Why Can't We Get Power From Waves?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 авг 2024
- Thanks to OIST for sponsoring this video. To learn more, visit admissions.ois...
Wave power hasn’t yet made a splash because it’s hard to use waves to spin turbines, and because the sea is a harsh place to build things.
Thanks also to our Patreon patrons / minuteearth and our RUclips members.
___________________________________________
To learn more, start your googling with these keywords:
Wave energy converter - a device for turning the mechanical energy of ocean waves into mechanical energy (flow of a substance) or electrical energy
Oscillating water column - an open-bottomed chamber filled with air and water, whose wave action moves the water column up and down like a piston, forcing the air out past a turbine
Attenuator - a long multisegment floating structure oriented parallel to the direction waves travel, where differing heights of waves along the length of the device flex the connections driving hydraulic pumps that can be connected to turbines
Oscillating body - a floating buoy that oscillates with waves, generating electricity within the buoy or by pulling on a generator or by pumping water through a turbine
Overtopping device - a reservoir filled by waves to a height higher the average nearby ocean, into which reservoir water is released, spinning a turbine
Biofouling - undesirable growth of organisms like barnacles and algae on underwater surfaces
Ocean wave - energy passing through water and causing it to move in a circular motion
Turbine - a machine for producing continuous power in which a wheel with blades gets hit by a fast-moving flow of water, steam, gas, air, or other fluid, and spins (often connected to a magnet that spins)
Induction - the production of an electric current in a wire by movement of a nearby magnetic field
___________________________________________
If you liked this week’s video, you might also like:
Why Wave Power Has Lagged Far Behind as Energy Source e360.yale.edu/...
_________________________________________
Subscribe to MinuteEarth on RUclips: goo.gl/EpIDGd
Support us on Patreon: goo.gl/ZVgLQZ
And visit our website: www.minuteeart...
Say hello on Facebook: goo.gl/FpAvo6
And Twitter: goo.gl/Y1aWVC
And download our videos on itunes: goo.gl/sfwS6n
___________________________________________
Credits:
Script Writer & Narrator: Alex Reich
Video Illustrator: Arcadi Garcia Rius
Video Directors: David Goldenberg & Julián Gómez
With Contributions From: Henry Reich, Kate Yoshida, Ever Salazar, Peter Reich, David Goldenberg
Music by: Nathaniel Schroeder: / drschroeder
___________________________________________
References:
Aderinto, T., & Li, H. 2018. Ocean wave energy converters: Status and challenges. Energies, 11(5), 1250. www.mdpi.com/1...
Khan, N., Kalair, A., Abas, N., & Haider, A. 2017. Review of ocean tidal, wave and thermal energy technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 590-604. doi.org/10.101...
Lewis, A., et al. 2011. Ocean Energy. In IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation [O. Edenhofer, et al (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. www.ipcc.ch/si...
Pérez-Collazo, C., Greaves, D., & Iglesias, G. 2015. A review of combined wave and offshore wind energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 42, 141-153. 10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.032
Shintake, T. 2016. Harnessing the Power of Breaking Waves. In Proceedings of the 3rd Asian Wave and Tidal Energy Conference (AWTEC2016) (Vol. 174, pp. 9-13). bit.ly/2U0tt1I
Shintake, T. March 2019. Personal communication.
Tollefson, J. 2014. Power from the oceans: Blue energy. Nature News, 508(7496), 302. www.nature.com...
Uihlein, A., & Magagna, D. 2016. Wave and tidal current energy-A review of the current state of research beyond technology. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 58, 1070-1081. www.sciencedir...
US Department of the Interior. May 2006. Technology White Paper on Wave Energy Potential on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. www.boem.gov/W...
Wang, Z. L. 2017. New wave power. Nature, 542(7640), 159-160. bit.ly/2HYE2v5 
Наука
Yes, wave power has it's ups and downs.
Badum tsss.
I’m proud of you
You have now passed the dad exam and are eligible to become a father
@@kepagu too late, I'm a granddad.
I see what you did there ;-)
That's right, folks. 97% of power is literally nothing more than interesting ways to heat water. Our lives are steam-powered.
EDIT: It has come to my attention (it hasn't) that the specific number 97 is incorrect (obviously it was, the video says literally that not seconds later; it's called hyperbole). Seriously, though, a vast majority of our power comes from boiling water. The only notable exceptions that I'm aware of are Hydro and Wind (Tidal generation is negligible at this point, though growing). Google says Hydro is ~17% of the world's power generation, and it says that the US generates 4% from wind. Even if we take an incredibly conservative estimate of 10% for wind for the entire world, that leaves us with 70% of the world's power that is generated from interesting ways of boiling water, and probably closer to 75%. Still a shocking amount, no?
Not wind turbines though. Though I guess water vapour in the air does help them.
@@Sir_Budginton no, water vapour lowerers the efficiency as its density is lower than the air.
Since "steampunk" usually involves using coal to heat water, should we start calling it "coalpunk"?
@@1queijocas You're right. nvm then.
@@imveryangryitsnotbutter We should... if we where naming it after the power source. But that is not what steam in steampunk is really referring to. More dominant technology (loosely) that capture the era which inspired this retro futuristic view. Like I like to define the -punk genera. It is taking the Zeitgeist of a era and turning it up to 11. Which is also why Steampunk is so more optimistic then Cyberpunk. And why Cyberpunk is so focused on mega corporations even if they have nothing to do with digital computers. Cyberpunk was just taking the Zeitgeist of 80's and 90's information age with larger global corporations starting to dominate every sphere and extrapolating. Of course that was a contemporary view of the Zeitgeist for the era and Steampunk is a retro view of a era that never was. But you can also see this with Biopunk that started to come in vague after cyberpunk. A other contemporary -punk genera. Of course this is all just made up definitions that are not universal. I just happen to be interested in definitions. ;)
Also steampunk often do not focus so much around turbines as much as older designs of steam engines. A interesting side note.
I loved this concept as a kid. And I would tell my dad ideas about how it could work, and my dad would slowly teach me concepts like mechanical engineering and thermodynamics by shooting down my ideas one by one. But every once in awhile, I'd give my dad an idea and he'd look at me with surprise, where looking back, he was delighted to see that his kid was learning how to think, and constantly getting a little better at it each time.
I kinda want a kid now. I went a long time not feeling that way.
Think about how long it took your father to get your head wrapped around mechanical engineering. Think of all those attempts you took before you ‘surprised’ your dad. Now realize that you’re probably going to parallel that when it comes to children - go in blind with what you think will work until you collect enough information to get it somewhat right. Each mistake or oversight you make will adversely affect a child - your child - until you get good enough at it. I should know, I’m a barely decent parent myself. Had one, learned I’m not good at this, but am still raising my kid with his mom because that kid didn’t choose to be my child but will still get the best I can give him. It’s a constant struggle, I’m not my dad and can’t look at my child some days because I get so absorbed in my own interests that he’s a bother and chore. Need time to get that out of my system to be at least a decent dad for the kid.
Maybe you’ll be a better parent than I am, just be warned that most of us are not good at this. Kids are just really durable.
a while*
@@JorgetePanete Don't be that guy who corrects grammar on a two year old RUclips comment; especially when the mistake does not result in ambiguity.
@@verdatum Negative, I am, and it helps AIs and humans learn.
@@JorgetePanete AI that can't solve that error should cut bait and import someone else's code. And people are better off learning how to overlook mistakes than they are learning how to be pedantic.
And you meant to write "Negative; I will be". 😛
Lol I was thinking to myself “why don’t they just put turbines in a river that would be a good idea” but then I realized DAMS were a thing 😆
Waterwheel: aight imma head out
Dam(n)
And many of those are being deconstructed because their productivity, it is deemed, is not worth their ecological impact.
That works to a certain degree. yes it is renewable energy and done properly it is very good for environment as a whole. But it can work also as negative effect to the environment if we depend to much on it. See the yellow river for example.
@@MartienBLY yeah I think hankyboy missed the main reason it was a stupid question. It's not because hydro electricity already exists but the video is talking about WAVES specifically lol
Are graduates from OIST called Oisters?
If they decide to speak English...
But they're from Okinawa, Japan. So unlikely.
moist
r/puns
@@thany3 Actually, OIST is an English-language institution despite its location in Japan.
Are those that work in sea based applications then... _the blue oyster club?_
Don't confuse wave energy with tidal energy. In places there is enough flow in the tidal changes to drive (you guessed it) a turbine. These are in commercial use, however they do suffer from the same issues as any undersea equipment, namely corrosion and inaccessibility.
Tidal power also messes up ecosystems badly (much like hydroelectric power) and requires a massive area, turning large lengths of coastline essentially dead.
@@MrOobling The main issue is that eligible sites are very rare, even if you are willing to risk the ecosystem.
I did not see any confusion in the video.
@@MrOobling The initial attempts at stored head tidal power (i.e. the demonstration site at Anapolis Royal Nova Scotia) had significant impacts. Modern units are essentially "underwater wind turbines" which have far lower ecological impact.
Thibaut Kovaltchouk - you also didn’t see any mention of tidal energy. It’s a valid comment which clarifies we are pulling energy from the sea for those uninformed.
Moral of the story; We gotta think outside the turbine.
Great!! Hahah
In early days of steam engines... They could only produce linear motion... So the linear motion was used to pump water, which was then then used to drive water wheel
Or improve it.
I was thinking about this. Turbine is just not the way to go for wave energy. But I'm just an ordinary citizen
Way using waves. Why not using thermo energy by using differences in temperature and pressure in between the different sealevels?
I love how I’m going to arrogantly think of this problem for the next several weeks as though my dumb ass will be able to come up with something all of human history has failed to figure out.
all it takes is one person thinking about it differently to change how we do things.
this is why having more educated people is so good.
the more people that are thinking, means we have more chances to make progress.
You never know if you experiment. The Wright brothers were bicycle mechanics.
You may do it
How is that going?
Don't put down ur self.
Simple. Just make it illegal for waves to move up and down then they will be forced to move sideways
Yes but we will need policemans in the ocean to punish disobeying waves. We might want to prosecute those non-law-abiding waves or even enforce it at gun-point.
Dumb. Its illegal to cross the US border without a visa, this didnt stop 100,000 border jumpers to welcome themselves into the US in March.
@I Am Sekou .
@@Supatrader -- Don't they fly in, then overstay their visa...And it's not _'THAT'_ illegal. Whatya gonna do, take in a million Mexicans fleeing drug violence at home, and then feed & house them for 2-10yrs before dumping them back in Mexico after the violence has had time to subside? _Hahahaha_
@Stoney Lonsome its always a good idea to pull your head out of where the sun dont shine. ruclips.net/video/sKWo8x5V-dA/видео.html you're welcome!
I design wave energy machines and this is a fairly accurate introduction. Well done.
Imo, I don't see any future with wave energy at all. Even if something works it would be too expensive to make, operate and maintain. Not to mention the people who have to go there and put it there and what about the cables that transfers the electricity what if something eats it. Even if solved it would be too far causing energy loss in transfer cuz majority of humans don't live near the beach. Might as well just improve solar panels to max efficiency possible and have them mass produced, there's study from a university in france that claims to have said that 60percent efficiency is possible tho.
But that's just my opinion
Is it possible to design a collection system whereby water is pumped up to a height utilizing a helical gear and an archemedes screw? When a given volume is collected the weight of the released water spins a turbine.
Mazda Miata wait, no, where are you getting this? The vast majority of humanity lives clustered on or near the water. And have you seen the kind of cables they lay on the ocean floor? Nothing’s gonna eat that!
Tommie duh Swamy some people think pumping water upwards like that would be a great way to store energy captured at one time and turned back into electricity exactly like you said. It would be fantastic for wind turbines since wind can produce a ton of power when we don’t need it and then suddenly stop blowing when we do.
@@MazdaRX7007 to be honest the challenge is mainly financial not technical. It needs investment. The smartphone I am writing this on is a far more complex machine yet its cheap and mass made. Power transmission is not a problem. You already live hundreds of km from a power station. Waves have the advantage of being much more predictable than wind. Solar is great but I doubt there is enough rare earth's to build enough... And finally you are right on costs at the moment but they will come down. Difficult and expensive doesn't mean not worth doing :-)
Every day I m tankful that there are no land barnacles.
But you have fungi, and moss
@@fajaradi1223 they dont attach on anything unlike barnacles
Botflies
@@fajaradi1223 Neither can produce cement. Scraping barnacles off a ship is a bitch.
Snails
Dam it!
No reply?
Why tho
For anyone interested in hearing "Turbine" or any of its variations
0:16
0:17
0:27
0:28
0:29
0:33
0:37
0:59
1:05
1:11
1:16
1:22
1:28
1:34
1:40
2:03
2:06
2:08
2:16
2:54
What a madlad
I appreciate this effort
This comment deserves gold
SR A this isnt reddit
Harry Surette Wasn’t really trying to emulate Reddit.
Humans: We’re really advanced! We’ve got space travel and genetic engineering and a bunch of cool science shit!
Aliens: Oh neat, so how do you power all that?
Humans: uhhhh make spinny thing go whoosh
more like boil water :D
Yeah, it's a bit sad.
More like: burn dead things to make spinny thing go "Brrrrrrrrr"
@@pawala7 Grow new trees to burn...instead of burning old trees that turned into fossil fuels
Makes perfect sense to me
@@kyleallen3857 Trouble with that is energy density. A fresh-grown tree just doesn't have as much energy per unit volume as 1000 dead trees that have been squeezed into coal by millions of years of tectonic activity. There isn't enough surface area on the entire planet to grow the trees we'd need to fuel our current energy needs if we reverted back to wood burning.
(That math is also a large part of why tree-planting efforts while better than nothing are not and literally can not be anywhere near sufficient to counteract our global CO2 production.)
We really have only three paths forward with respect to climate change: 1) Reduce greenhouse gas production significantly. Given that we're still _increasing_ our production globally, that's not likely to happen in time to save anything (yes the increase per year going down, but its still an increase -- just like taking your foot off the gas doesn't cause your car to come to a sudden stop.. and we're only doing the equivalent of slightly letting up on the gas..)
2) Remove greenhouse gasses from the atmosphere. That's the idea behind tree planting but as already noted, its way too inefficient to accomplish much of anything. There is some investment in CO2 harvesting technologies such as ruclips.net/video/63S0t4k_Glw/видео.html . While promising, it remains to be seen whether such technology can be scaled up enough to have a significant global impact (and they require power to run as well, so their ultimate effectiveness will rely on switching power generation facilities to something that isn't producing more CO2 than the scrubbers are extracting per unit energy.)
3) Reduce the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth. There have been various proposals to do this, but they all suffer from one (or both) of two enormous caveats: They're usually extremely expensive (some of them would cost more than the GDP of the entire planet) and they're often irreversible, so if we screw it up or fail to anticipate some important side-effect, we could be doing more harm than good. The only thing worse than a rapidly heating planet would be a rapidly cooling one. (Though its kind of fun to imagine what we could do with something like an array of adjustable sunlight-blockers in space -- raise and lower the earth's temperature as desired, within a small margin. Of course its equally fun to imagine who would abuse such power and to what ends..)
Why don't we just hire some guys to spin a lever wheel-thingy
Jonathan Sauceda if everyone was made to do it like some big tax that'd be cool
it's more energy efficient to just burn the food you would eat to make steam than it is for you to spin a turbine.
@@esequieltovar4955 the human body is very inefficient at converting food into mechanical energy
@@esequieltovar4955 yes indeed sir it is. especially because humans are warm blooded, you would actually shed a lot of that energy as heat. and the two biggest energy consumers in the human body are in fact brain and guts, muscles don't get that much.
Jonathan Sauceda 100 Chinese! ;)
Lets just invest in more nuclear. Its honestly great when done right
Chernobyl 2: Electric Boogaloo
@@lorddog7249 *Nuclear Boogalo
yes sadly we'll run out of uranium so it's only a temporary solution, maybe asteroid mining in the future?
I have faith in nuclear fusion tho, a mile better than fission as long as it's developed for energy and not to destroy other countries lol.
That's the thing. It's never been done right. Because humans can't be trusted with nuclear power.
I said this before and I say it again: these guys start with a worplay and work backwards from there...
Yeah, I agree, I guess they accept their sponsors based on how many wordplays they can make.
pls stfu, k?
If this is 6 hours ago and this video is 5 hours ago then HOW R U DOIN’ DAT
What's worplay or wordplay?
Is your avatar Daria from when she was telling subverted Hansel and Gretel?
Aliens: So how do you get your energy
Us: We usually convert mechanical energy through turbines to generate electricity. Sadly we couldn't figure out how to use waves.
Aliens: *snicker* Well at least you discovered splitting the atom.
Us: Yeah they are really good at boiling water to push the turbines faster
Aliens: *breaks down from laughter*
Wait till they learn what we will do with nuclear fusion. 😂
Boil more water!
If you think the way we live now, it’s already obsolete, way to much inefficient, like for example we try to save pennies in electricity, changing led bulbs, automatic switchers, but still we use a petrol car, to take one person on average, Weighting the car roughly a 1 ton, and burning the same amount of energy in one minute equivalent to light your house for hours if not a day...
Makes me sad people think steam is lame. The sheer size and complexity of steam based systems make them really interesting imo.
Some humans doesn't look back at the past. Like steam engine wasn't one of the reasons for industrialization.
@@icouldntthinkofagoodname7216 in truth, we still haven't moved from the steam engine.
So they're no longer held in hi esteam ? 📉😂📈♨💭
Never thought I would hear about OIST again after four years!
It is actually a lot simpler than this. Waves don't carry much energy per unit of area. A 'large' coastal wave will typically be lifting water less than one meter up. Even deeper ocean swells are typically under 3m and max out at around 16kw/square meter. Meanwhile, a hydro-electric dam typically has water falling 50m or more, giving it 250x the amount of energy per unit area of the water -- and it is easy to dam up millions of square meters of water to that depth. In the ocean... that water area can't be concentrated and make to flow though a single turbine. So, in order to collect the same amount of energy as a dam, you'd need 250x as many turbines (spread out over 250x the surface area) just to collect the same amount of energy.
Waves just don't have enough energy per unit area. Tides solve on of the issues. You allow tides to flow into an larger holding tank/area and then you can seal it as the tide cost out and then direct the water to flow out through a single turbine. Thus, like a dam, you only need one turbine for all that water. However, most tides only flow to a maximum of 1m or so in most areas.... so you need to build such tanks/areas in the rare places on earth which have higher tide ranges. However, even at a 2m tide range... you still need a huge tank/area and these are typically along valuable realty areas.
Ultimately, this is the problem with any renewable -- energy density. Solar, wind, biofuels, wave, and others all take massive areas to collect useful amounts of energy. This means massive construction, land usage, maintenance, etc. costs and low returns per unit area.
I was always interested in electricity made by tides. Reading your comment, I thought : one or two meters of tides is kinda low, he must be in error, tides near my home are much higher than that.
So i searched for tides around the world and discovered that I live in the place where tides are the highest around the world, in Canada. Tides in my city (Québec) are around 5 meters. As opposed to many places where it is less than one meter.
I found that in some parts of Europe, they are well around 2 meters so that's not bad. Unfortunately, or should I say fortunately, we will not see this type of electricity in my city or province since it is almost exclusively power dams which are very effective in my area considering the amount of big rivers and lakes.
Have a good day.
@@maxlevedgeful Tides get complex. In the open ocean tides only average 0.6m. Near shore, they vary all over the place based on the depth/share of the ocean floor, bays or islands which focus water, the time of year/position of the moon, etc. You also get tides at different times during day, multiple high/low tides, and all of different ranges over the year. Two meters actually isn't that low. Remember that any fixed tank needs always be above the height of the highest low-tide to generate power -- and typically a lot more in order to get enough force through a pipe to actually turn the turbine.
For example, Quebec City tides range from 0 (lowest possible) to 6m. However, in typical ranges it is 0.7m to 4.6m. Say your tank starts at 0m. At what height is the outflow pipe/generator? If you put it at 0m, it generates no power anytime the tide is above 0m, since it won't outflow water. So, you pick say 2m... allowing it a 1m drop on 80% of low tides. That means you only get energy out of 2-2.5m of tide out of a 3.5m difference (typical to Quebec City). Multiple outflows and turbines gets expensive/complex and that only gets you that extra 1m of water less than 20% of the time. You then have the issue of how much water you can get through your turbines and over what period of time. If you allow the possibility of a 5m range, when you typical range is 2.5m, you are building more outflows/turbines for that 10% case and... what do you do with the extra power?
In most cases, you'll give up the extremes (any tides below the 80% of low tides) and highs (any tides above 80% of high tides) and then need to subtract 1m (or so) in order to get a drop to create the energy. In practice, even on a 4m range, in practice your system is probably only getting energy out of 2m.
@@BW022 As an interesting fact, there's an highway (number 440) on the shore of the Saint Lawrence river which has high tides. It is near the bridge of the Orleans island if you want to check it. The highway is built in a manner of creating a basin of water separated artificially from the Saint Lawrence. It is calles "Étang de la côte". The water comes and leaves the places every tide by a relatively small round opening under the highway. Every time I go on this part of the 440 hw (everyday at different hours) I see the water is coming in or out of the basin at significant velocity. The (state owned) power company could simply put a turbine in this opening and get free electricity supply to sell to it's customers. It would be a great place to test the viability and feasibility of this type of power source.
@@maxlevedgeful I can only assume you mean the basin of the Montmorency River (46.885473, -71.143337)? In any case, that would not work.
You can't just put a 'turbine' in a flow of moving water. That would just be an impellor (not a turbine) and it produces almost no power as the water merely moves faster around the impellor. If you put a bunch of impellors there, the water would just flow over them -- or the bridge if it needed to. Further, the amount of energy you get out of it is always determined by the change in the velocity of the water going in and coming out. I.e. if the water is moving 10m/s before and 9m/s after... only 10% of that energy is captured. For all practical purposes... if the turbine system isn't backing up the water, it isn't giving you energy. This is why nearly every turbine is placed horizontally across a vertical shaft and the water is allowed to fall downwards -- and (for hydro-electric dams) there is a vast amount of water hundreds of feet up being forced through it.
Tidal power doesn't work by putting impellors in a tidal flow. In order to get power, you would need to build a tank. Then allow it to fill up until high tide. Then plug it. Then wait for a much lower tide. Now you have a lot of water which is going to fall a (relatively) large distance. And then release the water to fall as far as it can... forcing it through as narrow a spot as possible, so that as much of the water moving through the turbine must push the blade out of its way.
And of course... that's just the theory. In practice you have to worry about junk (fish, logs, rocks, sand, sea weed, etc.) being brought into your system and then blasted through your turbines. Then you have to worry about corrosion (salt water itself is highly abrasive), environmental issues (blendering/filtering large amounts of fish, blasting higher pressure water into an area, water temperature issues since you are holding/releasing water into an existing system, etc.), construction issues (you need a coastal area wide/flat/solid enough to build large tanks, but typically beaches are either sandy/rocky soft or not dense rock which isn't wide/flat), collection, tide cycle/release issues (i.e. intermitant power production), etc.
Looking at your idea in reverse: It would take a lot of energy to create a wave 2m high. So there must be a lot of energy in the wave. Not as much as 50m of course, but not insignificant. Especially if it is 1/4 mile long and arrives every 20 seconds. Just need to find a way to encourage it to share its energy with us ...
I did my Capstone project designing buoys that generated electricity for use off the coast of Guam. There's a lot of great research happening. But you guys hit the nail on the head, the electricity costs are too high. Great video!
It's only about cost when you're head is buried in capitalism. Those buoys' electric may be the same or even more cost than turbine driven generators, but they don't use fossil fuels. Even if you're a climate change denier, not strip mining and not fracking are good things. Unless of course you're making billions of dollars from strip mining and fracking.
@@crudeviolin Convert money AND energy into "work equivalent unit". If you need 90 work equivalent unit to generate 80 work equivalent unit, your technology isn't worth it, even if it environmentaly friendly, you are basically "wasting".
==> Here is the problem, if it's not economicaly viable, it means it needs too much work for too little output.
It's not just about money, it's about efficiency.
Most Green Energy needs a great injection of work to start producing energy, and they don't give a lot, then, they also need energy to be after being too old to dismantle and put into "not-that-bad-of-a-waste".
But we will find a way, I trust in humanity.
Problem is that we were used to have close to free work unit.
Extracting oil was very easy and cheap and giving out tons of energy, now it gets more complex, and it has "deadly" side effects.
@@Masterpouya You seem to be missing my point, and are going off track from Joe's original comment which was commenting that the electricity wasn't cheap enough. Sometimes the more expensive option is better. Also, unless you live in a country that has vast reserves of petroleum, gaining energy independence is a high priority and can provide "savings" that may not be apparent when only looking at the cost per kWH.
Excellent, thank you!!! I've been wondering what happened to wave power since the 1980s, the first time I read about small scale deployments of it in a few rivers in the UK and Canada. So the trial deployments failed. And now I know why.
Thank you so much. I was struggling a lot for my Science Assessment and then saw this video and it saved me.
So we gain 97% of our electricity from interesting ways of making weirdly- shaped wheels spin?
Well, yes.
Or well, the spinning turbine rubs copper agaisnt magnets that actually gives the electricity.
Nuclear plant = steam energy
turns out sometimes the simplest design is the best one (its not simple, turbines are filled with elecronics that control the flow of air and torque applied to it to ensure maximum efficiency at all times, but the base principle is shockingly simple). most of our research is about figuring out ways of making a better heating source. coal and oil are inefficient because their base chemical reactions are ineffective, solar concentration is good but only in countries that see almost no clouds and have enough ground space to make the gigantic instalations. dams are damn effective but need specific terrain and weather cycles to work, and nuclear is efficent and usable almost anywhere with fresh water, but our research on nuclear reactors has been shamefully slow after the energy got its bad stigma due to a certain reactor 4, and bad safety decisions in japan. geothermal is also an interesting one, because a technology very similar to fracking (but without the need of many of the problematic chemicals) could allow heat spots to be exploited almost everywhere on the planet, but the funding for that research has been catastrophically low compared to what fracking for oil has received. fusion is getting some attention too, but again, not nearly as much as it should, and only more than all others because of europe's research institutions pulling many times their weight.
Yes. We're almost always just bringing water to a boil to spin some wheels. That's what humanity has achived so far.
@@mobiuscoreindustries Just want to drop this, and I can find a source, but micro nuclear energy is a simple and safe alternative, you put depleted uranium in a CO2 based generator, and it creates a (relatively) small amount of energy with no risk of meltdown, basically no footprint, and basically no maintenance.
It literally uses used materials to run so the half life is forever, and even in a "total failure" it's no harder to deal with than modern nuclear waste.
I've loved wave power ever since I saw the first large scale wave power generator in action. It's such a great example of the first law of thermodynamics. Waves came in, and behind the generator the water was perfectly flat.
This was delightfully concise and to the point.
I love the fact that u guys put in a Moana reference😂😂😂
Did you see Wilson? 😁
Nice spoiler :(
0:09 Is that Jasmine from "Pokemon"?
I was expecting someone to point this out
I was questioning that too
hottest pokemilf
@@DerToasti Pokemilf? She is said to be 15 or more, that sounds like jailbait to me o.O
Who?
If it's so impractical, why don't we take those waves, and *PUSH* it somewhere else?
shin lee he only spends like 1-3 hours a day unlike you which probably spends like 5-9 hours a day
How you y’all know…? It’s scary…online stalkers?
12th like
Where are your bots?
shin lee Ahhh name calling because you don’t actually have a way to respond to a child on the internet expect saying that their a “retarted, autisitic, bipolar child”
I used to live about half an hour from OIST. Okinawa is a lovely place to live.
0:12 I saw that drawing of a girl and instantly though of Jasmine, the Olivine Gym leader in pokemon.
As for the problem, a pendulum design might work.
Thumbs Up for that AFC Wimbledon! 👍🏼
That and the "DFTBA" next to it :P came here looking for someone else who noticed that
That's when I clicked like
How did I miss that first time around!
Thanks for pointing it out. 😁
Come on you Dons!
(We're clawing or way back up the table - it's all to play for)
Time stamp?
@@achanwahn 0:56
nobody:
“I have found unlimited energy!l
Me: "but can you spin a turbine with it?
found and foundation is completely different.
100% the worst meme of the year
You have a better idea then what is the most powerful AND most cost-efficient way of generating electricity? By all means, Wanna-be engineer...enlighten us all...
@@collinspecht6725 as an engineering student, I was constantly told that, if it's dumb and simple but it works, just do it
@@alexanderchristopher6237 That's my point...
Also, you don't count. You haven't graduated and you have no experience. I've worked as an engineer technician for some time and you can always tell the college grads from the ones who have the know-how.
0:12 isnt that the hairstyle of the 2o gen steel gym leader?
YOUR RIGHT
Yes I was thought of commenting but unlucky me you already commented
That's jasmine
There's also a Moana reference.
This is the second video I've watched of this guy and BOTH have had a pokemon reference.
*IT IS!*
i am in awe at how goodly structured this video is very informative and to the point
the afc wimbledon banners with the wave bit was a nice touch
Have you seen this one:
ruclips.net/video/KRGca_Ya6OM/видео.html
There must be sometime in the "minuteX" office who is an AFC fan
Human history has always been the progress of more efficiently boiling water and spinning a wheel.
For 200 years of 200.000, yes
@@authomat6236 We have watermills at least as far back as the Roman Empire. An order of magnitude farther back then 200 years. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watermill#Ancient_Near_East
And the basic idea is something people can come up with independantly. It is just soemwhat hard ot find examples that far back, given that they were often made from wood.
@@christopherg2347 'boiling'
Edit: Granted, there were steam driven devices in the classical period but they weren't of any importance whatsoever.
@@authomat6236 "and spinning a wheel."
@@christopherg2347 'AND'; which means that if one part doesn't hold true, the whole statement isn't true. Otherwise it would be 'or'.
The little Jasmine cameo was a pleasant surprise! Poor Amphy's been working his tail off
Nicely done video. Explains the question and answer very clearly! Thanks!
I saw one design for a floating pod which uses tidal forces to generate electricity.
They were going to be called tide pods, but the fear was that kids would eat them :(
Yeah, I sea what you did there.
Tidal is waaaay different topic than waves, y'know
Why wouldn't you call them tidal pods?
Nice AFC Wimbledon appearance! #DFTBA!
Check out this one as well:
ruclips.net/video/KRGca_Ya6OM/видео.html
0:55 AFC WIMBLEDON 😂😂
LOL
John Green would be happy.
That was a very informative, entertaining, yet succinct video. Good job 👍
Wow this was explained so simply and yet was so informative. Great job!
0:08 OMG that is Jasmine the metal type gym leader of Johto did anyone else notice that?
This video makes a lot of sense. So what we really need is a "mobile" energy storage to avoid any complex fixed constructions that cost too much.
Why dont they try spinning turbines using deep sea currents? I know we're talking about converting waves here but it's just a thought that stuck with me.
You'd have to build and maintain a very long cable to transmit the electricity.
Did I like the video just because you used AFC Wimbeldon as example of a football team?
Yes, Yes, I did.
And I was so excited afterwards that I couldn't really listen to the video any more and instead had to write this comment. But I'm sure the rest of the video is great too :)
I also liked the video for that reason :)
Yo, that is one cool sponsorship. OIST sounds like a muggle Hogwarts.
It really is. English-speaking and very international, too, which is rare in Japan.
I had the buoy idea 5 years ago when I was 17 and I think its time I finally try something with it to make a protoype. I still have my drawing. The up/down motion basically works a pump. I used to be a zoology major so I got the idea to have the gases be in seperate chambers to require less work to to spin the fan and would also solve an issue if the volume of the pump tube is greater than the air it brings in.
Nicely explained.
Why not harness tidal power? Water flows into a bay at high tide. A metal gate comes down and then the water turns a turbine as it exits during low tide. There's literally no limit to this as the bay can be enlarged to any size trapping cubic kilometers of water behind the gate giving you power as it flows out.
Because the sea is frigging unforgiving. Mooring, mechanical and corrosion resistance, transferring power, etc. are all difficult in this challenging environment. I've participated in the study of a few tidal power projects (Open Hydro, Emera,...).
It really is just very challenging to make cost-effective equipment that will work reliably.
the environmental impacts of this can be enormous (like fish need to get up the river, mudlfats are important habitats etc) also to capture enough water you need to build huge reservoirs.... but also remember that electricity is more or less worthless in the middle of the night as demand drops. large coal stations cannot switch off easily so base load is covered by these fairly easily. and that means you only really get one tide per day which is worth using. Basically if you are going to the hassle of building a huge dam, do it upstream.
@C Lopez this is used, and energy storage is a massive deal in getting renewables to work (eg no solar at night) but it's another layer of expense. Compared to solar and wind, tidal is just much more expensive and if you have to store the energy anyway you might as well use them. They looked for years at using the Bristol channel for tidal power but the cost and impact on ecosystem is massive.
@C Lopez the cost of solar is something like 15 euros per megawat hour, tidal is about 10 times that amount. The Orkney site is a prototype with 2Mw capacity that generated 3Gwh in a year. That sounds ok but is terrible in the grand scheme of things. They have taken one of the prime spots for tidal flows and generated enough power for a tiny village. It simply won't scale. You can develop it all you want but you'd be far better spending the cash on a decent power link to north Africa and dropping a load of solar. It's one of those idea that is brain candy and gets the engineering brain ticking but the real solution is more boring and involves scale, low maintenance and mass production.
@C Lopez but you are completely ignoring the environment impact of tidal power. solar panels are not that bad for pollution compared to many sources. you've obviously made up your mind that this is a magic bullet that will miraculously become 10x cheaper and we will find millions of great sites for it, but i think it's fantasy.
Every time he says "spin a turbine" take a drink
YR SO ORIGINAL
or just "turbine"
Aliens : it's been a long trip.
Humans : let's make them a hot beverage. Have a coffee.
We boil water...it's all we know.
I could see a design where rather than transforming the waves you have a sort of flap that the waves push up and down and then you use this motion to spin a turbine as long as gravity can bring the flap back down you can effectively just keep it clean this way you benefit from the upwards and localized motion of waves without nearly as much effort to create it though I'm sure someone else has already thought of this method and failed to see results
Yup, that's one of the designs I remember seeing, back when I was looking into this as a high-school science project. The main problem with this (and similar designs) is that the flap doesn't go up and down very far or very fast, so you have to have lots of really long flaps to get much energy out of the design.
"oh okay this video sounds interesting"
*watches until **0:07*
"WAIT IS THAT JASMINE FROM POKÉMON GSC"
I thought she was a Valkyrie from Norse mythology.
Yes, yes she is. Something about being by the ocean as well as a light house.
Wait, you're a Wimbledon fan?! :D
That's really interesting! I never thought much about this but I just assumed that, in the same way we can have a motor that can turn circular movement into an oscillating up-and-down movement, we can just reverse engineer that to have up-and-down movement as an input and convert that into circular movement for a turbine. But of course, it's never that simple!
It's also kind of tricky in both directions. One of the problems with turbine-powered cars was always that turbines (especially the small ones that go in cars) want to spin really fast, and making gears to slow that down to an appropriate speed for a car isn't easy.
With wave power, you've got something going up and down maybe 10 times a minute, and you'd like to have the generator spinning at thousands of revolutions per minute for it to be effective at generating energy.
The other trick is that you always need relative motion (one thing moving, one thing staying still) to pull the energy out. With a turbine, you've got the rotating part and the non-rotating part. With wave motion, you need to connect the part that's bobbing up and down to something that's staying still, and that's not easy in the ocean.
@@BrooksMoses that final paragraph is what made everything click
How about adding linear generators to floating windmills?
The static parts would be the leashes connected to the seaground and the dynamic parts would be the windmills bouncing up and down. Everything fragile and heavy would be placed inside and as low as possible in the windmills for stability and minimum wear.
Surely there's a way to convert wave energy directly to low frequency AC current...mmm
There is... Go look at Seadogsystems.com
@@roughdiamondlagos6818 Looked at the site. A whole lot of maybe, and if, with a hew short-term scale model tests. If they are not vaporware, I wish them success.
A big problem, I imagine, is voltage. To send electricity any distance at all (even from an off-shore turbine to an on-shore substation) you need relatively good voltage - probably at least 1kv or more to go a kilometer without significant losses. A low frequency AC source is likely also to be low voltage. So you need to convert the voltage to a higher level before sending it across the wire, which is lossy if the conversion is too high.
If your low frequency source can hit 100 volts it will probably not be too bad. But if you're generating 10 volts or less your going to spend a lot of your harvested energy just converting it up to send down the wire.
@@MonkeyJedi99 the technology has been demonstrated to technical readiness level (TRL) 8 - next step is commercial deployment
Certainly there are ways, and patent offices are littered with them. The trouble has been coming up with something that makes economic sense.
This is sorta a tangentially related question, but why did people decide to use the heat from coal in coal power plants to heat up water specifically? Why not a liquid that has a lower boiling point, or lower specific heat? Is it bc of the mass, or availability of water?
You are asking why water is the working fluid?
#1: Abundance on this planet. We need a reason to select another fluid. Water is the default choice, because of its availability.
#2: high latent heat of vaporization. This means most of the heat is added (in the boiler) and rejected (in the condenser) at constant temperatures, which is what is desirable for a heat engine. An ideal engine has heat addition processes happening at constant temperatures, such that the cycle is a rectangle on the temperature-entropy diagram. A real heat engine in practice should be as close to a rectangle on that same diagram as practical, and boiling/condensing processes allow us to do this.
#3: low viscosity. This means less energy loss in the piping due to viscous and roughness effects.
#4: high thermal conductivity. This means less physical space is needed for the heat exchangers, compared to what it would have to be, if it were some other fluid.
#5: pumps already exist for transporting water, and no brand new pump is needed to be purpose-built for a different working fluid.
Some power plants do effectively use air as a working fluid, like the peak operation power plants that use natural gas and the Brayton cycle. What is happening here, is that air is compressed and mixed with gaseous fuel which is then burned, and then the products of combustion spin the gas turbine. The products of combustion are mostly nitrogen, and can be modeled as if it were air being heated by an outside source. Heating air from an outside source is not as space efficient as boiling water, because of air's lower thermal conductivity. So flame-to-air heat exchangers are uncommon in power plants.
Refrigeration works like a steam turbine system in reverse, but we have ruled out using water in that application. Water would be the best refrigerant in terms of thermal performance, if it didn't freeze at 0 Celsius. For this reason, and because a lot of refrigeration applications do involve the working fluid going below 0 Celsius, that alone is enough of a reason to select specialized fluids for the purpose of refrigeration cycles, such as freon and R134a.
Thanks for the video, I heard about tidal energy years ago and was curious why it hasn't shown up yet.
Tides and waves are totally different things, and tidal energy has none of the problems described in this video.
Ive done a hilarious amount of research and experiments on this, the trick is to force the tidal currents through a funnel like structure forcing the water to spin around, the turbines are impeller that are spun as the water cork screws through the system, you can replicate this with a 2 liter coke bottle, fill it, give the water a spin and hold it upside down, the water spins out of the nozzle, imagine an impeller at the throat of the nozzle.
Wow! OIST as a sponsor!
Take a shot every time he says turbine. You'l die from alcohol poisoning.
The R rated version of Justin Y.
no
Or lead poisoning depending on shot.
1:51 WIIIIIILSOOOOOOON
I used to drive past OIST all the time! Beautiful campus and great location especially for studying the ocean!
WOO GO AFC WIMBLEDON!!
We need to use the thermoelectric properties in the oceans rather than the flow.
Water retains thermal energy very well. We do something similar with sand.
actually the other way around, since its an excellent insulator, it also retains cold, so we can use temperature differential, in other words, the temp difference between the ocean water and the air above it, the sharper the temp difference, the more energy that can be can be extracted. And in fact wind farm turbines operate under the same principle, but instead of temperature, its pressure, because its difference in pressure that generates all of the planets winds, the sharper the difference in pressure in a given area, the faster the wind speed
Would it be easier to place the turbine in the large currents like the gulf stream?
Just thinking out loud but that seems more intuitive to the turbines as we currently use them. Would probably have to be put much deeper though...
your not thinking out loud your typing
Don't know of anyone harnessing currents, but tidal energy is normally just underwater turbines. So, a thing which already exists.
I meant its more analogous to the way a wind turbine is used if it were meant to harness directional current energy rather than periodic tidal energy
@@aucontraire4717 I get what you're saying, but...
Tidal is periodic on with a frequency of hours. This is a lot like wind, which changes direction sometimes too ;)
BTW: Here's an example project from some years back:
www.energy.gov/articles/turbines-nyc-east-river-will-provide-power-9500-residents
Thanks. I was curious about that one.
The people at Bungie featured an interesting idea in Destiny 2 on their map on Saturn's moon Titan.
What is the idea?
@@fezii9043 Floating masses that push pistons with the rise and fall of waves.
I think those were implemented in Japan somewhere. I definitely seen video if small ones working, but I'm likely misremembering where it was
@@brendenpischke6060 oh damn, you right that IS cool
@@fezii9043 basically what Brenden said. Massive metal plates sit just above the water and the surge from each wave pushed up the plate. The plate then drives a pistol which goes on to produce power
AFC Wimbledon I like that reference
Let's just go nuclear and call it a day. We'd be set and then we can work on improving solar, wind, and hydro at a more leisurely pace.
Until a few years and the population has doubled again and we're back at square one.
Nuclear power, fusion reactor, Dyson swam. Adding solar panels to the roofs of building and small efficient windmills also helps.
Yes a Dyson swam is a hard to make at this point as far as we know theoretical structure but you don't need to cover up the whole sun. You only need to cover up a small fraction of a percent of it to power the earth easily.
Or you can choose to put windmills every where and use the needed energy of ocean waves that helps move resources and nutrients for animal into power.
If you can improve solar panels, reducing there heat output and making them effective in high temperature areas then you can use those effectively.
@@NickRoman it would take more than a few years for the population to double. Wed be looking at decades and we cpuld always overbuild as well
Untill one earth quake or hurricane and we have a Chernobyl level disaster or worse. Never mind the nuclear waste that slowly poisons the ground below our feet unless perfectly contained for generations.
@@sneakycat67 nuclear waste is fairly easy to contain and there have been reactors made that can use common nuclear waste to produce even more energy. Plus modern nuclear reactors have so many safeguards the chances of a 2nd chernoybl is pretty much the same as a solar flare wiping out all life on earth.
God, your puns are so cool. Thoroughly enjoyable
Why not just connect the turbine to a free moving piston? The up and down movements push the piston and spin the turbine.
This is just a less efficient version of the example from 1:14
I've the feeling that the artist is a biiiiiiiig nerd. Especially in Pokémon.
In France, we have at least one "centrale marémotrice" (rough translation "tidal power station") in the city of Rance. It's running since 1966 and produce 500 GWh per years.
Tidal power != wave power
I think your example is a nice proof of concept and works. And even if people claim that this energy source is too expensive... but hey it's clean energy, so it has to be expensive !
Mighty people seems to think that dirty but cheap energy is the better way. But what shall we do with the spare money if our planet is destroyd. So many ways for clean energy, we need to use them more !
Problem is Tidal Power is not the same as wave power, Tidal Power Generators tend to rely on the currents formed and caused by the ebb and flow of tides, and not waves. These currents are more powerful, and last longer than the movements of waves (though they are still periodic, as tides are), more importantly they have a lateral movement to them that non breaking waves do not have. As tides come in and go out they are moving vast amounts of water, often very quickly, as anyone who has been caught in a rip tide (and survived) can tell you. Another example of how much water can be physically moved by tides are Bores, such as the Severn Bore, where the tide pushes water into more constricted areas.
The problem with waves is as stated, the WAVE moves, but the medium it is travelling through, the water, does not, and to spin a turbine you need the medium to move. It is only when the trough of the wave hits the sea bottom on the coast that the wave structure is disrupted, the trough of the wave slows while the crest maintains its speed, and so the water itself begins to move. Its a bit more complex than that of course, but that does give you a general and clear look at why utilising wave energy is a problem.
The short version is that Tidal Energy is viable, but it is also not the same as wave energy. Hopefully one day someone will come up with a way to harness all that power that is represented by waves, for Island Nations it would represent a huge amount of cheap, clean power when it is finally done....
My immediate thought was whether people would consider the low frequency waves of the tides to be wave power or not. Most people do not think of heat as low frequency electromagnetic radiation, so I'm guessing "no." As demonstrated here, the ignorati win again by proclamation.
@@randomxnp Trump University graduate?
0:30 Most gas fired power stations use the fuel air mixture itself as the working fluid, a bit like a bolted-down jet engine connected to a turbine and generator. In a combined cycle gas turbine system the still-quite-hot exhaust is used to boil water in a traditional steam turbine system, thus making gas fired power stations relatively efficient compared with coal, nuclear, biomass, geothermal, or solar thermal power stations. If the gas turbine is there to provide backup power, it might leave out the steam cycle altogether since heating up the boiler takes much longer than activating the gas turbine. In either case, the gas isn't _just_ another heat source for boiling water.
I think Carnegie is onto something with their CETO system which uses submerged buoys to power pumps as they rise and fall. The pumps force water through a turbine or can be used for desalinization. The system has very few moving parts so it should be reliable and regardless of tide or weather, the depth of submersion ensures that the wave energy doesn't overwhelm the system (unlike wind turbines in a hurricane, for example). I first heard about it in 2016 and it seems to be in testing now. It has amazing possibilities as long as there's enough shelf to submerge the buoys and the ability to anchor the buoys.
Me:ohhh this looks cool
MinuteEarth: turbine turbine turbine
AFC WIMBLEDON MY MAN
I was going to comment on turbines being most efficient only because we haven’t yet invented a better way to harness waves more directly, but then you said it at 2:06. So, nice summary - economics beats technology every time, but that shouldn’t stop us trying to come up with the NEXT economic technology.
Great point. What about channeling the airflow to move a turbine.
What a surprise!! I live in Okinawa and have many friends working at OIST!
And no - I’m not military!
I like the Pokémon Gold GYM leader in the video.
Turbines are an efficient way to generate power. But we have many machines that efficiently generate power from a vertical motions: reciprocating engines found in most automobiles. Another big issue is that most the energy of a shallow water wave (wind wave) is near the surface (see the velocity potential function). It is difficult to design machinery to operate at the surface. It has to withstand the more volatile surface weather. In the shallow water, you need to design equipment to withstand breaking waves (surf zone). In deeper water, long cables are needed to connect to surface energy to bottom mounted power generators and/or power transmission lines.
There was some random show that used a turbine that spins the same way regardless of wind direction and they put it in a tube over the ocean so the waves would push and pul lair to spin the turbine and power their caravan. It worked. But it was so small , imagine having those big enough to actually power things, everyone's gonna complain.
Smithers, are they saying booee or boy?
Sir, I think they're saying booee..
Boi
Buoys.
AFC Wimbledon is THE most random football team you could possibly use I love it
FrodoTheDodo only nerdfighters know
It's popular with hipsters
it's really not, considering it's popularity amongst nerdfighters
The Gulfstream comes close to shore in South Florida. Just north of Delray Beach, there is a town called Gulfstream. Put in big funnels, narrowed down to a turbine. Design it so it doesn't trap fish, etc. The units can be anchored from the seabed.
They place turbines on the sea floor in inlets to catch the tidal flow. The rotor turns a magnetic coil generator in the shaft housing which creates an electrical current. The higher the flow rate of the water, the more electricity is generated. The major difference is that underwater turbines are designed to work with water flow from either the front or the back.Mar 2, 2013
So since people from OIST work on water-related stuff,do they get mOIST while working?
Oof
In the same context,is getting salty praise for hard work or insult? Do they get compensated for environmental hazards like adding salt to injury? I just hope they are making the moist out of their time there.
@@BL1zZ4Rth I sea what you did there.
Tidal energy seems better. You can fill a whole bay with water and then have basically a hydroelectric plant until it drains
This has its own engineering challenge, for a damn you need pretty significant head hight to gain enough pressure to convert the energy, and using this method would limit the maximum head to at most a couple meters which would only provide any significant power if you wait until low tide run the system but then as the fluid drains out you have less and less pressure to generated energy all while the tide is rising again and you want to make sure you drain as much as you can before the tides rise so that you can repeat this process in reverse. What this means is that you will only give brief energy spikes during the peak high and low tides and little to none during the transition. All while you need to design the system to handle converting all this stored of energy 1 - 2 hours while sitting idle until the next peak low/high tide. And you still have the problem with the low head which will significantly reduce the efficiency of the system compared to typical a higher pressure damn. Further more with a typical damn the water level is controlled better so that that the turbines experience a more consistent water pressure as fixed blade turbines have a certain head pressure and flow that they operate most efficiently at and the problem with tides is that the magnitude will change with the moon phases so you need to design it to operate a t a pretty wide pressure range which again will have some standoffs in terms of efficiency. Not to say it can't be done, because of coarse you can do this but the point i am trying to make is that you still have the same issue with inconsistent and interrupted power delivery.
@@HPD1171 Look up Penzhin Tidal Power Plant Project on wikipedia. It's projected to produce 87 gigawatts of electricity. That's about 4x as much power as the most powerful power plant in the world.
Nah , that's too easy . And way to efficent. Let's not do that.
good point indeed, unlikely but its thinking outside the box
Engineering problems aside, this types of generation plants can only work during low tide. So, they can generate electricity every 12.5 hours, making them unreliable, since at certain points in time the generation availability won't be aligned with the peak demand of the system.
Short Sweet and To The Point! TY
Stopping the Earth's natural water and air currents sound like great ideas, I don't see what could go wrong.
This reminds me of the power generators on Titan (Destiny 2)
Someone send this to CdawgVA and make him remember one of the worst moments in his career
Which was...?
I think the answer is to have a series of turbines, not just one, that can access the wave over a longer time span because each turbine is closer from the first turbine. As the wave comes in, it hits a turbine every few seconds. Maybe a computer can be used to link all the turbines in sequence to draw a longer time frame of energy from the wave.That way you can have a more consistent flow of energy to make into electricity. As an example, lets say you put a tiny turbine on a fishing line. You would get a tiny bit of energy fron the one turbine. But if you put ten or twenty tiny turbines on the fishing line, you would have access to a lot more energy from one wave.
Going back to the philosophy of a crowd doing the wave, imagine the person jumping up the highest to be hitting their head on the edge of a turbine, and from the force of the hit, the turbine spins.
Just my idea.