Water Power Grows Up
The University of Michigan has just announced the development of extraordinary new technology that can generate energy at a very low cost from ordinary currents in lakes or oceans.
The new device, which has been inspired by the way fish swim, consists of a system of cylinders positioned horizontal to the water flow and attached to springs.
As water flows past, the cylinder creates vortices, which push and pull the cylinder up and down. The mechanical energy in the vibrations is then converted into electricity.
Cylinders arranged over a cubic metre of the sea or river bed in a flow of three knots can produce 51 watts. This is more efficient than similar-sized turbines or wave generators, and the amount of power produced can increase sharply if the flow is faster or if more cylinders are added.
A “field” of cylinders built on the sea bed over a 1km by 1.5km area, and the height of a two-storey house, with a flow of just three knots, could generate enough power for around 100,000 homes. Just a few of the cylinders, stacked in a short ladder, could power an anchored ship or a lighthouse.
Never underestimate the innovation coming out of America’s great universities.
Is that image correct Jon – the article refers to horizonally aligned cylinders, not vertically? That image looks more like a model relying on a wave action to induce bending rather than a constant current inducing vertical oscillations
cheers!
Is that image correct Jon – the article refers to horizonally aligned cylinders, not vertically? That image looks more like a model relying on a wave action to induce bending rather than a constant current inducing vertical oscillations
cheers!
“the article refers to horizonally aligned cylinders, not vertically”
Actually, the picture is correct. Check out http://www.vortexhydroenergy.com/
However, a 1×1.5km area to power 100,000 homes means an array roughly the size of Delaware (~1000 km^2) could power all the households of the US (~ 111,160,000). Seems like some *shakey* math!
“the article refers to horizonally aligned cylinders, not vertically”
Actually, the picture is correct. Check out http://www.vortexhydroenergy.com/
However, a 1×1.5km area to power 100,000 homes means an array roughly the size of Delaware (~1000 km^2) could power all the households of the US (~ 111,160,000). Seems like some *shakey* math!
“the article refers to horizonally aligned cylinders, not vertically”
Actually, the picture is correct. Check out http://www.vortexhydroenergy.com/
However, a 1×1.5km area to power 100,000 homes means an array roughly the size of Delaware (~1000 km^2) could power all the households of the US (~ 111,160,000). Seems like some *shakey* math!
The reference was probably to flow “at right angles” to the axis of the cylinder, which is still more likely as you point out to induce lateral oscillations via “vortex shedding.” Wonder if the energy is recovered by some piezoelectric process, lke a giant old-fashioned stereo record pickup (remember those?) or what?
An interesting idea, wonder how it would work in salt water? And cavil, cavil, in how many places are there with stable bottoms with three knots of current flow, 20 feet of usable depth that wouldn’t interfere with navigation or kill Snail Darters, etc? Darn details.
Maybe they need a grant to figure it all out?
The reference was probably to flow “at right angles” to the axis of the cylinder, which is still more likely as you point out to induce lateral oscillations via “vortex shedding.” Wonder if the energy is recovered by some piezoelectric process, lke a giant old-fashioned stereo record pickup (remember those?) or what?
An interesting idea, wonder how it would work in salt water? And cavil, cavil, in how many places are there with stable bottoms with three knots of current flow, 20 feet of usable depth that wouldn’t interfere with navigation or kill Snail Darters, etc? Darn details.
Maybe they need a grant to figure it all out?
The reference was probably to flow “at right angles” to the axis of the cylinder, which is still more likely as you point out to induce lateral oscillations via “vortex shedding.” Wonder if the energy is recovered by some piezoelectric process, lke a giant old-fashioned stereo record pickup (remember those?) or what?
An interesting idea, wonder how it would work in salt water? And cavil, cavil, in how many places are there with stable bottoms with three knots of current flow, 20 feet of usable depth that wouldn’t interfere with navigation or kill Snail Darters, etc? Darn details.
Maybe they need a grant to figure it all out?
I wonder what effects on marine life this would have? I’m just working on the assumption that there’s no completely free lunch here.
I wonder what effects on marine life this would have? I’m just working on the assumption that there’s no completely free lunch here.
I wonder what effects on marine life this would have? I’m just working on the assumption that there’s no completely free lunch here.
Looks like the organ of Corti to me. Cochlear power generation!
Looks like the organ of Corti to me. Cochlear power generation!
Looks like the organ of Corti to me. Cochlear power generation!
I do like the little PR bit in the startup’s web sales pitch about why it’s OK to just go ahead with this technology –
“Compatibility with marine life – VIVACE utilizes vortex formation and shedding, which is the same mechanism fish use to propel themselves through the water. ”
Maybe “similarity” to some of the physics of movement of swimming fish,
http://www.ams.org/mathmedia/archive/02-2001-media.html#flapping
but “compatibility” is just flim-flam to make this particular bubble “attractive” to regulators, “acceptable” to snail-darter-protectors, and “understandable” to potential investors.
And the videos at the corporate site in Special’s post above show bench models that are nothing like the field-of-posts layout — it’s hard to see how the motion imparted by vortex creation and shedding would do anything but wave the one-fixed-end-one-free-end posts back and forth, with an interesting challenge converting that motion to electrical energy, and a limited likelihood that the energy collected would be in the same order of magnitude that the up-and-down, fixed-path bench scale shown in the video. And the vortex fields of each of those posts would have interesting effects on the ability of downstream posts to extract energy from the flow field. These are not fish swimming in each others’ wakes, able to sense and adjust their positions to slipstream like a NASCAR road ranger.
Wonder what Nicola Tesla would have thought about it.
And isn’t it fun to use blog posts to niggle and cavil and show how smart we think we are?
I do like the little PR bit in the startup’s web sales pitch about why it’s OK to just go ahead with this technology –
“Compatibility with marine life – VIVACE utilizes vortex formation and shedding, which is the same mechanism fish use to propel themselves through the water. ”
Maybe “similarity” to some of the physics of movement of swimming fish,
http://www.ams.org/mathmedia/archive/02-2001-media.html#flapping
but “compatibility” is just flim-flam to make this particular bubble “attractive” to regulators, “acceptable” to snail-darter-protectors, and “understandable” to potential investors.
And the videos at the corporate site in Special’s post above show bench models that are nothing like the field-of-posts layout — it’s hard to see how the motion imparted by vortex creation and shedding would do anything but wave the one-fixed-end-one-free-end posts back and forth, with an interesting challenge converting that motion to electrical energy, and a limited likelihood that the energy collected would be in the same order of magnitude that the up-and-down, fixed-path bench scale shown in the video. And the vortex fields of each of those posts would have interesting effects on the ability of downstream posts to extract energy from the flow field. These are not fish swimming in each others’ wakes, able to sense and adjust their positions to slipstream like a NASCAR road ranger.
Wonder what Nicola Tesla would have thought about it.
And isn’t it fun to use blog posts to niggle and cavil and show how smart we think we are?
I do like the little PR bit in the startup’s web sales pitch about why it’s OK to just go ahead with this technology –
“Compatibility with marine life – VIVACE utilizes vortex formation and shedding, which is the same mechanism fish use to propel themselves through the water. ”
Maybe “similarity” to some of the physics of movement of swimming fish,
http://www.ams.org/mathmedia/archive/02-2001-media.html#flapping
but “compatibility” is just flim-flam to make this particular bubble “attractive” to regulators, “acceptable” to snail-darter-protectors, and “understandable” to potential investors.
And the videos at the corporate site in Special’s post above show bench models that are nothing like the field-of-posts layout — it’s hard to see how the motion imparted by vortex creation and shedding would do anything but wave the one-fixed-end-one-free-end posts back and forth, with an interesting challenge converting that motion to electrical energy, and a limited likelihood that the energy collected would be in the same order of magnitude that the up-and-down, fixed-path bench scale shown in the video. And the vortex fields of each of those posts would have interesting effects on the ability of downstream posts to extract energy from the flow field. These are not fish swimming in each others’ wakes, able to sense and adjust their positions to slipstream like a NASCAR road ranger.
Wonder what Nicola Tesla would have thought about it.
And isn’t it fun to use blog posts to niggle and cavil and show how smart we think we are?
I don’t think the U. of Michigan would be promoting this if the research hadn’t been verified.
I don’t think the U. of Michigan would be promoting this if the research hadn’t been verified.
I don’t think the U. of Michigan would be promoting this if the research hadn’t been verified.
Ha, Tesla probably did think about it and rejected it. He probably rejected solar as well because it’s DC and not AC. It’s bogus tech and let’s get some nukes fired up to crank AC like Tesla knew from the start. Wind is AC, that’s cool. But you gotta have current and that means torque.
Ha, Tesla probably did think about it and rejected it. He probably rejected solar as well because it’s DC and not AC. It’s bogus tech and let’s get some nukes fired up to crank AC like Tesla knew from the start. Wind is AC, that’s cool. But you gotta have current and that means torque.
Ha, Tesla probably did think about it and rejected it. He probably rejected solar as well because it’s DC and not AC. It’s bogus tech and let’s get some nukes fired up to crank AC like Tesla knew from the start. Wind is AC, that’s cool. But you gotta have current and that means torque.
Jon, The University of Michigan, as I would see it, is a Big Tent, with lots of room for all kinds of positions, right or wrong.
Absolutely no question that flowing water past especially a cylindrical object results in vortices and forces at right angles to the flow. The trick is efficiently converting the forces from one form of energy to another, hopefully without the kinds of externalities and unintended consequences and surprises that other technologies have gifted us with. Buckyballs, anyone?
Let’s see, the University of Utah, Texas A&M, Department of Energy, Deparment of Defense (sic), the formerly all-powerful Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI, pronounced “MIGHTY”), all have “promoted” or continue to promote cold fusion as a promising energy source for the salvation and future of mankind. Six million scientists can’t be wrong!
Is there a stock play here? Short or Long?
And Dav, I live on a boat in Florida — my electrical needs are relatively modest, but they (including refrigeration and this-here computer, excluding A/C) are mostly served by a couple of “130-watt” (ideal conditions) 8-year-old Siemens solar panels. If I added another couple of panels and one of the newer high-frequency pure-sine inverters, not as efficient as Tesla’s ideal AC, of course, I could probably cool the (well-insulated) boat too.
No government incentives for my little installation, which cost about $2,200 with regulator (installation costs were zero, did it myself). Panel costs are headed down as production ramps and more efficient collectors are discovered, I could probably get an equivalent 130-watt fpanel or less than $900. Wouldn’t probably work for a 20,000 sq. ft. McMansion, of course, even Al Gore’s, without the Germany-style Socialist Incentives for purchase costs and their requirement that our monopoly utilities buy surplus power from solar installations at retail market rates — NOT commercial-discounted like most places now.
Jon, The University of Michigan, as I would see it, is a Big Tent, with lots of room for all kinds of positions, right or wrong.
Absolutely no question that flowing water past especially a cylindrical object results in vortices and forces at right angles to the flow. The trick is efficiently converting the forces from one form of energy to another, hopefully without the kinds of externalities and unintended consequences and surprises that other technologies have gifted us with. Buckyballs, anyone?
Let’s see, the University of Utah, Texas A&M, Department of Energy, Deparment of Defense (sic), the formerly all-powerful Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI, pronounced “MIGHTY”), all have “promoted” or continue to promote cold fusion as a promising energy source for the salvation and future of mankind. Six million scientists can’t be wrong!
Is there a stock play here? Short or Long?
And Dav, I live on a boat in Florida — my electrical needs are relatively modest, but they (including refrigeration and this-here computer, excluding A/C) are mostly served by a couple of “130-watt” (ideal conditions) 8-year-old Siemens solar panels. If I added another couple of panels and one of the newer high-frequency pure-sine inverters, not as efficient as Tesla’s ideal AC, of course, I could probably cool the (well-insulated) boat too.
No government incentives for my little installation, which cost about $2,200 with regulator (installation costs were zero, did it myself). Panel costs are headed down as production ramps and more efficient collectors are discovered, I could probably get an equivalent 130-watt fpanel or less than $900. Wouldn’t probably work for a 20,000 sq. ft. McMansion, of course, even Al Gore’s, without the Germany-style Socialist Incentives for purchase costs and their requirement that our monopoly utilities buy surplus power from solar installations at retail market rates — NOT commercial-discounted like most places now.
Jon, The University of Michigan, as I would see it, is a Big Tent, with lots of room for all kinds of positions, right or wrong.
Absolutely no question that flowing water past especially a cylindrical object results in vortices and forces at right angles to the flow. The trick is efficiently converting the forces from one form of energy to another, hopefully without the kinds of externalities and unintended consequences and surprises that other technologies have gifted us with. Buckyballs, anyone?
Let’s see, the University of Utah, Texas A&M, Department of Energy, Deparment of Defense (sic), the formerly all-powerful Japanese Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI, pronounced “MIGHTY”), all have “promoted” or continue to promote cold fusion as a promising energy source for the salvation and future of mankind. Six million scientists can’t be wrong!
Is there a stock play here? Short or Long?
And Dav, I live on a boat in Florida — my electrical needs are relatively modest, but they (including refrigeration and this-here computer, excluding A/C) are mostly served by a couple of “130-watt” (ideal conditions) 8-year-old Siemens solar panels. If I added another couple of panels and one of the newer high-frequency pure-sine inverters, not as efficient as Tesla’s ideal AC, of course, I could probably cool the (well-insulated) boat too.
No government incentives for my little installation, which cost about $2,200 with regulator (installation costs were zero, did it myself). Panel costs are headed down as production ramps and more efficient collectors are discovered, I could probably get an equivalent 130-watt fpanel or less than $900. Wouldn’t probably work for a 20,000 sq. ft. McMansion, of course, even Al Gore’s, without the Germany-style Socialist Incentives for purchase costs and their requirement that our monopoly utilities buy surplus power from solar installations at retail market rates — NOT commercial-discounted like most places now.
Yeah JT, I dig your self sufficient boat life and cheap rent. I’m headed to Costa Rica in a few days for the rest of the year and, after I paint my masterpiece, I’m gonna put me a nice casual life together. Also, I remember that cold fusion promise with power that was…”too cheap to meter.”
Yeah JT, I dig your self sufficient boat life and cheap rent. I’m headed to Costa Rica in a few days for the rest of the year and, after I paint my masterpiece, I’m gonna put me a nice casual life together. Also, I remember that cold fusion promise with power that was…”too cheap to meter.”