TED Conversations

Timothy Shreffler

Linux Systems Administrator, Booz Allen Hamilton

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

We capture a diverse set of energy very efficiently and find a way to transfer it into a system with a large storage capacity.

I was thinking about kinetic watches this morning and began to think more. What if every human being on the planet wore a bracelet that captured kinetic, sound/vibration, and thermal energy. With all the motion (kinetic), all the noise pollution in the world (sound/vibration), and all the humans (thermal) we could capture a lot of energy. Obviously no human wants to wear something bulky but if we could figure out a way to transfer that energy every time we touched a surface maybe it could work? I don't know much about engineering which is why I just posted this as an idea could someone share some insight with me as to if they think this would be feasible? I understand this idea is very crude but if we applied technology to it maybe we'd have a very efficient way of capturing energy. Keep in mind this combination of kinetic, vibration, and thermal energy doesn't just have to apply to only humans we could install energy capturing devices on cars, planes, trains, computers, virtually anything. Maybe the answer to alternative energy isn't so much to find a way to generate an endless source but to become more efficient. If energy cannot be created or destroyed maybe we just need to keep the cycle working for us instead of against us. Essentially we build take micro energy and find a way to connect it building an energy network (big energy). Please expand on this I would love to hear more thoughts this community is amazing and highly intellectual.

Examples of appliances that are already plugged in and could instantly put energy back into the system: Thermal = T, Vibration = V, Kinetic = K
Coffee Maker (TV), TV (TV), Computer (T), Mouse (K), Phone (V), Bed (T), Chair (T), the last two aren't plugged in yet but maybe they could be...

Topics: Alternative Fuels Clean energy Energy Independence alternative energy energy energy resources free energy
0
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb

    Angella Grey

    • 0
    Feb 24 2012: Very nice
  • thumb

    Ken brown 30+

    • 0
    Feb 24 2012: Hi
    A farmer here in Nz developed a roller similar to a judderbar that in essence became a big dynamo,he perfected it and has gone on to sell that technology to an american concern somewhere,anyway it was touted over the news that from one dynamo mounted at the entrance to a mall carpark it provided the mall with all it's energy for that day,for the life of me i can't find it anywhere on the net.

    It peaked my interest as i had a similar idea for our vast roading networks that cover our planet but realised it would take a whole new technology to be invented for it to work.Let's turn our roads into energy producers.

    I had one other idea,turn paint into heat/friction generators,if enough energy could be pumped into a cities grid from every house/building/factory to slightly lower it's reliance on turbine power then it's a win situation.

    Engineer organic phosphorent low lighting for walkways.

  • Len Berger

    • +1
    Feb 24 2012: wow! as an instructor in Environmental Sciences, let me give you some input, if I may. And I mean no disrespect at all. However it seems as if you might have left out one VERY important method of energy-capture which has been, in fact, operating here on Earth literally for millions of years. I refer to the world of green plants which convert light energy into the chemical energy of sugars and starches through the process of photosynthsis. All we humans and other animals need to do is simply to eat. Using light energy (which is due fundamentally to photons released as electrons change positions around nuclei) for the purposes of moving large masses is in my view an inefficient plan, since MANY VERY LARGE collectors would be needed to generate energy on the scale needed in the practical world. It would be almost impossible to magnify the electric output to the point where a "reasonably"-sized collector could operate trains, trucks and the like. We cannot "create" more energy but we can use more efficiently what we have.
  • thumb

    Tommaso Maria Sarpietro

    • 0
    Feb 5 2012: Hi,

    I think that energy storage is among the biggest challenges today. We could cover Sahara desert with solar panels and cover a big portion of European demand, but how to transfer this energy or how to store is still a problem.
    I heard Siemens had some project related to Sahara solar energy for Europe..

    According to order of magnitude I would try to get energy efficiently from huge sources (wind, sun, sea), rather than turning human beings into batteries, that reminds me Matrix and scares me a little bit as concept.

    There are several interesting projects of alternative energy, this for instance is beyond standard wind energy, it uses wings that works with high-altitude winds:
    http://www.kitegen.com/en/?page_id=2

    • shawn disney 10+

      • 0
      Feb 8 2012: Storing and transporting energy is quite wasteful. A better way is to produce it closer to where you need it. A complete system for this was years ago, proposed to power airplanes. You'd be interested: it is a nuclear fission plant which has NONE of the bad features of the existing Fukushima type LWR plants. It is called Thorium Liquid Fueled Reactor (LFTR); they cannot blow up, melt down, or produce unmanageable amounts of radioactive waste. In fact, they "burn" the waste of LWR plants, destroying the waste in the process, so we don't need the present expensive disposal problems. See Youtube, Kirk Sorensen, Thorium LFTR

  • Douglas Bell

    • +1
    Feb 2 2012: Hi Timothy,

    There are a couple of challenges for this type of system.

    The first is that current energy sources are so incredibly cheap. Consider that for $3.50 I can push my 1,500Kg minivan for 40 or 50 km, and do it at 100Km/h. Or that I can heat my home for 2 or 3 dollars a day. It's really astounding.

    The second is that our day to day existence only generates a very, very tiny amount of energy. Go back to my minivan example. If I use my entire body's energy output, I can move it maybe 20 meters before I fall flat on my face. Compare this to the idea that a few milliliters of gasoline can crush this van like a bug. I just that I don't generate much if any power.

    The last is that in many cases the power that you'd collect is simply salvaging an item's waste power. So, for instance, you may salvage 5 watts of the 50 watts a tv wasted as heat. From an engineering point of view you'd probably be better off putting your efforts into making the tv more efficient in the first place. It's more likely that you'd be able to build tvs that use 30 watts, instead of a 50 watt tv with a 5 or 10 watt recovery system.

    Best wishes,
    Doug Bell
    • thumb

      Timothy Shreffler

      • 0
      Feb 2 2012: Doug thanks for the thoughts always nice to hear good information. So to add to your suggestion of making a TV more efficient in the first place that makes sense. Maybe my idea is one of those ways we could lower the bottom line. Like taking a 50w television that engineered better could be 30w and then adding in a thermal energy recycling technology could lower it to 25w assuming we could make the technology cost effective.
Showing all 8 comments