3 ms·

This seems so inefficient: you're transferring power from the moving water to moving air, but the air can be compressed. It must be losing a lot of it's power i

This seems so inefficient: you're transferring power from the moving water to moving air, but the air can be compressed. It must be losing a lot of it's power in that transfer alone. Plus, you get all the downsides of deploying a mechanism at sea: constant salt and stress.

rtkwe 6y ago
The compression is a good thing, it drives the power to the turbine in the first place and also acts like a spring so it'll smooth out the energy impulse from the waves. One of the big problems with other wave energy systems is the stress from waves is pretty peaky so the generators have to spin up and down a lot and then also deal with storms. In this the air acts like a cushion to the peaks of energy from waves and the whole power generation side can be bypassed in a storm even by just opening another air path.
- samizdis 6y ago
  > ... power generation side can be bypassed in a storm even by just opening another air path. This surely presents the opportunity for an art installation along the lines of [1] ‘Sea Organ’ uses ocean waves to make beautiful music , but perhaps adapted to sound loud but harmonious storm alerts for, say, five minutes or so to warn coastal dwellers. Different tunes could cut in at varying storm strengths, maybe ... . [1] https://inhabitat.com/incredible-sea-organ-uses-ocean-waves-to-make-beautiful-music/ https://inhabitat.com/incredible-sea-organ-uses-ocean-waves-...
- photojosh 6y ago
  I'm interested in micro-scale power generation from intermittent sources, so the other day I came across a paper [0] which discusses capturing the energy in gusts more efficiently: drive the turbine as if it were a motor when you detect a gust to accelerate the blades past stall. Very clever! Another comment below [1] also prompted my reply, if they do use the Wells Turbine, this is even more relevant. [0] Effective capture of wind gusts in small wind turbines by using a full active rectifier: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6993228 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6993228 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26020506 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26020506
Pfhreak 6y ago
This seems so inefficient: you're transferring power from the sun into carboniferous life forms, then relying on the compression of the earth to squeeze that carbon into a dense form. Then you have to mine, ship, store, and burn that carbon to boil water to turn turbines -- you are losing a lot of the power in harvest transport alone, let alone the steam cycle. Plus you get all the downsides of combustion: fly ash and greenhouse gases. Non sarcastic response: Different sites are going to have different needs and different local resources they can exploit for energy. There may be reasons why solar, wind, nuclear, etc. might not be appropriate here.
- flavius29663 6y ago
  I wasn't comparing it with fossil fuels, but with more direct energy, where you have a turbine sunk in water, or other forms of floating wave generators, without the power being intermediated by air movement
renewiltord 6y ago
Isn't that traditional? We lack most mechanisms of extracting power from sources. Like, even with nuclear radiation we insist on converting to steam generally. Some times an effective mechanism doesn't exist. Like how if I could, the ideal way to warm my home would be to just transmit power to a bubble around me and warm that, since the rest of the house doesn't need warming, but there is no pleasant way to do that so you use a couple of low efficiency ways: * heating the entire house * using lots of energy to grow plants for animals to eat so you can consume them so you can generate heat you can keep within insulation with a sweater
r00fus 6y ago
We're dipping our fingers into a massive untapped stream of energy. It's also a vehicle for sustainable energy (part of a portfolio) that deserves investigation.

rtkwe 6y ago

The compression is a good thing, it drives the power to the turbine in the first place and also acts like a spring so it'll smooth out the energy impulse from the waves. One of the big problems with other wave energy systems is the stress from waves is pretty peaky so the generators have to spin up and down a lot and then also deal with storms. In this the air acts like a cushion to the peaks of energy from waves and the whole power generation side can be bypassed in a storm even by just opening another air path.

samizdis 6y ago
> ... power generation side can be bypassed in a storm even by just opening another air path. This surely presents the opportunity for an art installation along the lines of [1] ‘Sea Organ’ uses ocean waves to make beautiful music , but perhaps adapted to sound loud but harmonious storm alerts for, say, five minutes or so to warn coastal dwellers. Different tunes could cut in at varying storm strengths, maybe ... . [1] https://inhabitat.com/incredible-sea-organ-uses-ocean-waves-to-make-beautiful-music/ https://inhabitat.com/incredible-sea-organ-uses-ocean-waves-...
photojosh 6y ago
I'm interested in micro-scale power generation from intermittent sources, so the other day I came across a paper [0] which discusses capturing the energy in gusts more efficiently: drive the turbine as if it were a motor when you detect a gust to accelerate the blades past stall. Very clever! Another comment below [1] also prompted my reply, if they do use the Wells Turbine, this is even more relevant. [0] Effective capture of wind gusts in small wind turbines by using a full active rectifier: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6993228 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6993228 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26020506 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26020506

Pfhreak 6y ago

This seems so inefficient: you're transferring power from the sun into carboniferous life forms, then relying on the compression of the earth to squeeze that carbon into a dense form. Then you have to mine, ship, store, and burn that carbon to boil water to turn turbines -- you are losing a lot of the power in harvest transport alone, let alone the steam cycle. Plus you get all the downsides of combustion: fly ash and greenhouse gases. Non sarcastic response: Different sites are going to have different needs and different local resources they can exploit for energy. There may be reasons why solar, wind, nuclear, etc. might not be appropriate here.

flavius29663 6y ago
I wasn't comparing it with fossil fuels, but with more direct energy, where you have a turbine sunk in water, or other forms of floating wave generators, without the power being intermediated by air movement

renewiltord 6y ago

Isn't that traditional? We lack most mechanisms of extracting power from sources. Like, even with nuclear radiation we insist on converting to steam generally. Some times an effective mechanism doesn't exist. Like how if I could, the ideal way to warm my home would be to just transmit power to a bubble around me and warm that, since the rest of the house doesn't need warming, but there is no pleasant way to do that so you use a couple of low efficiency ways: * heating the entire house * using lots of energy to grow plants for animals to eat so you can consume them so you can generate heat you can keep within insulation with a sweater

r00fus 6y ago

We're dipping our fingers into a massive untapped stream of energy. It's also a vehicle for sustainable energy (part of a portfolio) that deserves investigation.