Participating in a discussion is a great way to learn and contribute to ideas for superstructing. When you post a comment, try to provide information that others may not know, and avoid getting into arguments. Winning discussions are all about working together to get smarter.

Please login or register to post


    PowerStruggle: Distributed power and energy for the world and independent living and "smart grids"

    I envision distributed electric power tied to but also independent of a smart grid centralized power system

    Started by: lectricman Raves:7

    Subscribe » RSS

    Each home or homeless person would have the capability of generating energy credits for world hotspot consumption. An example would be a homeless person who goes to a local bicycle positioned around the environment, city or country. The bicycle would serve as a flywheel storage device that would convert mechanical energy into stored electrical energy. It would be metered and pumped into the grid with a collection point to a microwave satellite interface equiped to distribute the power and credit the individual contribution. For home applications a multi-source alternative energy generation scheme would integrate with the centralized electric "smart grid" invoking "smart" metering to sell back power but with the additional capability to define where the power is to be sent. If Ethiopia needs power then they can send out bulletins on the interconnected web to have a homeowner use his alternative energy system to contribute to the grid and be credited for the contribution.

    Interesting. Worth working up as a Superstructure to get others involved in designing the finer points, I\\\'d say.

    I remember the first time I saw floors which converted human footfalls into energy. I guess the short costs have stifled adoption; seems like a longer term solution. Perhaps that kind of system could be used in what you\\\'re thinking, lectricman. Definitely should consider starting a superstruct to brainstorm how to implement these ideas.

    First -using human labour as source of energy is complete and utter bullshit. It would be more plausible if you\\\'d kill the human and use the food he would have eaten and turn it into fuel. A LOT more efficient. So people cycling bikes to power the grid - a laughable idea.

    Second - the way to go would be as described by Jeremy Rifkin - in the Hydrogen economy. In the big picture this approach IS not terribly efficient, BUT our society needs combustibles, and pretty energy-rich types of combustibles. The easiest to create being Hydrogen or ethanols. Plants converting sunlight into energy and combustibles are woefully inefficient (under 1%) the expensive photovoltaics have efficiencies over 40% but marketgrade PVs are about 20% efficient in 2008. By 2019 that will have risen a good bit. At some point it makes perfect (and perverse) sense to plough down trees and place Photovoltaic farms in place, as long as the raw materials are available. My personal guess is that if this process starts, we will see an incremental and in the end a pretty fast covering of PV\\\'s of almost anything where humans are around. This would be a bit weird to experience firsthand, but it WOULD destroy centralized energy - which is to blame for most horrible things happening in the 20th century.

    \\\"First -using human labour as source of energy is complete and utter bullshit.\\\" Yet it\\\'s been done for thousands of years ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowboat ) and even continues to this day. Human-powered radios were rapidly adopted by people in countries without an electrical grid and a desperate need for news ( http://www.freeplayenergy.com ), and I even have my own hand-cranked LED flashlight for emergencies ( http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/09/a_better_hand-c.php ). No, these won\\\'t likely solve the energy problem, but if we discount every thought now with a casual \\\"that\\\'s bullshit\\\", we may as well just give up, because every idea would seem worth exploration at this point. So while the HumanCar/Generator ( http://www.humancar.com ) may not \\\"power the grid\\\", it can certainly do something. That\\\'s better than nothing, imo.

    Consider the suggestion of human power generation in the sense of scale and idea of appropriate technology for less developed environments. The intent is to use indigenous resources as much as possible and scale to more energy intensive sourcing as long as net energy and environmental constraints are met. You might be surprised what people with little hope of work, camp detaines, and immigrants are willing to do an contribute if given the chance.

    I created a superstructure based on individuals providing sustainable environmentally sound power to their own needs, their communities, and the wider global community. If you can\\\'t kill-a-watt then what\\\'s the use? We need like-minded individuals to help out in developing a smart grid for the community.

    In an era of over-population, displaced persons, and security crises, I think there is a lot of potential for this concept. For instance, let\\\'s place banks of human-powered generators in our prisons and let prisoners make some money by pedaling or running for a few hours (not as punishment). The same could be applied to large refugee camps or unemployment centres. Moreover, human-powered electricity generation encourages physical fitness, which in turn will reduce demand for public health services and enable the poorest to better survive our pandemics. There is a major concern with distributed power generation connecting to the main grid: pumping electricity directly into a grid is a difficult thing to manage - the load on the system must be balanced or the system collapses (blackouts). Therefore, if we had a massive number of distributed - but unpredictable - sources of electrical generation, we will have to find a way to balance it. We will likely need to store much of this power in a buffer first and then pull from the buffer into the grid. This raises the infrastructure costs, however. Certainly this would be a cheap and easy way for households to create off-grid power.

    I think we could expect the average human to produce only around 75W to 100W per hour. If they were to go \\\'all-out\\\' for 10 minutes they could generate about 250W. But that would be about it. I think we have to seriously reduce the use of electricity in order to make this productive on a large scale. But we could likely make this work on a local level - especially in warmer climes that do not require houses to be heated. Perhaps human power generation could be used to power the creation of a more powerful power generation device. Like using human power to create the electricity for a factory producing windmills.

    The basic premise is still sound that individuals insure that they take ownership of their energy needs through a portfolio of options including energy conservation, energy efficiency improvements, alternate sourcing, and pursuit of distributed, dispersed, decentralized supply. The later is necessary as the pressure that are being placed on threat prone centralized systems. A more robust topology is one where we rely more on our own initiative to keep the juice flowing. Encouragement of a \\\"smart grid\\\" which allows for localized options is important. Check out the ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT OF 2007 and do a find word search using \\\"smart\\\". (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ140.110) While you are at it, how about helping me build a smart grid superstructure. I need help on this project.

    Pedal power may not generate a lot of energy but 100 watts in a refuge camp with an ideal workforce. How about coupling the energy generation with water purification as in ( http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/10/08/aquaduct-bike-purifies-water-as-you-pedal/) There are other synergies that cascade in value to distressed communities. Who will take the challenge and add it to the smart grid superstructure?

    This is an interesting suggestion. It seems to me that the major drawback of the idea, however is the effective distribution of energy. It would be counter-productive to develop a centralised power collection system without the means to re-distribute the power in an effective matter. To this end, I suggest adding to your proposal an amount of R&D towards the wireless transmission of energy. This idea was first explored by Nicola Tesla over a hundred years ago, and was doomed to obscurity due to historical and financial circumstances. Essentially, the wireless transmission scheme would require vast amount of energy, which would be supplied via your distributed, human-powered devices, and re-transmitted to the world as a whole, using extremely high voltage delivered through the earth itself using an extremely low current.

    Did wireless transfer ever get above the 75-80% efficiency Intel achieved? I lost track. But what I have to admit liking most is the *responsibility* factor in this. Would it be worthwhile to outlaw non-human powered mobile electronics? It wouldn't make a dent in our overall energy problem, but it would certainly raise awareness and educate people.

    The trick to this is to limit the distribution radius to a useful distance. Improving transmission loss is a good long term goal, but in the immediate need electricity is like fresh fruits - keep it local

    I think this idea is great in that it brings up a real question- why do some people have access to nearly unlimited power based on wealth, and how does this dictate their use of power? What if households HAD to generate their own power? What would they use and what would they give up? Perhaps we should attempt to implement a system where households are encouraged to provide as much of their own power as possible through things like solar, wind and human power.

    There is a huge legacy infrastructure of electric wiring in place around most of the world it would be a shocking waste to just ignore that. With a little finessing, railway lines could become power transit corridors and there are railways in places where HV powerlines never got to. If households have to generate their own power I think you would see the revival of old practices such as stills on farms except this time not making moonshine but cooking biodiesel. Port Harcourt 2008 is a study in adaptation to intermittent power; the locals have diesel generators and grid connections; they use the grid where they can and generate otherwise. The grid is 15 times cheaper for them.

    I like Leo Miller's idea of using human energy to fuel greater sources of power generation. Also like footfall energy--the impact vibration could be channeled to a battery storage system. Connected to http://www.mam.org/act/index.htm. If "responsive flooring" were installed in homes, the footfall energy could be used to power household energy expenses. Similar technologies could harness energy from urban centers and highways.

    Universal energy packs are charged and swapped among the community in local areas. People are collecting solar and kinetic energy to run personal devices.

    @solspire - exactly the point of my Oct 14 comment. By forcing mobile electronics device makers to standardize on human-generated power (e.g. power-generating clothing), we don't so much impact consumption as we begin to take the first steps toward making people *aware* of consumption.




    Nominate For A Badge

    Badge:
    More detail on badges



    NOMINATE CANCEL