Bladeless wind turbine
>>55162114
wouldnt it be more efficient to have them much closer together?
explain
How do they work? I can't see this being more efficient than a three blade windmill
>>55162223
less moving parts - less wear
just a thought
>>55162221
Here you go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_5K4kmnsL4
>>55162223
Less butthurt people complaining about "ugly" windmills
>>55162250
There would probably be more wear on the one part that does move though so more frequent maintenance. Plus less power generated probably.
>>55162320
Riiiight
So instead of thin windmills we're gonna go with wobbling sticks....
>>55162398
just looking at this thing tells you its easier to install therefore a cheaper acquistition
its one part compared to how many with the blade variant?
and that one part might be also easier to replace
but im not an engineer
>>55162320
Hope it's durable because you're going to have all kinds of animals and birds of prey perching on top of every one of those. I guess you could solve that by placing vertical pigeon spikes on them, but then the naturefags are going to complain. On the other hand, will an eagle sitting on it affect its energy generation?
>>55162398
Actually lesser maintenance, no bearrings . Lesser parts that move.
30% less generated energy though
50% less costs
>>55162320
So it's going to be producing barely any energy if the wind speed isn't within a few m/s of the natural frequency of the stick? What a trash idea.
>Using wind
>Not using nuclear
>>55162114
These scare me. I don't know why. That frightens me more.
Embrace fission until solar panels aren't shit, then try to move onto fusion after 50 years.
It works, its better than traditional ones but who cares? nuclear is the only option
>>55162320
topkek
BLADELESS FREAKING WINDMILLS
>>55162719
> then try to move onto fusion after 50 years.
more like 150 years
>>55162114
Wind turbines are a meme.
Wave power on the other hand...
>>55162320
Huh so they're not even windmills they just sway back and forth in the wind. That's kinda neat.
>>55162243
underrated
so their inspiration was a structure that collapsed
yeah sounds like a good idea
imagine a 400 feet tall version of this and imagine the level of force applied to the bottom of the structure when it's all shaking violently
Just being boring:
The exact shape of turbines are found by optimization around some predefined shapes, using a certain algorithm. There are possibilities to have super-efficient wind mills that have some crazy fractal-like shape, but we just don't know.
>>55162114
What a meme. The future of wind energy is HUGE FUCKING wind turbines. Scaling laws are favorable to making em' huge. Like 200 meter blades huge
https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/energy/palm-trees-sway-wind-turbine-design
>>55162250
But is it worth it? Less area intercepted = less power
Though wind power does not have much of a future cause solar is gonna eat it. Solar is getting fucking cheap
>>55162956
>Though wind power does not have much of a future cause solar is gonna eat it. Solar is getting fucking cheap
lets coat the whole wind turbine construct with solarcells even the blades
I dunno... I heard that producing and maintaining these wind turbines and solar panels uses a large amount of non-renewable resources, ironically making them inefficient and wasteful.
>>55163010
EROI is positive so once we have enough renewables we can make em with all renewable.
>>55162576
Wind costs less and doesn't require as many technicians
>>55163010
Then you heard wrong
>>55163010
You are correct
>>55163568
How would windmill upkeep require more resources exactly?
>>55162114
when will we just go nuclear and stop relying on gimmick tech.
this sort of tech literally only works on earth, and under specific conditions.
just fuckign go nuclear. shit, if you want to, you could literally pop a small reactor in your backpack. but nooooo, people ar elike "we must put kinetic reliant generators everywhere, and stop funding nuclear technology.
give me my fkn gundams already
>>55162989
Why hasn't anyone done this? It's probably not very effecient a return on their investment and power generated compared to traditional dedicated solar cells right?
Most people in /g/ says to use the nuclear power, but I got one question:
What should we do with the nuclear waste ?
>>55163887
windy places != places that are crazy sunny
>>55163887
Probably because solar panels don't work well when pointed at the horizon.
>What should we do with the nuclear waste ?
Build a fucking wall out of it to keep Mexicans out.
>>55163918
Toss it in the Mariana Trench. Water is pretty much the best radiation insulator we've got. Nothing important lives down there. Nobody will ever come in contact with it. It will just sit down there until it either decays or is absorbed into the Earth's crust.
But there will inevitably be some retarded hippie that says "Blobfish are people too!" and throws a wrench into things. So we'll keep having people die in coal mining accidents and polluting the atmosphere because some faggots care about possibly irradiating a small amount of fish nobody gives a fuck about.
And before you reply to this post, read this[1] so you understand how innocuous the idea is
[1] https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
>>55164165
Well these elements come from the earth to begin with, it seems like putting them in a central location far away from man and animals might be a net gain for the environment overall.
>>55163918
There is a lot of energy left in "nuclear waste". We should recycle such "waste" and reuse it in the plants.
>>55162218
i don't see a reason for them to not be closer either, dunno how they work but if wind is suppose to just go through them, making a whole wall of them would make more sense.
>>55162665
you're a pussy, so it makes sense they would
>>55162956
>solar is gonna eat it
this, the sun produces more energy that gets absorbed by earth then we can use, altho we might want to supplement with wind, since no sun at night means no power
>>55164253
We really should be using gen 4 reactors with breeder reactors either on site or within a reasonable distance. That way spent fuel can be reprocessed into usable fuel again. This can continue for several cycles until the fuel is actually spent.
>>55164005
>>55162989
>>55163887
Some retards already though of that. It's a fucking stupid idea.
inhabitat.com/scientists-develop-solar-powered-wind-turbine/
>>55164583
Hahahahahaha
>>55164583
spins itself clean when it rains, brilliant
>>55164583
FUND IT
Fuck nuclear dawg. Fucking dangerous as fuck and messy. I like solar better.
>>55164723
>Fucking dangerous
This meme again.
>>55162114
or we could just solve the world energy problem and use nuclear.
>>55164723
>dangerous
literally the safest non-renewable energy source, and currently the most efficient energy source. we'll be using fusion long before we deplete the world's supply of uranium
>>55164583
there's unused land all around the fucking windmill, you could just put fucking panels down there.
>>55164723
>messy
coal gives out more radiation
>>55165007
but what about achieving maximum levels of SYNERGY
No but seriously, a better idea would be to put the solar panels somewhere where it's actually sunny.
>>55165038
>where it's actually sunny.
it'll produce energy even if it's cloudy, just not as much. but if you're going to make some shitty meme device to use space for energy, you might aswell just use the space around the windmill.
I'm going to make windmills out of a raspberri pi, shipping containers, and blades made from recycled pallets.
moni plx.
>>55162320
I feel like it would be bizzare to see these rocking around in the distance.
>>55162114
>using the same idea from a bridge that falls down
what protect this thing from doing the same thing? what re the conditions for it
>>55166110
A lot less mass
Planning on it moving like that
It's also not bridge shaped and is sticking directly out of the ground
>>55164723
This
>>55164723
>Lets all use this expensive and hard to make thing with also dangerous waste
naaah
>>55164723
Probably "dangerous" because you're only familiar with reactors designed and built close to half a century ago.
This is what computers looked like around the time construction began on Fukushima, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.
I think it's safe to say technology and nuclear theory has come a long way since then.
>>55166682
More advanced computers doesn't make radiation any less dangerous you mong.
Solar is infinitely more safe than radiation machines.
Every house should have solar panels installed. Personally, I think it's a matter of national security and should be installed with government money. Literally 1% of the yearly military spending could see every occupied structure have adequate solar panels installed.
Much better money spent than paying for radiation poisoning or oil terrorist funding. Go to hell asshole! Solar for Prosperity and Solidarity.
>>55166773
why is that wind turbine casting two shadows ?
looks like a field of dicks, lol
>>55163887
Because you want a strong and light material for the blades in particular. Not a fucking solar cell that doesn't orient itself towards the sun.
>>55166682
Government oversight is also still lax and the companies involved usually successfully lobby that it remains so.
And most of the severe costs (safe storage of waste for xxxxx years - in presumably a somewhat guarded storage, plus guarding nuclear materials transports and air space security and all that) remain "outsourced" to the public. Let the operators pay these expenses in full...
>>55166773
Yeah, radiation is still radiation.
But that's like saying flying in a jet built in the 60's is just as dangerous as flying in one built today.
Falling out of the sky from a mile up and several hundred MPH will still kill you either way.
We're just a hell of a lot better at preventing that from happening in the first place today than 50 years ago.
>>55166806
>>55166794
Fuck off neckbeard. It's still fucking dumb to have centralized power generation ie single point of failure, susceptible to natural disaster, terrorist attack, operator error, accidents etc etc etc etc. A distributed system just works better. So unless you're going to recommend microreactors everywhere then solar is just simply superior to anything we have today (given enough scale).
Solar > Nuclear.
>>55166839
And solar is better than it was. And is more easily utilized in a distributed system.
>>55166849
I actually have a small nuclear reactor that powers my house. It's weird how easy it is to set one up desu
I get weird readings sometimes that make me think I might be getting radiated but nothing's happened so far and I don't have to pay the Jews at TVA
>>55166773
>or oil terrorist funding
Majority of US's oil import comes from Canada..
I agree in a general sense on your views on solar, but I think the gov should just offer some incentive and let the free market work it out.
There is still a problem of storing is energy somewhere too..
>>55166849
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>55166870
>oil terrorist funding
>majority of US oil import comes from Canada
Pick two.
Yep, the oil industry here are literal terrorists. Completely obliterating ecosystems and the environment. Oil sands are literally the most egregious method of obtaining oil, it is environmental terrorism.
t. Canadian
>>55162320
Thought it was a flettner rotor
Disappointed that its not
>>55166870
>but I think the gov should just offer some incentive and let the free market work it out.
I think national "infrastructure" (roads, railways, electrical grid and power generation... but actually also some of the basic business infrastructure like telecommunication and postal services) work should simply be fully done by the government, not on a profit motive but on a set of regulations that pays for a mountain road and some terabytes of internet infrastructure (not per person, just trunk lines to the general place) to a random hamlet as long as it has x people per y area.
Privatizing these basics almost never worked out too well here at least, whereas everything worked quite okay when it was all government run.
>>55166925
now you're just moving the goal posts to label anything you don't like as "terrorism"
Stop terrorizing me with your opinions!
>>55166932
I agree with you, not everything needs to be privatized.
But my point about the incentive was say for the government to offer rebates for buying solar panels, or some sort of loan program (for qualified people of course)
Yo FUCK nuclear FUCK coal and FUUUCK oil. God damn rich asss old fart white ddues run that shit. Solar, wind and every eother clean energy is way better. NUCLEAR FUCKING MAKES RADIOACTIVE WASTE. Piece of crap bullshit, Chernobyl, and japan fucked people up, That never woulda happened with wind or solar!!
>>55166996
They've also made protesters and detractors "disappear" with regard to the huge pipelines they want to put in. Oil companies have done more damage to Canada in both land and law than any terrorist could have ever dreamed.
Space based solar + microwave lasers is the last answer for power generation
>>55167013
>Chernobyl,
How many people do you think died ?
How many people do you think got cancer? (compared to natural cancer occurrences)
The answer is surprisingly low.
But , put your money where your mouth is and buy solar panels and just stfu.
>>55167018
Got a source for such a bold claim ?
Or maybe just put random words in "quotations"
>>55167119
How many animals do you thing died?! UCK You
>nuclear is bad
>Chernobyl killed people!!!
Yet you never hear anyone bring up this shit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
>>55167139
again moving goal posts.
How many animals have you eaten today ?
Chicken is my favorite.
>>55167164
>raising animals to slaughter is the same as poisoning millions of acres of environment so badly that it's literally impossible for life to be sustained
Found the (((Shill))).
>>55167187
>one animal has more value than another
at least be consistent.
The tar sands wouldn't exist if there was no need for oil, they exist because people like you and I have a need for oil and oil based products.
>>55167013
>163 wind turbine accidents that killed 14 people in 2011
>Wind produced about 15 billion kWhrs that year
>Nuclear energy produced over 90 billion kWhrs in England with no deaths.
>America produced about 800 billion kWhrs from nuclear with no deaths.
So not only does wind produce way less power, it also kills way more people. Remind me why wind isn't banned again?
https://web.archive.org/web/20160513113534/http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-eagle-deaths-wind-turbines-kill-humans/#fc72fc344508
>>55167202
They exist because of greed, period.
And you're a (((Shill))) obviously. Go get cucked some more.
>>55166996
>But my point about the incentive was say for the government to offer rebates for buying solar panels, or some sort of loan program (for qualified people of course)
I can't see this helping here.
Once we determine that solar power is part of the national power infrastructure, IMO the government should be in charge of deploying it and the corresponding "smart" power grid backbone with the necessary distribution and control systems and sources and sinks and all that.
All the cost and effort spent on redundant planning, finding companies with the required skills and devices to get the right degree of efficiency, then all the bureaucracy related to verifying and paying subsidies can be saved, as can be a lot of costs related to building the grid itself.
Of course off grid solar like the highly efficient solar "warm water" panels should probably be only subsidized (though maybe simply required unless you file good reasons not to need them), because these are belonging purely to a house, not a piece of national infrastructure.
>>55167219
hear-hear!
Solar will be part of the solution, but it won't be the only solution.
The change is already happening where renewables are generating more and more power.
But a fundamental problem is that they cannot just turned up to 11 and generate more power when supply spikes,
coal/gas plants can do is easily and quickly, so I imagine they will be around for a while longer at the very least to deal with situations like that.
Of course we need to dig up the earth to make lots of batteries and other possible exotic materials to make solar panels.
I think overall they will have a benefit on the environment, but they aren't nearly as clean as people make them out to be.
>>55167219
>In the 2011 tsunami-earthquake, 1,607 lives were lost in Fukushima. Overall, the double natural disasters killed 15,884 people and left 2,636 still unaccounted for. Surging water from the tsunami blew out the cooling system at the plant causing the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjtlpSY47XNAhWh7IMKHQCeDekQFghGMAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftimesofindia.indiatimes.com%2Fworld%2Frest-of-world%2FAt-Fukushima-meltdown-deaths-top-tsunami-toll%2Farticleshow%2F31818324.cms&usg=AFQjCNG-JkkoOl3rSisaCV_exiCwh8lccg&bvm=bv.124817099,d.aXo
![hqdefault[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/m2yPKf1.jpg "hqdefault[1].jpg")
We need to go Thorium
>>55167228
>Once we determine that solar power is part of the national power infrastructure,
It won't be, just like the government doesn't control the wiring in your home.
It is too small scale to bother with such fine control.
There will be regulations/safety stuff and thats about it.
>then all the bureaucracy related to verifying and paying subsidies can be saved
lots of subsidies already exist for lots of various things, their implementation isn't nearly as plagued as you make it out to be.
Besides pick a side of the fence, either the government is incompetent and can't issue rebates for solar panels OR government can run the entire power grid just fine, you can't go both ways here.
>>55162477
It will be affected by the eagles freedom and work less because it doesn't want a 24 hours a day work for 7 weeks, it will gather the other windmills to start a riot against the government and it will result in nothing because they can't fucking move.
>>55167282
>Physical and psychological fatigue were the causes of 2,973 deaths in the three hardest hit prefectures of Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima, out of which 1,660 deaths were in Fukushima alone.
You do know that those deaths came from the forced evacuation of the area, not from radiation, right ?
>>55167219
>>163 wind turbine accidents that killed 14 people in 2011
You do know those deaths were caused by... well I don't know? Why don't you tell us how those deaths happened. Do you know?
>>55167282
Yet no one died from the nuclear reactor.... Through an earthquake and a tsunami, not a single person died from the nuclear reactor directly. Really puts how nuclear safety into perspective. We can protect people from nuclear radiation and explosions better than we can protect them from natural disasters.
>>55167390
Maintenance hazards. Falling off high places, fires, electric shock, flying ice... Ect
>>55163530
>doesn't continuously produce energy
>only suitable for specific locations
>kills more people yearly than nuclear energy
literally meme tier
>>55167410
And the cost of each wind turbine, which produced a significant amount of energy was worth each death, compared to the cost of building a nuclear plant. What do you have to say to that?
>>55167423
Why are you so against renewable energy?
>>55162114
why don't windmills have solar panels on them?
>>55167390
i'm not the one spreading FUD.
>>55167444
I'm not anon but there are far better options than wind energy
>>55166849
Nuclear > Solar
See? I can make statements too, now convince me otherwise.
Good luck servicing a grid with millions of different inputs instead of a few big ones :3
>>55164723
>dangerous
anon please
>>55167431
Nuclear produced 6 times more energy with 0 deaths that year. Do you mean money wise? Who the fuck cares how much money it costs. We're saving human lives here and using our environment's resources as efficiently as possible.
>>55167048
>Microwaves
>Lasers
Choose one, because they aren't the same thing.
Furthermore,
>Implying that sending power through RF from fucking space wouldn't be a massive waste
>>55167311
> It won't be, just like the government doesn't control the wiring in your home.
The wiring in my home isn't a source to the nationwide electrical grid, and indeed only an insignificant sink.
> It is too small scale to bother with such fine control.
The related automation / monitoring devices aren't terribly expensive, and it should be advantageous to have them at houses (maybe not at individual panels) and feeding into the controls that will switch over to whatever other forms of power on demand.
Besides, it isn't at all small scale - once you deploy solar power on all opportune property, you get one of the most significant sources on the power grid.
Doing it with subsidies and twhere everyone runs off and does their thing gets you a Germany situation. Lots of problems related to the grid not being communicative enough, or planned out well enough in advance, plus lots of management overhead in planning and maintenance and all that.
> lots of subsidies already exist for lots of various things, their implementation isn't nearly as plagued as you make it out to be.
They probably aren't infrastructure projects for the most part. Most infrastructure things are insane to get done with subsidies rather than government management.
>>55167223
Spouting buzzwords and epick me mehs of the week doesn't make you right.
Stay mad that nuclear blows other means of energy production out of the water.
>>55167476
Radio waves are light, so are microwaves, x-rays and gamma rays. Take a basic physics class retard. All light can be focused into a laser, shit we could polarize it too if need be.
>>55167474
What do you do with the nuclear waste
>>55162573
you could use a microcontroller to measure the wind speed and adjust the height of the stick to the resonant length so it wobbles at all speeds
>>55167527
Nuclear waste from the older generation reactors can be used in the new reactors and the new reactors produce waste with a half life of 300 years; some anon said in this thread. Plus it's not really waste, it's actually energy we don't have the means to harvest right now. In the future when nuclear matures more, we can dig up the waste and use it up.
>>55167527
Use it in a reactor designed to use it. Gen IV reactors are designed to use what we currently hold as waste. With proper breeder reactors you can then turn some of the waste from the gen IV reactor back into usable fuel again.
ie. run that shit until it is lead.
>>55167566
So, what do you do with the waste that is produced right now?
According to him >>55167566 you don't use the waste produced from current reactors in current reactors.
>>55167511
>Not understanding why RF is terrible for power transmission
Take a basic physics class, retard.
>>55167527
Reuse it, like people have been doing since the 1960s.
>>55167511
Radio waves are not photons.
All of electromagnetic radiation is not light.
>>55162114
So having gone through this thread, it seems that Gen 4 nuclear reactors are too god to be true. How much would they cost to install? Price per watt?
Also, is fusion a potential source in the future (regardless of time) or will it be unacheivable? How would it compare to Gen 4 reactors?
>>55163918
RECYCLE IT
>>55167527
You have a law passed that makes it the problem and cost of the government.
Same as most of the necessary installation security and security of nuclear transportation and everything else.
Or you "reprocess" it and have a pipe that "disposes" the waste through a pipe into the sea. Make sure you ignore reports of multiple times the normal rates leukemia and what not in the adjacent coastal areas and only measure the places that are too high above the beach line to be irradiated and what not (horray for Sellafield, but also La Hague).
>>55167566
We have the means to reprocess spent nuclear fuel rods to be reused as fuel. The problem is that the government has outlawed the technology required to make this happen. The reason is the technology we use to make it happen is the exact same technology that is used to make weapons grade nuclear bombs.
>>55167622
>exact same technology that is used to make weapons grade nuclear bombs
I'm guessing that its nuclear centrifuges that produce concentrated U235?
Can we all agree that oil and coal are shitty compared to solar, wind, thermonuclear, tidal, etc.
>>55167596
>Radio waves are not photons.
Are you baiting on purpose?
>>55167431
This has to be bait. Nobody can be this stupid. Solar and wind don't generate enough power to replace nuclear energy. Nuclear power is the only answer for our growing power demands.
>a solar panel on every house
Fucking kek. Do you have any idea how little energy solar provides?
>>55167666
>Do you have any idea how little energy solar provides?
No I don't. Please tell me
>>55162114
Men without dicks
>>55167647
We don't burn oil, we burn natural gas which is very clean and efficient. Most oil wells give more natural gas than anything else and lots of that is simply burned off because there isn't a demand for it.
>>55167587
>Take a basic physics class, retard.
He was arguing that it was possible more than it was good.
It being good isn't the overall context, the overall context is that it works and might be feasible.
Even if it's like 10% efficient, you're still gathering energy from outer orbit and not on land
>>55167702
There are coal, oil and gas plants.
>>55167619
Or you just stick it underground, like in an unused mine
Because guess where the fucking uranium comes from to begin with
>>55162320
>>55167585
>>55167574
So can we run that shit until it is lead with today's technology? Sorry if I misunderstood.
>>55167716
No one burns oil straight out of the ground. You might be thinking of fuel oil which is not the same, that is basically diesel and others similar
>>55167476
>implying that you have any idea what you are talking about
>>55167585
> So, what do you do with the waste that is produced right now?
In reality? Remind the government it's not supposed to be your own problem because you successfully lobbied it that it indeed isn't.
Stuff then ends up in a "temporary" storage pending some solution in the future.
You can also reprocess the materials if the government also takes the contaminated tools and materials that were used... or if you're allowed to dump it in the sea.
That's basically how it is handled in Europe (and with some variation, most places) today.
>>55167830
>think only natural gas is used in power plants
>hurr durr I meant pure oil XDDD
>>55167766
Aren't you a genius! You just solved that problem!
It's not that simple in reality. There are relatively few geological formations that seem waterproof and stable enough to work for this.
Additionally, for most of them, no one wanted to pay the required guard staff to protect against removal of the related materials by terrorists and gangsters for the like 100'000 years this stuff is particularly dangerous... most of them will be far too easily accessible to simple mining operations.
>>55167912
There's plenty of unguarded nuclear waste sitting around from the 60s, you don't need security.
Terrorists want blood and explosions. They're like schlock movie directors.
>>55167587
>Firing a High Powered laser from stationairy orbit to the earth through earth's atmosphere.
Whatever could go wrong?
>>55168129
Just accidentally hit detroit or somalia
>>55167283
Is that the kek?
>>55167596
>Radio waves are not photons.
Thanks for reminding me that the average /g/ user is complete retard.
I mean, it's one thing to not know something, but it's wholly different thing to post anyway.
>>55167596
Correct, they are made of tiny radios and dreams
>>55162320
>The entire world is powered by wobbling sticks.
I don't even care if they are more efficient, we need to think of what the aliens will think when they come.
>>55162925
windmilloptimization@home when?
I would love to donate some CPU cycles to that cause.
>>55168261
If you care about what aliens think, just imagine that their first reaction is going to be "Wow this is pretty cool, another intelligent lifeform, I thought we were the only ones"
Even if we were doing something stupid, the novelty of finding us would make them pretty forgiving.
>>55163577
The windmills need fuel for their generators, obviously.
>>55167932
> There's plenty of unguarded nuclear waste sitting around from the 60s
Low-level nuclear waste is treated randomly.
High-level nuclear waste (and I think most reprocessing waste - which of course had to be classified as something different even before it's properly separated into high and low-level waste... 'cause poltics) is almost all guarded as far as I know. If it wasn't dumped into the ocean.
>>55164491
What retarded hippie wrote this garbage?
It's misleading to call them wind turbines if they don't rotate.
>>55166806
>>55166806
Can nobody answer this man? What even is the sun?
>>55167616
Fusion will be great if it ever gets enough funding. no more uranium or other heavy elements, even.
>>55167788
Not quite, but we have enough to run what we do have for several hundred if not thousand years, with increasing demand. By the time it gets to a point where it is a concern we could likely run it until it is lead.
>>55168597
That makes me sad.
>>55168871
Don't be sad, fusion is still a pipe dream. It should definitely get more funding, but the tech required to reach those estimates wouldn't have existed and you'd have thrown a load of money away.
You can get to the moon on 1960s tech but it ain't cost effective, and fusion needs to be cost effective.
>>55162473
>a moving energy-capture, storage, transfer device composed of a great number of connected systems
>its one part
look at this fucking retard.
>>55162320
>crowdfunding with scam video pretending their slightly-wobbling stick is an enormous electricity generation machine
yep. Fuck those douchebags.
>>55162719
>after 50 years
That's what they said 50 years ago
But I like these.
>>55166794
>zero people have died in the US form nuclear accidents
yeah, that's not true, zero people died form COMMERCIAL nuclear accidents.
Several people died in experiments and bomb production.
>>55169424
instead of investing in green tech that works lets come up with a gimmick I can copyright - capitalism
>>55169571
Still less than how many have died from project UPD.OG
>>55162320
imagine peta when these sticks start bashing shit out of birds
>>55162320
you know, i could see it working, if instead of a wobble stick, they used some sort of cylindrical fan sort of like a blower style fan on a first graphics card cooler.
big, tall, with 2 "slits" in the side of the cylinder, air goes in one side, out the other, so you could technically have walls of them. with very little wind impedance between them first and second wall and so on and so forth.
Oh look, it's another one of those threads where sensible, reasonably knowledgeable people attempt to seriously have an intelligent discussion with literal tree-huggers while said hippies repeat whatever they heard in the latest solar freakin gill rebreather roadways crowdfunding scam video.
>>55167142
I managed to forget about that for a few years, dammit. Now I have to be mad at the world again.
>>55169769
what's u-
oh
>>55162477
This. Animals are cancer, they just stop the human race from progressing furwther.
>>55163623
>small reactor in your backpack
But Anon, I carry my AR and 1911's in my backpack everyday when I go to school, how am I gonna fit a nuclear reactor in there ?
>>55168928
I'm beginning to doubt fusion's feasibility from a thermodynamic standpoint. Shouldn't the containment always cost more power than it produces? Isn't the free ride of gravity the only reason it works properly for the sun?
>>55162114
>"that looks kind of cool"
>go to the website
>halfass.js
>zero technical substance whatsoever
>not even an explanation of how it works other than one or two vague graphics
>the only information of even mild non-buzzword substance is some uncited percentages of potential cost reduction
>every page has a gigantic fucking section begging you to check their "latest tweets" because the future of wind energy is best explained in 150 characters or less #crowdfundplease
>>55170241
>a fool and his money are soon parted
Shorter
>>55167444
>>55163530
Trust me, I know a very, very clever person, he is also 110% for green energy, and he told me no other energy source got shit on nuclear.
Ok I cannot really explain but he knew his shit, he had a PhD in physics, and he also showed me why he is right.
Since then, I know that no current 'alternative' can ever replace nuclear.
It's also the safest, but yes, human error can cause big fuckups.
Like building a nuclear plant in Japan? Allowing Ukraine blyat-comrades to have one? I mean what could possibly go wrong?
>>55170241
>>55170303
Nigga just check the bottom of the indieshill page.
> lets just write random numbers on the image Pablo!
>>55167527
> store it
> put it on moon once we can
> come up with even more ways to re-use it
> bring it down
I mean it's not that fucking hard.
>>55170495
>I mean it's not that fucking hard.
Said some 19 yo neckbeard who shitposts on a taiwanese bongo enthusiast board all day.
>>55170461
Still pretty damn lame though.
>>55170461
Fucking kek. They even show birds flying next to the thing. Literally press F to pay respects to the sky shitters.
>it's like natuuuure and like free energyyy living together duudee
>Captain Planet shopp levels
>poo in loo
Leaving this here
http://www.gizmag.com/windstalk-concept/16647/
>>55166794
>zero people have died in the US form nuclear accidents
What is the demon core
>>55170685
> Pajeet climbs on it
> he shits on the generator
> wind coming
> it starts to oscillate
> it throws shit everywhere
>>55170759
>missing sides here
$150000 shit flinger
I'd buy that for a $
>giant dragon dildos wobbling everywhere
Aliens will fucking wipe us out
I get the idea and it might really be less of a disturbance if built this way.
But I can't imagine this machine not losing a lot of it's kinetic energy while transfering it to the generator.
it would need smart materials made in labs to enable kinetic waves to propagate through this machine without cancelling eachother out. This seems like a nice prototype but it would be a waste to bulk produce this as finished.
>>55166794
>Solar: 5x more dangerous than Nuclear
wut, solar is just a bunch of fucking panels on the ground lol.
>>55172735
>meat grows in the supermarket
It takes a little more than a socket to charge your Mac.
>>55167396
Go on then - move within a 5km radius of the Fuku reactors. Put your money where your mouth is, shill vermin.
Protip: You won't
>>55162320
Can I attach such a thing to my car and produce energy on the go?
>>55173038
Go sleep in the basement of an old house or better yet go live somewhere with a lot of granite.
And like anons already pointed out radiation is not some super villain that's going to steal your one password for all accounts and shoot your dog.
You being scared of something does not an argument make.
>>55173258
It generates electricity from rocking back and forth. The only way you'd be able to get any significant amount of electricity from it would be if you're constantly pressing the gas and brakes which is a waste of power.
Electric vehicles can use regenerative braking which is superior.
>>55167283
yep
>>55173291
You are an idiot. The other anon as well.
The whole point of the concept is that it uses turbulent winds to cause oscillations which can be turned into electricity. It would be perfectly possible to attach it to your car and generate electricity with it while driving on the highway.
The problem is just that you would increase air friction immensly and thus increase your gas usage. So all you do is turning your gas into electricity, but in a very inefficient way.
>>55173463
The wind is what causes the turbine to rock back and forth. The thing is when you're driving the wind will be going in one direction and thus there wont be any rocking it will just get pulled backward. The only way to make it rock in the other direction would be to break and let the momentum pull it forward.
>>55173487
>break
brake*
>>55162218
>>55164373
I'm assuming most of these will end up in farms and stuff which would make sense to keep them a little farther apart.
I'm all for renewables, but they have a whole lot of problems.
First, the energy market. The way energy gets to consumers is through energy markets (at least here in yurop, don't know about Freedomistan). This means electricity suppliers "buy" energy days before to satisfy a need the magnitude of which they can't perfectly foresee.
Pic related is the expected vs real wind speed from a study in Germany. With numbers like this, companies simply cannot rely on wind. They can afford neither to buy energy and then get the rug pulled out from under them when the wind doesn't blow, nor to buy needless energy which the goes to waste when the turbines supply the system unexpectedly.
Solar is somewhat similar. The grid is simply not built to handle customer-side supply. It's not as simple as flicking a switch and changing which way the electrons go. The energy fed by solar can be disruptive, less efficient, cannot really be stored right, and even if it could be, and somehow magically everyone could produce enough to go all solar, we'd still have problems. The grid would have to be expanded and changed. This is easy to say in a sentence, but the reality of it is a multi-billion dollar expansion, and the money has to come from somewhere. And then we haven't even mentioned the fact that energy companies have only minimal incentives to supply this grid. They aren't paid after solar, and if every customer generates it, they practically become "leeches", using the infrastructure provided to them, but never paying any real money to the companies.
>>55162665
Are you a bird, anon?
>>55165007
>unused land
That's farm land
I mean this is 4chan so idiocy is always just one click away but are you people actually thinking of nuclear as a good technology?
How do you want to ecologically dispose of the waste?
>>55173514
Is it not possible to make a clean switch from solar during the daytime to nuclear (or any other source) at night?
>>55173546
You can just bury it in giant concrete and lead bunkers. It's a minuscule amount to the amount of trash we produce every day.
>>55173554
Like he said, what if the demand suddenly peaks and renewables can't cope? What if it peaks massively for 3 days?
>>55173275
Fuck the granite and bananas, man. 5 clicks from Fuku. Go ahead. Land is going cheap. You can be the poster mong boy to prove once and for all that ionising radiation emitted by reactor meltdowns and thus, all other radiation emitting substances is 100% safe.
>>55173487
You clearly don't understand aerodynamics. It's unintuitive but it's part of what makes turbulent winds turbulent. It's a resonance with Kármán vortex street (see Wikipedia), it has nothing to do with changes of direction or magnitude.
>>55173546
Storage really isn't as much of a problem as hippies make it out to be.
We might even find a way to reuse all the stored shit some day. I think I've already read about reactors that can use 'spent' fuel from other power plants.
>>55173580
But does that ever happen? Power demand is pretty predictable.
>>55173546
I can't see how taking all of these elements and putting them in one location far away from all living things is bad for the environment. Aside from plutonium basically all of these elements are found in nature to begin with.
>>55173606
Demand doesn't even need to peak, look at pic related.>>55173514
All you need is unpredictable weather and renewables become trash outside of personal gimmick use.
>>55173563
concrete doesnt last as long as uranium, do you want to dig it all up and re-do the bunkers every couple hundred years?
>>55173554
First of all, what >>55173580 said, but also:
The financial situation of the energy companies is still shaky. They don't get paid for solar, but they need to pay for the grid and nuclear. Which means that they either need government funding, or nuclear at night will cost a whole lot to make up for solar. Which means that Joe Everyman will not only be mad at nuclear, he will also grow to hate solar, because he either keeps getting checks with the same numbers on them, or his panels get taxed out the wazoo.
The sad fact is that technology is only part of the problem with renewables. Economics and the xboxhueg inertia of the current system fuck it up just as bad.
>>55173581
Honest to God, buy me a ticket and pay the rent for the 1st month or 2 and I'm in. I'll even make tumblr and instagram accounts to post my everyday life.
You show me proofs of the ticket and I'll post my skype so we can arrange the deal.
I'll even bet you the symbolic $1 that I'll be present at your funeral.
>>55173688
I think the biggest problem is the lack of a viable storage solution for excess energy. If there were a battery with the energy density comparable to or better than gasoline we would probably see a lot more wind and/or solar.
>>55173606
It's not that predictable. That's the exact reason why "dirty" power will never completely cease to exist.
See, because of the unpredictability and things like fucking Christmas and New Years' and catastrophes, etc, there will always be a need for quick energy sources. And since you can turn neither the sun, nor the wind up when you need to (and starting a nuclear plant takes time), you need a power plant that starts quick, and that's gonna be coal or gas.
And of course that means that these need to be kept in shape and ready start at a phone call, and when they do, they'll cost ya.
>>55173763
No offense, anon, but
>if
I'm not saying nuclear is without its dangers. To be honest, what I'm saying is we're pretty much fucked one way or the other, and there's precious little incentive for companies to change as of now.
>>55166819
>Government oversight is also still lax
if oversight was so poor how come there's hardly been any new nuclear plants in the west
the chinks don't give a fuck though
>>55173763
>I think the biggest problem is the lack of a viable storage solution for excess energy.
Of course it is, add to that transmission. Otherwise we would have already filled some African wasteland with panels and called it a day.
What most solar panel hippies also forget is that solar panels aren't just le shiny black glass ;DDDD they are dirty to make and dirty to dispose of.
The batteries required to make panels and wind power more viable are even worse. Just take a look at the footprint a fucking Prius battery makes, now compare that to the batteries required to cover peaks and troughs for a village.
>>55162504
How the fuck are these things getting 70% the energy of a wind turbine?
How does the mechanism even work?
Mechanically speaking, how does it translate swinging into magnetic fields anywhere near as well as a traditional rotor does?
>>55173929
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/537721/bladeless-wind-turbines-may-offer-more-form-than-function/
When wind passes one of the cylindrical turbines, it shears off the downwind side of the cylinder in a spinning whirlpool or vortex. That vortex then exerts force on the cylinder, causing it to vibrate. The kinetic energy of the oscillating cylinder is converted to electricity through a linear generator similar to those used to harness wave energy.
Anyone waiting for Thundef00t to get over the politics and end this vortex scam rightly?
>>55173904
I'm probably being too optimistic but I like to believe we'll eventually find a way to make a decent battery. A cleaner battery would be great too but that might be too optimistic. A better battery would at least mean there wouldn't need to be as many batteries to accomplish some tasks.
>>55166794
>unironically browsing fp
hey gayry
>>55174104
I think the best way would be that everyone has electronic cars. These cars need big batteries, will be charged when the cars are not being used with exces energy from renewable sources. And drained if you dont need your car and if there isnt enough wind or sun to cover the overal usage of the community.
>>55164858
We indeed should use nuclear, but fusion version. However this tech isnt yet operationable in big scales
>>55174104
There are many companies working on exactly that and have been for a while.
A big jump in battery technology has been long overdue.
>>55169424
The standard wind-mills have become remarkably efficient and sophisticated. There is no point in looking for different designs for harvesting wind energy.
>>55169070
>talking about moving parts
>mentions storage, transfer device etc which is stationary
cmon you can turn your shitposts into intelligent posts when you read the thread
>we should embrace everything that's natural like wind and solar maaaaaaaaaan
>mfw fission reactors are natural
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklo
>>55174272
Basically everything is natural if you consider that humans come from nature. "Renewables" is a slightly more accurate term.
>>55170759
audible kek
>inb4 some shitlord brings up cold fusion e-cats
>>55174416
>cold fusion
My favorite meme.
>>55173514
And yet Portugal somehow managed to use only renewables for 4 days
eat shit germanese
>>55174416
>cold fusion
I want to believe
>>55173526
>i've never seen a real farm in my entire life: the post
>>55174572
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/energy/2016/05/portugal-100-percent-renewable-energy-wind-solar-hydroelectric/
>The idea that the world as it stands today can transition to 100 percent renewable energy, as some experts have suggested, just isn’t feasible, O’Malley says...
Portugal has wind, solar and above all, hydroelectric on its side. Hydroelectric is much more reliable than the other two, its only downsides are environmental impact and initial cost (dams, plants, moving people), and the fact that not nearly every country can enjoy its benefits.
And still, it was only 4 days in the summer.
>>55174416
>>55174457
>>55174573
It's real, nerds.
https://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion-family.html
