A question about natural energy

viel cazzo · 06-25-2008, 08:04 AM

Couldn't we harness the energy in Lightning (Thunder) and save it in some sort of capacitor for distribution? This is something I have little knowledge of but it seems we aren't really reclaiming one of the best forms of electrical generation on the planet that is 100% green.

If you think this is a dumb idea that's cool I'm just curious if there was any research done or reasons why it's not possible.

Fanu · 06-25-2008, 08:16 AM

is there even a man made equipment strong enough to recieve that kind of energy?

wvboy · 06-25-2008, 08:18 AM

Here are some of the problematical details:

1) Most places receive lightning very infrequently, but have a steady demand for electrical energy. The smaller the area you look at the fewer the lightning strikes will hit within that area per unit time. If you build some kind of device it has to be big enough to get hit by enough lightning strikes to supply the desired energy. If it gets hit once every ten years or so, you could be waiting a long time for a return on your investment. Bigger devices cost more.

2) Lightning has a high voltage but not a huge amount of current. Controlled sources of electrical energy typically want the other way around -- lots of current at lower voltages. 120VAC is what consumers can use, and they want a steady supply of it. Voltage and phase should not drift over time. Lightning can give you tens of thousands of volts over a few milliseconds and then be gone for the rest of the day. The lightning strike may damage the equipment, and still not have as much energy as we’d like to use. The problem is that the energy is deposited all at once, instead of spread out over time.

3) Much of the energy of the lightning discharge goes into heating up the air and making the glow. The available energy at the ground is just the amount of energy required to get the electrons into or off of the ground surface.

Storing energy from lightning

viel cazzo · 06-25-2008, 08:18 AM

This is exactly what I'm asking imagine if we could harness it partially at first. That could probably energize a small city or big one for that matter. I thought about this the other night while fishing and seeing a storm heading to us. When lightning hits the water it dances on the surface for a bit. It's amazing.

viel cazzo · 06-25-2008, 08:20 AM

WVBoy thanks for the explaination.

niloroth · 06-25-2008, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by viel cazzo

Couldn't we harness the energy in Lightning (Thunder) and save it in some sort of capacitor for distribution? This is something I have little knowledge of but it seems we aren't really reclaiming one of the best forms of electrical generation on the planet that is 100% green.

If you think this is a dumb idea that's cool I'm just curious if there was any research done or reasons why it's not possible.

capacitors are good at gaining and releasing charges quickly, not so good on holding large amounts of energy. Even the ultracapaciters that have been in the news are 1) not fully tested and 2) very far from market ready.

The problem is with the battery. There is tons of energy out there, but converting it and storing it is the issue. Solar is good, there still isn't a high enough conversion rate on the energy hitting the cells, but the big issue is battery storage for use at night.

Mr. Omoplata · 06-25-2008, 08:23 AM

Lighting is not a very reliable source of energy... and also, it's very unpredictable, unstable. That is why most of the time people usually ground the voltage into the earth because it really isn't a viable source of energy.

But I'm sure some wackos out there have attempted it... if not still do.

viel cazzo · 06-25-2008, 08:32 AM

Well thanks for all the explainations. I figured someone smarter then myself would have probably invented a way to harness it already if it was viable. I just figured I'd put it out there and see what the reasoning was behind it.

megaseth7 · 06-25-2008, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by viel cazzo

Couldn't we harness the energy in Lightning (Thunder) and save it in some sort of capacitor for distribution? This is something I have little knowledge of but it seems we aren't really reclaiming one of the best forms of electrical generation on the planet that is 100% green.

If you think this is a dumb idea that's cool I'm just curious if there was any research done or reasons why it's not possible.

Well, its way too much energy all at once.

What I would say that we could make more use of is geothermal energy. I think we should open up Yellowstone National Park, give the energy companies large grants so that they dont have to risk capital on new projects. Maybe after that we can give them more tax breaks but only if they support the necessary number of lobbiests.

But then again the earths core could grow cold. Geothermal energy is much like solar, wind and tidal energy...the sun, wind and tides could all run out and then where would you be and how stupid would you look for having developed them after the sun goes out?

megaseth7 · 06-25-2008, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niloroth

capacitors are good at gaining and releasing charges quickly, not so good on holding large amounts of energy. Even the ultracapaciters that have been in the news are 1) not fully tested and 2) very far from market ready.

The problem is with the battery. There is tons of energy out there, but converting it and storing it is the issue. Solar is good, there still isn't a high enough conversion rate on the energy hitting the cells, but the big issue is battery storage for use at night.

Thats why I have always thought that maintaing the stored energy in the same form that it is created in is vital. Wouldnt it be more efficient to store a slowing auto's energy in the same mechanical form rather than convert it to electricty store it to mechanical energy then reconvert it back to electricity then back to mechanical???

Why not simply use the brakes to compress hydrolic energy...standard off the shelf technology that has already been developed. To store that energy not as mech/ele/chem/ele/then back to mechanical but maintain that energy as a mechanical energy? I think a far greater efficiency would be attained.

Of course the main detractors (the technology has been developed at Ford) state that there is an inherant danger in compressing the hydrolic fluids...of course there isnt one in having a very large batter that can explode or the risk of sitting on 5000 psi of odorless hydrogen gas.