 (Click photo to enlarge.) |
Wave energy got a boost with the connection of the Oyster hydro-electric device to the electricity grid in Scotland last Friday.
Aquamarine Power activated the connection of the Oyster in the waters off Orkney, marking one of the few ocean power devices to be producing electricity.
The device is a hydraulic pump operated by a “hinged flap,” where a large metal piece moves back and forth from the motion of the waves. The movement moves a hydraulic piston that pumps water underground to a hydro-electric turbine that drives a generator to make electricity.
The peak power output of the Oyster 1 is about two megawatts, depending on the location. The company, which received research funding from the U.K. government, is now working on a second-generation device.
Some fish is going to be swimming along and get smacked upside the gills…
All the power to them. An inexpensive, renewable resource that causes minimal inconvenience and no damage to the environment.
It’s all fun and games until someone puts their fish-eye out.
But is has no emissions! How will it contribute to global cooling?
@honeyman,
What about the design and manufacture of the device, did that cause any emissions?
#5 ethanol
I don’t know of any manufacturing process that doesn’t pollute in some way.
On another news, the device misteriously “malfunctioned” in a gigantic ball of fire while “casually” the company is sold to Chevron along with all its patents and its former owners commit suicide by hitting each other with an Axe as they sit on a chair with their arms tied to it with duct tape.
#6
Because humans are involved. If there’s human there’s pollution. You can’t have one without the other. The best you can try to do is minimize the risk, of which smart intelligent people are not in the position to do so but rather politicians and greedy companies.
I’m all for it. Why don’t we line the entire coastline outside of Malibu with these massive flapping gates for the “green” celebrities? I’m sure that would go over well.
Los Angeles requires about 6,000 kilowatts at peak use so it would only take 3,000 of these things (they look to be about 70 feet long by about 40 feet deep). It would only cover about 50 miles of coastline.
LA could go in on these with San Diego and San Francisco then you would have the entire coastline covered with these flapping gates. I’m sure nobody living on the coast would mind looking at miles of neon yellow topped flapping gates. I can’t think of one person here in California that would mind having a bunch of these just outside the surf line. Not even one. Consider me sold.
Glad we see different parts of the world harness their natural resources for clean energy. In the US, we have powerful wind energy to harness.
Are the Republipukes still howling the DIG DIG DIG for dinosaur juice energy plan or did that blow over?
Considering that most of the domestic population is close to the coast I can’t see how this is a bad idea!
An, imperfect, knowledge of geography also suggests to me that most huge cities are near bodies of water.
This is where the burst usage capacity is. A series of generators tied to batteries should save energy generated during tides that isn’t helpful during times of peak usage.
Why not?
These things are mostly “too small” for mass production. Best for small localized usuage. Need to multi-task them to get multiple returns like artificial reef constructs and what not.
The “Huge” energy reserve of the ocean is extracting energy from the thermal clime. Several test facilities producing power for the last few years. Don’t know why there is not more news on these. I assume the energy/oil cabal wants only red herrings for public consumption for now.
“Los Angeles requires about 6,000 kilowatts at peak use so it would only take 3,000 of these things (they look to be about 70 feet long by about 40 feet deep). It would only cover about 50 miles of coastline.”
“The peak power output of the Oyster 1 is about two megawatts, ”
Emphasis on the mega
Smitty if peak is 2 megawatts, then LA needs 3 of these.
>An inexpensive, renewable resource that causes minimal inconvenience and no damage to the environment.
It emits no CO2, but I’m not convinced that taking away wave power from the oceans does no damage to the environment, or less damage than taking coal and oil out of the ground.
#14 MikeN
I think the figure for LA is 6 gigawatts (6,000 megawatts).
One of these things could theoretically power 1600 homes.
Doesn’t anyone else see that by extracting wave energy what we really are extracting is gravity- specifically the pull of the moon against the earth. If we take away the energy the moon will fly off into space.
“… is now working on a second-generation device.”
hmmm. Not sure if they mean an additional “generation device” or a they mean a next generation device.
What an excellent idea.
#16 —- the moon has been flying of into space for 100s of millions of years. When the moon was first captured it loomed HUGE in the sky. Eventually on some unknown future day, the moon will fly off tangent to it’s much receded orbit of the future and anything left on earth will view a moonless sky thereafter. But you know that, so this is for others. When the moon was first captured, tides were 250 feet or so, twice a day.
So I say, steal the energy of the earth moon system, and FÜCK the future.
Just wave to a pump and make electricity. Spooky.
#2 Who says it has no impact on the environment?
If it is cost effective and the impact is minimal it’s fine with me.
The problem with green energy is the cost is often not competitive and the units mess up something or get in the way of something.
One obvious problem is these things are going to have to stand up to major storms and might get in the way of shipping.
#17 onanymouse:
“‘… is now working on a second-generation device.’
hmmm. Not sure if they mean an additional “generation device” or a they mean a next generation device.”
Second-generation device=next generation device
Second generation device=additional generation device
I think…
Surfers are already preparing a protest march. There will always be opponents.
PETA will join when the first harbor seal is smacked.
in an odd way, the only one whose head is not in a box is #16 Lunatic Fringe..
some anti-gravity devices use gravity as an energy source and even produce cold “excess” energy as a by-product
-similar to Searl effect Generators (SEG’s)
This ocean wave stuff is a waste of time.
we’ve had the ability to produce basically zero footprint energy since Tesla’s time.
The only thing people should march on Washington for is the release of the thousands of energy patents that prove this.
Here is a collection of [re]verified research on various technologies from a 2007 energy conference..some with 2000% efficiency.
(“quick someone yell QUACK” -idiots)
http://tinyurl.com/ya5n489
The Russians, and possibly the Belgians or Bulgarians will probably end up releasing this tech way before we ever even admit it exists.
*Our* laws of physics are obviously incomplete and need a complete re-write.
(Clue: man-made climate change is not the only “science” that has been hoaxed)
I fail to see why we still pussyfoot around with all this inefficient BS.
-s