Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Il Palazzo]

well, I'd say that the law of conservation of energy is a part of common sense, as you can't get energy from nothing. The general idea that you've described seems viable at first sight, but so do those 'perpetuum mobile' drawings.
In your rough design, the kinetic energy gained from magnets' attraction during the 'action' phase, would've been lost when you change the (piston)magnet's allignment to the 'repelling' configuration, as it would strongly resist such a change. If anything, it could be used as a braking system, I suppose.
Also, if my memory serves me well, magnets do not deteriorate as a result of magnetic field propagation. What you've described is a macro-scale structural destruction due to too high a temperature or stress. Meaning, the magnet is not, generally, a 'fuel cell'. Same as gravitation field generator(mass) isn't. e.g. You can't send anything on orbit using Earth's gravity.
That said, it's been a while since I did my physics course, so feel free to prove me wrong.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I have a rough sketch, but it's more rough than sketch really. The magnet would not oppose being rotated in the right way, I have observed that two magnets passing each other tend to "slip" along the edge of the active zone of the field, away from the axis of the pole and towards the neutral edges. Orienting two magnets to be at an angle to each other, and syncing them appropriately, could result in the "slipping" combining with an actual repulsing force, pushing the rotor along its path and applying pressure on the piston at the same time. I say 'could' - I lack the engineering skills to construct even a simple model, though I do have an array of mini supermagnets (from one of those magnetic construction things) to do it with.

And magnets do deteriorate with high enough magnetic gradients applied. Since a magnetic field is what is used to empower the magnet in the first place, another magnetic field will affect it the same way - and if it's strong enough, it will begin to form magnetic clusters of its own in the magnet, reducing the force on the main magnetic vector.

[Aqizzar]

In defense of the Magnet thing - Sean does actually have a point buried in his pie-in-the-sky science.  Namely, a magnetic motor wouldn't "make energy from nothing", it would use the Earth's natural and very powerful magnetic field to spin magnetic turbines - essentially the same as waterwheel, just with magnets.

The problem is, the Earth's magnetic field is far too weak and variable on any local scale a turbine could conceivably be built at.  Maybe a globe spanning ring floating in space could be turned by the Earth's magnetism, but nothing humans will be building for eons.


Speaking of which, why so little mention of hydroelectric power?  There's ridiculous amounts of easily tapped hydroelectric sources around the world that initially profitability and local problems prevent construction of.  The Congo river and the Caucasus waterways have been estimated that, if fully exploited, meet the current static power requirements (not transportation obviously) of that respective quarter of the planet.

[umiman]

Because exploitation of those waterways would cause untold ecological damage? You can't dam the Congo river without destroying all the jungle that line it for miles. Contrary to popular belief, water power is just as variable as other sources of green energy, as a lack of rainfall or glacial melting will be more than a little troublesome.

In Canada, 90% of Ontario's energy comes from their stupidly massive hydro projects. Unfortunately, they still rely on inter-provincial power trades to power their cities, not to mention their provincial government runs an amazingly large debt trying to give their citizens affordable power. Basically, they buy power from the suppliers (Bruce Power, Alberta energy, etc.) at something around 12c per kilowatt/hour and resell it to the residents at... 7c? I don't remember the exact figure.

By the way, I didn't expect this thread to reach 5 pages in less than a day. :/

[Duke 2.0]

 Of course, there are the obvious problems with that. Changing the landscape(No real problem. Nature does that all the time!), catastrophic breakdowns means insane floods, few places they could work and just plain messing around with rivers that environmentalists won't allow.

 Not that I'm not for them. There are just few places they would work with the current model. Now if we were to build small-scale dams with levees for the lake they make, I could see many sites opening up. Then there are the tidal dams, which have even fewer places they could work and would be stupidly expensive for how much power they generate. Still, I think there could be methods to harness wave energy and flowing water.

 I believe there was once a plan to dam the Mediterranean Straight. Pre-WWII-era Germany invested in the architect, but as we all know WWII Germany came around and the architect came out of favor. I think it was shown on Damn Interesting...

 Edit: Ninjad

[umiman]

People used to try to extract oil from the ground by detonating nuclear bombs above the reserves. (but under the ground)

[Aqizzar]

The Mediterranean Strait plan came from Hugo Gernsback, who had a personal vendetta against the natural world and would have been perfectly happy to see ecologies obliterated.

On reflection, yes, damming rivers isn't a great idea.  Here in America, we're having to build new reservoirs all the time to hold water in for irrigation and such, because damming in the past completely screwed up the water tables.

So, let's talk about ocean based power.  Like tidal turbines, wave-plate condensers, and those giant tube heat-transfer things.

[Duke 2.0]

So, let's talk about ocean based power.  Like tidal turbines, wave-plate condensers, and those giant tube heat-transfer things.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Most awesome energy generator ever. I don't care what people say about eyesores, I would gladly live near one of these things.

 They bonus as farmland, too. Although I'm unsure of how these mammoth things will effect air currents.

[Sean Mirrsen]

By the way, we forgot geothermal. Seeing how it's the most prominent energy source in DF (the magma) I find it strange. It's also by far the most abundant one on the planet, practically ALL of the planet except for the 20 miles of crust can be used for geothermal power. Of course, the problems remain the same - drilling a deep enough hole to get to the magma, and doing it in such a way that will not provoke a massive geological uprising - namely, a mini-volcano. There was a movie about the matter, I think.

I wonder, just how much power could a massive geothermal complex generate? It's not like there aren't enough active volcanoes in the world, they are simply deemed to be too dangerous and unstable. But with robots and some newfangled heat-resisting materials, it could be another easy source of power.

ninjaedit: yeah, solar furnaces like that are neat. A good source of electricity if you have a dependable medium to get it to the consumers. Using it to thermolyse water into hydrogen could work, and double as an artificial forest amid the desert - though not burning up CO₂, it would produce oxygen.

[Duke 2.0]

 Another problem with geothermal is the number of toxins in the ground itself. Water would leech these toxins and bring them up when it turns to steam. Then there are the gasses, which as we can see from volcanoes are terrible.

 Unless we somehow discover zero-point energy, all energy sources have ecological damage. Even then, we might need the energy medium for things. Pardon me if any of my terminology is wrong, all I know is there is a background haze that researchers think could be harnessed to boil away the oceans.

[Jreengus]

you are all over thinking this, all we do is get him to shoot it at the wall and ceiling in a large room build some tubing between them along with lots of turbines to power the nearby generators then start pouring water in.

[umiman]

Tidal power is a good concept, but the problem is that the current methods used to generate tidal power are incredulously expensive for very little power. Furthermore, it is difficult to build and maintain.

[Dae]

I'm still thinking the best way to green energy isn't through humongus constructions but through many little systems. Let's say, a house that lives on its own energy. That would be the best way to preserve environment. Of course, there will still be need to some mass production, for factories for example. But cutting domestic energy use out of a nation's bill would be good.

A house can rely upon solar panels (polluting at the production, but eventually it'll pay, and I haven't heard of a solar panel time limit yet), rain for collecting water, using this water several times (for cleaning, then for garden, etc. can't remember the exact system but it can be used four times I think), making compost out of wastes, then using the gases produced during decomposition for heat. Of course, most f it won't be possible in a city, but there could be ways to make miniatures of these systems especially for buildings.
There could even be some sort of thing like a bike plugged on a generator. You would practice sport and help the environment - though in the US you'd probably be told you help your country or something like this.

The way to make people buy it (literally) ? Making it some sort of fashion (don't know a more fitting word in English). When gangsta rappers will drive electric cars, advertisement tell you to buy the newest pocket food-recycler (more effective than before) and to grow your own Monsanto vegetables, which need almost nothing, then the environment will be safe.
People will be environmentally friendly because they'll pay for it. Now they use oil because they pay more for it.

Also, Sergius, you can't reasonably quote an article stating that 'The nuclear industry solved the nuclear waste problem decades ago.'
A couple months ago there was an article in a scientific magazine about how we should make waste storage area to make sure no one will look this way for ore or just for fun. Polluting further and saying 'Future World will deal with it' isn't exactly dealing with it. That's why sending it into space isn't nearly a solution either (more, the Earth's orbit already looks like a junk garbage).
But I must admit nuclear energy is probably the best way to go currently.

Way better than biofuels anyway. Haven't you heard of the riots, in Haiti for example, because of the food crisis ? The one who grew crops to make food sold them to make biofuels, so there wasn't enough to feed everyone, and prices skyrocketed...

[Aqizzar]

One comment - collecting rain for water at home?  I laugh, sir.  Here in Texas it hasn't rained in a month, and it's acidic anyway.

This is a recurring problem with thinking about people-level environmentalism.  The assumption that the entire world lives like suburban Americans and can respond with the same changes.

[JoshuaFH]

Perhaps some agreement between countries to acquire strict laws concerning recycling and whatnot?

If a very vigilante and determined recycling service were set up, it might help.