supply." by Kittenman · · Score: 1

    "are often.. scarce". Sorry, but it's a pet peeve of mine. If I could count the number of times people say "in short supply" rather than "scarce" in a month, I'd be a rich man. Well, if someone would pay me to do that sort of thing, of course...

    --
    "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    1. Re:"are often in short supply." by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      So why is "scarce" so much better than "in short supply"? I grant you, it's shorter, and that's a valid reason to prefer it, but it doesn't seem a grave enough sin to be a pet peeve.

    2. Re:"are often in short supply." by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      So, you don't like idioms when other people use them?

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:"are often in short supply." by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      "are often.. scarce". Sorry, but it's a pet peeve of mine.

      My pet peeve is when folks place contradictory words too close together. Thanks for the double dot, that was awfully... kind of you.

  10. I can't buy it right now, so it's useless BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This being a slashdot story on a new technology, at least one comment of the type "I can't buy it right now, so it's useless BS" is pro forma.

    You're welcome.

  11. Coming soon... not by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

    Coming soon in 3-5 years just like every other solar breakthrough. And where is my flying car?

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
  12. "Useful energy"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing to see here, move along. When they say useful energy, are they referring to a solar heater or a solar power producing electricity? Just a quick search on the internet leads me to believe that solar/water heating is already ~75% efficient.

  13. Link to actual illustration by PhamNguyen · · Score: 2

    This is really cool, pun intended, their cooling system really is similar to human blood flow (fractal capillary structure). See video here as the article just discusses the application to cooling solar cells (which is cool in its own right), but not how the cooling actually resembles bloodflow in humans.

    1. Re:Link to actual illustration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fractal

      oh boy here we go

    2. Re:Link to actual illustration by PhamNguyen · · Score: 1

      Nothing in the real world is truly self similar because eventually you get to atoms. The IBM water coolers really are fractal. To disagree is not pedantic, it's wrong

  14. A Dyson sphere! by Blaskowicz · · Score: 2

    Let me say I'm excited that IBM is building a Dyson sphere powered by human blood, first, to get 80% of the Sun's output is tremendously effective and secundly who knew the blueprints were somehow sitting in our DNA?
    It comes at a surprise that IBM is so technologically advanced, now it ain't gonna easy to launch all that stuff and assemble it in heliocentric orbit.

  15. Not cost competitive by jamesl · · Score: 1

    The cost of energy with this system is " ... less than 10 cents per KWh ... cost at coal power stations is 5 - 10 cents per KWh ... "

    And it will be on-line at most eight hours per day.

    Other than that, it's a good deal.

    1. Re:Not cost competitive by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      So, environmental responsibility doesn't matter at all? It's not just dollars, you know.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    2. Re:Not cost competitive by dagarath · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they can find a way to store the heat energy for use during darkness.

      (I guess the blood system analogy reads better than just saying they made a radiator.)

    3. Re:Not cost competitive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      at most eight hours per day

      Thanks, James, for the laugh. At least I hope you were trying to be funny.

      Other than that AND THE LACK OF POLLUTION, it's a good deal.

    4. Re:Not cost competitive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "less than 10 cents per KWh"? If that's the cost to me as a consumer sign me up!!! I'm tired of paying PG&E 35 cents per KWh.

    5. Re:Not cost competitive by khallow · · Score: 1

      So, environmental responsibility doesn't matter at all? It's not just dollars, you know.

      But those dollars are an important part of environmental responsibility. I think one of the great tragedies of the modern era is the considerable economic ignorance of people in the environmental movement.

    6. Re:Not cost competitive by sulimma · · Score: 1

      a)
      End customers often pay more than those 10ct due to transportation losses and other overhead. So if you are connected ton the grid and have a minimum power requirement higher than the peak output of this system, the system is profitable.

      b)
      Coal has seen very little cost improvement over the last decades while solar is co stantly improving at 30% per year since the sixties. It is intermediate steps like this system that are likely to make solar one of the least expensive technologies around.

      (BTW: A recent survey revealed that solar installation overhead costs are 3x as high in the US compared to Germany due to less efficient work organization. So if IBMs numbers are for the US there is immediate room for improvement.)

    7. Re:Not cost competitive by jewens · · Score: 1

      30% cost improvement per year 19 works out to about $500,000/kWh in 1969.

      --
      That group of bovine standing over there appears quite portentous. That's right it's an ominous cow herd.
    8. Re:Not cost competitive by sulimma · · Score: 1

      My fault, wrong wording. If you go backwards you see a 30% price increase per year which is a 23% cost reduction when you go forward (1/1.3 = ca. 0,77) which equates to a factor of about 10000 over 44 years.
      Photovoltaics system costs in 1969 where about 3000$/kwp compared to about 1.4$/kwp in 2013. This is a factor of 2150 (19% improvement per year). Together with shorter module liveteam and higher maintainance cost and much higher installation area you get the 23% improvement.
      I currently can't find 1969 data, but here is a plot going back to 1972:
      http://www.nzdl.org/gsdl/collect/envl/archives/HASH0123.dir/p17.gif

      I currently don't find long term data for coal, but there is a slow increase since 1995. The gap between coal and solar has been rapidly closing.

      It is not guaranteed that the same cost can be reached, but we are allready down to a factor of 3, coming from a factor of several thousand. Currently no significant slow down in improvement is apparent. There is no data to support that coal will continue to be less expensive than solar twenty years from now. Denying this is similar to those who in the face of moores law claimed that there never could be interactice 3D computer graphics with bump mapping.

    9. Re:Not cost competitive by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 1

      Solar panels require energy to create. People never think about that. These magic devices don't just magically appear on your roof. They have to take raw materials, break them down enough to get the raw components, and then convert those into solar panels. All of that takes massive amounts of energy. Lets not forget that they then have to ship them from the other side of the world. In fact, it wasn't until earlier this month that solar panels http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-04/solar-panels-now-make-more-electricity-they-use>generated more energy than they took to create them. So just think about this, by the time you get those panels installed on your roof, it will take you years and years before you've generated more electricity than you forced a company to use to create the damn panels in the first place. I wish I knew how long, because I'm guessing it's decades.

    10. Re:Not cost competitive by jewens · · Score: 1

      +1 Informative, Thanks.

      --
      That group of bovine standing over there appears quite portentous. That's right it's an ominous cow herd.
    11. Re:Not cost competitive by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      The idea is that the large power requirement is centralized, so that higher-efficiency higher-efficient processes could be used to provide said industry.

      Not everyone can have a hydroelectric generator in their back yard, but it makes sense that a panel plant might.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    12. Re:Not cost competitive by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 1

      Yeah, cause we all know that the environment and sustainable energy are China's number one priority. Sure, you could buy panels in the USA, but once the demand gets high enough, you KNOW manufacturing in China will squeeze the domestic manufacturers till they crumble. Which leaves us back at destroying the planet to build solar panels that take years too have a net positive effect on the environment.

  16. You people are the trolls... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    See here, explains it all -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3561925&cid=43223585

    * :)

    I.E./Summary: Trolls had a challenge put to them to validly disprove my points in the post I just replied to - result? Trolls FAIL... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!

    Hahaha... lol, man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...

    Ah yes "geek angst" @ it's 'finest' (not), vs. facts & truths = downmod by /. weak trolls!

    ... apk

    1. Re:You people are the trolls... apk by Khyber · · Score: 0

      You do realize that every time your dumb ass posts we can use the laws of physics to narrow down where you live/post from to within a 2km radius, right?

      I suggest you stop shitting up the board before I show you other neat things physics can do. Like what high-velocity flying metal can do to soft tissue.

      Both you and the MyCleanPC people are targets.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:You people are the trolls... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like what high-velocity flying metal can do to soft tissue.

      Say that to my face, not online, and see what happens.

  17. Frist psOt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    dea6d. It is A dead

  18. I get that evolution yields excellent results by erroneus · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Evolution is a very powerful force. I recall an evolutionary software design system that was used to create the most efficient antenna discussed here on Slashdot some years ago. It was a pretty cool concept and it worked pretty well as I recall. But to straight up model a system after the human circulatory system? Really? I would think there were far better systems than the human system. Humans have stopped evolving physically and one could say we are devolving as our survival is no longer so dependent on what is physically the most fit.

    I would look to life which survives well in difficult climates to see what adaptations could be mimmicked.

    1. Re:I get that evolution yields excellent results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans have stopped evolving physically

      So there's no mutation, multiplication and selection in humans? So we either are all clones(no mutattion), don't breed(no multiplication) or are immortal(no selection). Didn't notice one of them.
      When exactly did the human evolution stop? March 4 1812?
      Just because the selection rate is lower in some areas in the world in recent times, doesn't mean its non existant.

    2. Re:I get that evolution yields excellent results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Also, even if humans *had* stopped evolving as GP mistakenly asserts, that doesn't really mean jack. If we "stopped evolving" tomorrow, to yesterday, or even a thousand years ago, we are sitting on top of several billion years of accumulated evolved features. More than enough to serve as a model for some nifty engineering.

      The GP falls into the trap of thinking that "evolution trends towards better", which is another way of saying "evolution is going somewhere", aka "evolution has a goal", and of course from there it is only a short step to "The Mighty Creator has a plan for us". Just because we tend to represent the diversity of life on this planet in the structure of a tree, that does not mean that there is a tree to climb.

      Evolution does produce "better" organisms", but only for a very narrow definition of "better". The definition being "more likely to successfully achieve reproduction in its current environment." The idea that a wombat is "better" than a T-Rex just because it has a few hundred million years of extra evolution in its pouch is absurd. T-Rex ftw.

  19. "in short supply" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or scarce as another poster commented. The real reason these are scarce is because they're not cost effective. I mean hell, we have the technology to build solar panels all around the moon and set up a network of satellites to beam power down to earth via microwave lasers, but what good is the tech if it would bankrupt the entire world to do it?

    So the real question is, does this new technology fulfill all it's promises in a cost effective manner? If not, it's FUD. If so, well then we have something here.

  20. Why human? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not model it after mammalian blood system?

  21. Complexity be gone! by govett · · Score: 1

    Any such system had better be damn simple to operate, maintain, and service if it's to be used in remote areas.

  22. Suitable to generate liquid fuels? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    One pet idea of mine is we should generate ammonia (NH3) from water, air, electricity and heat. You would need nuclear power or efficient renewables for that ; it's wasteful as you need electrolysis of water, then use the Haber process to combine hydrogen and nitrogen into ammonia but the end result is a non carbonated liquid fuel you can easily enough handle, with about a third the energy density of diesel fuel by volume - that's way better energy storage than H2 and batteries!
    Ammonia can be burnt in converted internal combustion engines or more specific engines, and used in fuel cells.
    HCPVT would be very useful, as it provides both electricity and heat, needed by the Haber process.

    Another great fuel to make would be CH4, which is already widespread, burns clearly and used in transportation (mainly city buses) as well as flexible power generation. The process here is methanation, but requires CO2 which you can't easily get from the air, barring "artificial trees" that are questionable for now. You would use this on industrial sites (e.g. cement factory), taking waste CO2 as input.

    Any idea if we should do this, and especially on a major scale? We badly need to get rid of all fossil fuels and even "bio"fuels (palm oil, ethanol) IMO and that's why I favor nuclear fission too (though we can't have terawatts of it it seems), anyway I don't want to leech off the current biosphere and past ones.

    1. Re:Suitable to generate liquid fuels? by Thagg · · Score: 1

      Ammonia is terribly useful in its own right. The amount of energy used making ammonia for fertilizer is huge, and is growing. You can stop right there, and have a very useful process -- even if it only runs on sunny days.

      --
      I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
    2. Re:Suitable to generate liquid fuels? by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Ammonia is terribly useful in its own right. The amount of energy used making ammonia for fertilizer is huge, and is growing. You can stop right there, and have a very useful process -- even if it only runs on sunny days.

      That word is obsolete. We now use "terrorist WMDs" instead.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  23. Nothing converts from heat with 80% efficiency by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Simple fact. There is no heat engine that can convert heat to mechanical energy with 80% efficiency (with reasonable source/sink temperatures). They must be playing fast and loose with the definition of "usable energy".

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Nothing converts from heat with 80% efficiency by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      It's obvious they refer to using the heat itself, whether that is "usable energy" depend on your needs but heat can be pretty useful, if only for cooking, making tea and taking a shower.
      I think the 80% figure is the sum of electricity and useful heat, leaving 20% as heat wasted away.

    2. Re:Nothing converts from heat with 80% efficiency by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Even concentrating heat is not all that efficient. If you have two huge lakes with a 10 degree temp diff (one at 35 deg C and another at 25 deg C) you still can not even boil a liter of water, certainly not with 80% efficiency.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    3. Re:Nothing converts from heat with 80% efficiency by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 1

      Isn't that how Geothermal HVAC works? I know it requires other inputs (AC Power), but it uses the ground or even a lake as it's source of heating and cooling.

  24. Article not well written by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read TFA. I don't trust it, because it contains statements like: "each 1x1 centimeter chip can convert 200-250 watts, on average, over a typical eight hour day in a sunny region" - the author doesn't appear to understand what a Watt is.

  25. Water World by xdor · · Score: 1

    Can Kevin Costner save us from Big Blue?

  26. 30%, not 80%. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics.

    Also, in case anyone is wondering why this is better than normal water cooling, the basic advantage is that the boundary layer is eliminated by forcing the water through very small capillaries. A possible disadvantage is that this likely requires relatively high pressures, although I haven't looked too far into it to find out.

  27. Buzzwords for a patent troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM has no intention of making a solar powered anything. Just as they don't have any plans to make lithium air batteries

    http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2012/01/10/ibm-says-it-now-has-a-working-lithium-air-battery/

    They're the worlds biggest patent troll, they 'research' in an area that might result in future income (whether its solar or batteries). There's no intention to solve the real problems, or make any actual products, because that's hard and expensive. The output from that research is plausible sounding patents backed by marketing buzzwords, non commercial partial solutions that don't work well are fine for patents.

    Ten years from now, they'll be demanding money for their fluffy patents for things they never invented, and pointing to the marketing headlines are evidence that a jury will find in their favor. They are a troll. Nothing more nothing less.

    A very successful troll, but a patent troll nevertheless.

  28. Extended hours of operation ... by shikaisi · · Score: 1

    The solar power system using human blood works much better at Twilight.

    --
    No left turn unstoned.
  29. Hey look another solar power break through! by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    That leads to nothing as it is too expensive or unrealistic to work. With silly claims of efficiency etc... How many of these do we get on slashdot per year, for how many years. You would think by now we would all be running 100% solar power by now.

    So put me down for skeptical.

  30. Fact: You failed vs. APK 2x on that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Once here http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3673511&cid=43516405 + a 2nd time, here http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3671613&cid=43514927

    It's a widely known problem in Windows' known faulty DNS clientside local cache service with larger hosts files (you err in that mistake with the blatantly faulty dns caching client in Windows when using large hosts files).

    So, turn off your local dns clientside cache service in Windows to solve your problem (also saving its cpu cycles, ram, and other forms of I/O it uses as apk also pointed out since it fails with bigger hosts files).

    You can read more on it here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download , to verify that much from MalwareBytes' HpHosts site (on the top left-hand side of that site's "hosts file installation" section there).

    You might even LEARN something, since it's taken you "3 strikes/your out" times already, lol.

    1. Re:Fact: You failed vs. APK 2x on that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Paul, you fail it. Your skill is not enough.

  31. Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    You're embarassing yourself Jeremiah Cornelius http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276741 since you posted that using your registered username by mistake (instead of your usual anonymous coward submissions by the 100's the past 2-3 months now on slashdot) giving away it's you spamming this forums almost constantly, just as you have in the post I just replied to.

    1. Re:Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello Paul.

      p.s. What do you make of this?

    2. Re:Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forty Two Tenfold has Jeremiah Cornelius = "friend" in his account on slashdot = obvious he's a sockpuppet/alternate registered 'luser' account Jeremiah Cornelius (you) use along with your anonymous coward posts you blew it on accidentally submitting one of them by your registered username here Jeremiah Cornelius http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276741 and you failed badly giving yourself away troll.

    3. Re:Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up, Paul.