5 ms·

If that can be measured, I would be pretty surprised. I would project that the drain from all possible drone charging is orders of magnitude less than the e.g.

by wglb 3y ago

If that can be measured, I would be pretty surprised. I would project that the drain from all possible drone charging is orders of magnitude less than the e.g. coronal loss or the static radiation that blasts my ham radio. Any legal action would need to be able to document that loss, one would think.

Terr_ 3y ago
But you agree the loss exists, right? It's simply difficult to detect from some aggregate noisy flow at a centralized location, because the system was never designed to make that easily measurable. The amount could be estimated by looking at how much flying the drones do between charges, or by suing for access to charging/position telemetry of the units.
- _visgean 3y ago
  right now the loss does not exist. Its a cool experiment. If this was a big thing the drone fleet operators would simply get some kind of legal agreement with the transmission operator. But overall we are talking about really small amounts of energy.
  - Terr_ 3y ago
    > we are talking about really small amounts of energy Napkin-math time: I see 4 motors, searching the model-number suggests each has a max draw of ~380 watts, so let's assume it averages 1000 watts in operation, for 6 hours a day, with a local cost of electricity at $0.20 per kilowatt-hour, and this continues for one month. 1000*8/1000*$0.20*30 = $36 per month per drone. That's not give-a-penny-take-a-penny territory.
    - SECProto 3y ago
      That's bad napkin math. Per the video, it is charging at 50W. At worst, it would be charging 24hr/day, so 50Wx24h is 1.2kWh per day. Using your 20¢ rate, that's $0.24 per day or 7.20/month. That's the upper bound, assuming it only charges and does no work.
      - Terr_ 3y ago
        > That's bad napkin math. Per the video, it is charging at 50W. I previously pointed that out to someone in another comment, however I did not use 50 because the video-presentation continues with: > The current in the power-line was approximately 300 amperes [...] a higher power-line current would result in a proportionally higher charging power. As future iterations of this system become more efficient, the ratio of time spent flying and time spent charging will significantly increase. The point remains that once you reframe the electrical situation in financial terms, you will realize it is not just gleaning discarded ergs, and is instead significant enough to raise questions of theft and justice.
- SirSourdough 3y ago
  If the drones could meter their own consumption from the line using a utility-approved meter, anyone with a drone with said meter should be able to just tap onto lines at will and get a bill at the end of the month. Not sure how that plays out in terms of the weight/packaging of the drone but seems feasible for at least larger drones.
  - plorg 3y ago
    Really depends who owns the lines; I doubt many T/D owners would want drones flying around by their lines, much less directly grabbing them.
  - pigpang 3y ago
    A utility company can operate such drones without a meter, because they own lines and power.
- wglb 3y ago
  I would argue that it is less than an order of magnitude smaller than the coronal discharge or other losses. I suspect we are talking about 24 watts as compared to eg 1000 megawatt 500kv line. This is seven orders of magnitude difference. Totally lost in the noise.
  - Terr_ 3y ago
    > smaller than the coronal discharge [...] lost in the noise This is again technically plausible but ethically irrelevant. It's like the fallacy in: "It's OK for people to steal goods from that store, because the parent-company is very big and one theft won't even show up on their monthly financials and they've got spoilage and breakage too." > I suspect we are talking about 24 watts The video demonstration shows 50 watts of input. Napkin-math: Suppose one drone uses 1000 (battery) watts flying around, and does so for 4 hours each day for a month. (Made possible by an improved version of this research that charges at 200w.) That's 4 kWH. The electrical price is $0.20/kWh. That means siphoning $24/month for one drone. That's not a casual "keep the extra penny", that's a Netflix Premium subscription.
    - jfoutz 3y ago
      An alternative view, power companies point the finger at drones for outages or fires. Look the other way when people are stealing pennies. When the billion dollar bill comes in, hand it off to the police. Let them identify the operator, and put them on the hook for damages.
  - cdchn 3y ago
    If companies could sue Nature for potential lost revenue, they would.
    - CSSer 3y ago
      New FAA announcement: Effective immediately, all airspace below 500 feet near powerlines is now classified as Class M airspace (for money). If your registered drone is detected nearby, you’ll be charged per second.
PopePompus 3y ago
This video would probably suffice to document the loss, assuming the recharging was done without the utility's permission.

by wglb 3y ago

Terr_ 3y ago

But you agree the loss exists, right? It's simply difficult to detect from some aggregate noisy flow at a centralized location, because the system was never designed to make that easily measurable. The amount could be estimated by looking at how much flying the drones do between charges, or by suing for access to charging/position telemetry of the units.

_visgean 3y ago
right now the loss does not exist. Its a cool experiment. If this was a big thing the drone fleet operators would simply get some kind of legal agreement with the transmission operator. But overall we are talking about really small amounts of energy.
- Terr_ 3y ago
  > we are talking about really small amounts of energy Napkin-math time: I see 4 motors, searching the model-number suggests each has a max draw of ~380 watts, so let's assume it averages 1000 watts in operation, for 6 hours a day, with a local cost of electricity at $0.20 per kilowatt-hour, and this continues for one month. 1000*8/1000*$0.20*30 = $36 per month per drone. That's not give-a-penny-take-a-penny territory.
  - SECProto 3y ago
    That's bad napkin math. Per the video, it is charging at 50W. At worst, it would be charging 24hr/day, so 50Wx24h is 1.2kWh per day. Using your 20¢ rate, that's $0.24 per day or 7.20/month. That's the upper bound, assuming it only charges and does no work.
    - Terr_ 3y ago
      > That's bad napkin math. Per the video, it is charging at 50W. I previously pointed that out to someone in another comment, however I did not use 50 because the video-presentation continues with: > The current in the power-line was approximately 300 amperes [...] a higher power-line current would result in a proportionally higher charging power. As future iterations of this system become more efficient, the ratio of time spent flying and time spent charging will significantly increase. The point remains that once you reframe the electrical situation in financial terms, you will realize it is not just gleaning discarded ergs, and is instead significant enough to raise questions of theft and justice.
SirSourdough 3y ago
If the drones could meter their own consumption from the line using a utility-approved meter, anyone with a drone with said meter should be able to just tap onto lines at will and get a bill at the end of the month. Not sure how that plays out in terms of the weight/packaging of the drone but seems feasible for at least larger drones.
- plorg 3y ago
  Really depends who owns the lines; I doubt many T/D owners would want drones flying around by their lines, much less directly grabbing them.
- pigpang 3y ago
  A utility company can operate such drones without a meter, because they own lines and power.
wglb 3y ago
I would argue that it is less than an order of magnitude smaller than the coronal discharge or other losses. I suspect we are talking about 24 watts as compared to eg 1000 megawatt 500kv line. This is seven orders of magnitude difference. Totally lost in the noise.
- Terr_ 3y ago
  > smaller than the coronal discharge [...] lost in the noise This is again technically plausible but ethically irrelevant. It's like the fallacy in: "It's OK for people to steal goods from that store, because the parent-company is very big and one theft won't even show up on their monthly financials and they've got spoilage and breakage too." > I suspect we are talking about 24 watts The video demonstration shows 50 watts of input. Napkin-math: Suppose one drone uses 1000 (battery) watts flying around, and does so for 4 hours each day for a month. (Made possible by an improved version of this research that charges at 200w.) That's 4 kWH. The electrical price is $0.20/kWh. That means siphoning $24/month for one drone. That's not a casual "keep the extra penny", that's a Netflix Premium subscription.
  - jfoutz 3y ago
    An alternative view, power companies point the finger at drones for outages or fires. Look the other way when people are stealing pennies. When the billion dollar bill comes in, hand it off to the police. Let them identify the operator, and put them on the hook for damages.
- cdchn 3y ago
  If companies could sue Nature for potential lost revenue, they would.
  - CSSer 3y ago
    New FAA announcement: Effective immediately, all airspace below 500 feet near powerlines is now classified as Class M airspace (for money). If your registered drone is detected nearby, you’ll be charged per second.

PopePompus 3y ago

This video would probably suffice to document the loss, assuming the recharging was done without the utility's permission.