Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Engineers Devise a Way To Harvest Wind Energy From Trees (vice.com)

Posted by yaelk on from the harvesting-energy dept.

derekmead writes: Harvesting electrical power from vibrations or other mechanical stress is pretty easy. Turns out all it really takes is a bit of crystal or ceramic material and a couple of wires and, there you go, piezoelectricity. As stress is applied to the material, charge accumulates, which can then be shuttled away to do useful work. The classic example is an electric lighter, in which a spring-loaded hammer smacks a crystal, producing a spark. Another example is described in a new paper in the Journal of Sound and Vibration, courtesy of engineers at Ohio State's Laboratory of Sound and Vibration Research. The basic idea behind the energy harvesting platform: exploit the natural internal resonances of trees within tiny artificial forests capable of generating enough voltage to power sensors and structural monitoring systems.

43 of 75 comments (clear)

  1. Or you could by Crashmarik · · Score: 2

    Slap a solar cell on the tree. (Tree has access to sunlight)

    1. Re:Or you could by BoogieChile · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not after you've covered it in solar cells, it doesn't.

    2. Re:Or you could by Crashmarik · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh yea because it takes a tree's worth of solar cells to put out a few milliwatts

    3. Re:Or you could by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'd exploit the "natural internal resonances of trees" by chopping them down, burning them in a furnace, boiling water to steam, and driving a turbogenerator with the steam. Then you're talking real power; none of this namby-pamby tiny artificial forest electron jiggling nonsense.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    4. Re: Or you could by ferret4 · · Score: 2

      Trees will grow canopy to cover your solar panel with shade though.

    5. Re:Or you could by DivineKnight · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we've, uh, topped out with nuclear fission, technologically speaking, at the moment. Not that it isn't a bang for your buck, fantastic technology...and those scientists will get fusion up and running at some point.

      Now it feels like we're just running a science fair to think of any creative way to tap into energy..."Power via fluorescent slime molds!", etc. I don't know where I was going with this...someone find me a potato or a lemon and a voltmeter.

    6. Re:Or you could by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Informative

      After the birds have crapped on them for a a few weeks they won't be outputting anything.

    7. Re:Or you could by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Burning bird crap will produce some energy.

    8. Re:Or you could by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      Or just burn the wood. I like to take the long view.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    9. Re:Or you could by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Too many variables missing to calculate the difference. The average tree provides you what, 1 - 2 weeks of heating? If your winter is 20 weeks long that's a minimum of 10 trees burned. Include the energy required to cut the tree down, trim it down, cut it in pieces, hack it to manageable pieces, place it in it's storage location and then place it in the fireplace. In addition it produces toxic fumes (yes, wood burning isn't good for humans to inhale. All that aside, I doubt there's enough energy in 50 trees vibrating to keep any house warm for the winter.

  2. I saw ET too. by istartedi · · Score: 1

    If they can harvest enough energy to power a Speak-and-Spell hacked into a satellite up-link, they might have something.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  3. Re:dateline 40,000 BC by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 4, Funny

    Engineers Devise a Way To Harvest Wind Energy From Trees

    Wow. I know Slashdot tends to lag behind the other news sites, but this is ridiculous.

    Sorry, meant to make a smart remark about windmills there. It's ruined now. I suck. Sorry, everyone.

  4. Too much theory, not enough practice by Dereck1701 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The last paragraph pretty much sums it up.
    "It's mostly a proof of concept or rather a disproof of the assumption that wind vibrations can't be usefully harvested. Don't expect tiny metal forests to power cities, but it's still a cool idea."
    So this appears not to have any practical applications.

    1. Re:Too much theory, not enough practice by beckett · · Score: 2

      So this appears not to have any practical applications.

      only if you lack imagination. could see something like this powering sensors (e.g. air quality sampler, barometer, photodetector) would be valuable for leaving self-powered telemetry and a small sensor package to study forest canopy ecosystems, individual tree performance, etc.

    2. Re:Too much theory, not enough practice by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      So this appears not to have any practical applications.

      It also doesn't do anything for theory. No one ever doubted that it was theoretically possible. So it was pointless from any perspective.

    3. Re: Too much theory, not enough practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In many wooded areas the forest canopy cover is dense enough to limit how much light can reach certain levels. This along with the changes in forest foilage, etc. can potentially limit the potential for solar.

    4. Re:Too much theory, not enough practice by orlanz · · Score: 1

      Yeah, overall not very impressive. I mean you could tie a mini windmill, vibrating ribbon between two branches, or sail to achieve the same if not better results. I don't understand the purpose of this other than application of a known theory in yet another expected environment.

  5. Sheahh, right! by XB-70 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Quoting from the article: "...Yet for dynamic systems, studies show narrow operating regimes which exhibit internal resonance-based behaviors; this additionally suggests that the energetic dynamics may be susceptible to deactivation if stochastic inputs corrupt ideal excitation properties..."

    If you can read that techno-babble, you either wrote for The Big Bang Theory or you were a technical advisor.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
    1. Re:Sheahh, right! by Etherwalk · · Score: 2

      Quoting from the article: "...Yet for dynamic systems, studies show narrow operating regimes which exhibit internal resonance-based behaviors; this additionally suggests that the energetic dynamics may be susceptible to deactivation if stochastic inputs corrupt ideal excitation properties..."

      If you can read that techno-babble, you either wrote for The Big Bang Theory or you were a technical advisor.

      Why would you need a technical advisor for a documentary?

    2. Re:Sheahh, right! by ProfMobius · · Score: 1

      I don't see the big deal. It means the resonance frequency is narrow and the system would stop to work if external factors move the excitation outside of this narrow band. The sentence is a bit weird, but perfectly comprehensible.

      --
      EULA : By reading the above message, you agree that I now own your soul.
  6. Why only trees? by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've always wondered why nobody did this with the 'soundwalls' that parallel every urban highway today - all you'd be taking is sound energy, so essentially it would even perhaps improve their sound-deadening qualities, while powering a nearby street light or two.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Why only trees? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      piezo generators have less than a percent of efficiency is why.

      also, your 106 decibel noisy highway is hitting you with a massive 0.04 watts per square meter. can you see the issue here that these piezo dumbfucks can't?

    2. Re:Why only trees? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      piezo generators have less than a percent of efficiency is why.

      I thought it was closer to 80%, at least theoretically. Can you give me a reference for that "Less than 1%" number?

      Whether this maps into anything like that number in a practical device for converting "found" mechanical power - such as tree sway or vibrations - is another matter entirely.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    3. Re:Why only trees? by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      Okay, so sound hits a material. If the material is brittle and hard, it won't vibrate, it might even ignore the sound. This solid and brittle material, like glass, would most likely repel sound.
      So what is the soundwall built out of? Either vibrating material in many layers to absorb the vibration, or a brittle hard material to avoid sound waves passing trough it.
      In the first you could get something, if its installed into the wall.
      In the second case, no, there won't be any gains.

    4. Re: Why only trees? by johnsnails · · Score: 1

      Build the wall out of trees derf red...
      all it really takes is a bit of crystal or ceramic material and a couple of wires and, there you go, piezoelectricity!

    5. Re:Why only trees? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's because the technology is only now getting cheap enough, and even then there is still some development work to do for large scale installations spread over long distances like that. It all needs to be cabled together, there needs to be a plan for dealing with failures, an easy way to install and maintain it must be developed for the non-technical guys who will be doing the actual work etc.

      I'm sure it will come, it just takes a frustratingly long time.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Why only trees? by JSC · · Score: 1

      Find a way to bind it to or build it into the skeletons of skyscrapers during construction. Calculating wind sway is part of the design process so optimizing placement for max power generated should be a fairly minor additional exercise. Admittedly the power generated is low but you could use it to charge the batteries in the emergency lights or run the pump in the lobby fountain or some other lower power background task. Yes, I'm aware that those aren't cost effective suggestions. They're just the first examples that came to mind. But any technology that is in common use becomes more cost effective and more efficient over time.

      --
      Time's fun when you're having flies. - Kermit the Frog
    7. Re:Why only trees? by IcyWolfy · · Score: 1

      http://www.greenoptimistic.com...
      2012 increased efficiency in PZE design by 25% by reducing coating area.

      And, then it says, you just put hundreds of thousands of these things under highways, and start reaping a non-trivial amount of electricity

    8. Re:Why only trees? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      And, then it says, you just put hundreds of thousands of these things under highways, and start reaping a non-trivial amount of electricity

      And cause a non-trivial increase in rolling resistance and reduction in mileage of the victim vehicles. That energy had to come from somewhere, and collecting it has side-effects.

      TANSTAAFL: The first law of thermodynamics as well as economics.

      The trees, on the other hand, may appreciate some energy-absorbing sway damping - especially in a storm. (As long as it doesn't interfere with pumping the water up the trunk to the leaves, of course.)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    9. Re:Why only trees? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      one damn wind turbine on that skyscraper could generate orders of magnitude more power, so why bother with the horribly expensive LCD clock backlighter?

  7. Re:dateline 40,000 BC by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    It's all good, friend. Forgive yourself.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  8. tiny deer by Archfeld · · Score: 1

    Will the tiny forests have tiny herds of deer romping through them.

    https://www.google.com/search?...

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  9. when a tree falls by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    exploit the natural internal resonances of trees within tiny artificial forests capable of generating enough voltage to power sensors and structural monitoring systems.

    so they invented self-powered Life Alert system for trees? ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  10. Well, that's a terrible idea by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Any time someone proposes an artificial tree as a solution, you know they are an asshole. Put a real tree there. It will use solar power to turn atmospheric CO2 into solid fuel. It really doesn't get any better than that. You would get more power from one tree-sized solar plant than from a whole forest of artificial trees that don't make air, don't clean air, and don't self-repair.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Wind Doesn't Come From Trees by Luthair · · Score: 1

    Duh

    1. Re:Wind Doesn't Come From Trees by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      Well actually, a small part of it does. The albedo of trees is generally very different than the albedo of the ground or vegetation around the trees. This creates differential heating between forest and non-forest, and the differential localized heating drives differences in localized air pressure. As soon as you have this, you end up with wind as the air flows from low to high pressure.

      It's the same thing as a ocean/sea breeze or mountain breeze, just on a smaller scale.

      (I'd add a close tag to being pedantic, but apparently I can not.)

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    2. Re:Wind Doesn't Come From Trees by Luthair · · Score: 1

      Wind comes from windmills!

  12. Not a replacement for solar, a complement by perpenso · · Score: 1

    It is hard to find an application of this that would not be more easily solved with solar. Perhaps if you really wanted to hide your sensor as this could be completely inside the tree.

    Its not a replacement for solar it is a complement. We need trees, we should probably have more trees. Their trunks and branches are going to bend and flex whether we take advantage of that or not. Much like the tides are going to come and go. Having piezo devices running along (outside) tree trunks and branches is an interesting idea. Way too early to say how practical it is, but its yet another thing to look into. Science and engineering is at times all about looking at "crazy" ideas.

    Skyscrapers? Bridges?

  13. Can work with real trees ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

    Piezo devices can be run along trunks and branches of real trees. This tech does not require artificial trees.

  14. Re:Wind from running car and trainssss... by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

    The resistance from the collector outweighs the gain.

  15. E.T. did this is 1982 to phone home. by Doke · · Score: 1

    In the movie, the alien used connections to a tree to power his transmitter to phone home. It's nice to see some confirmation that the idea isn't entirely fantasy.

    1. Re:E.T. did this is 1982 to phone home. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      And here we see confirmation bias in the bright lite of day.

      Doke really want's this to work. No critical thinking, just 'It confirms my childhood world view, yeah'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  16. Re:Alternative, letting it go to waste? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Which is more wasteful: Letting $0.01 worth of power 'go to waste' or spending $1,000 to collect it?

    Before you go all self righteous hippy on us, remember cost is a decent, but imperfect proxy for power spent doing something.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'