E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
U.S. Air Force / Rachel Boettcher
A wave energy converter generates power in a tank at the Air Force Academy. The converter was designed by Department of Astronautics researchers Stefan Siegel and Jurgen Seidel. It converts 99 percent of the energy in a simulated ocean wave.
Air Force engineers have used their skills in keeping airplanes aloft to harness more than 99 percent of the energy in a simulated deep ocean wave. A scaled up version of the technology should be as efficient, they report.
The free-floating, fully-submerged wave energy converter effectively cancels incoming waves, capturing their energy while flattening them out. This differs from other wave energy technologies that are tethered to the seafloor and tend to be battered by storms.
Researchers at the U.S. Air Force Academy who have expertise in feedback flow control and fluid dynamics for various military aircraft and NASA spacecraft began working on the project in 2008.
Feedback flow control research involves the use of sensors and adjustable parts to control how fluids flow around airfoils like wings. The researchers decided to apply this knowledge to wave energy after reading about the field in a magazine and realizing the similarities.
The team presented their design and computer simulation results at the annual meeting of the American Physical Society's Division of Fluid Dynamics in November 2009. The latest tests are experimental confirmation of the computer simulations.
"Nobody believes simulations other than the guy who did it," Stefan Siegal, who is leading the wave energy effort, said in a news release announcing the result. "So we set up a very small, about 1:300 scale version of the deep ocean wave in a lab."
When they put in a scale model of the wave energy converter, they were able to capture about 95 percent of the wave's energy. "That is in a sense confirming the results that we got out of the simulations," Siegal said.
The remaining five percent was lost to harmonic waves. The team tweaked the feedback flow control and increased the efficiency to 99 percent in subsequent tests.
Siegel expressed confidence in the press release that a scaled up version of the experiment will behave in a similar fashion.
The Department of Energy has provided another $400,000 for follow on testing with a 1:10 scale models at the Offshore Technology Research Center at Texas A&M University, taking the technology another step closer to full size tests in the open ocean.
Update for 7:40 p.m. ET: In a follow-up phone conversation today, Siegel explained his optimism for the scale-up of the technology. "Things actually get better for us as it gets bigger," he said. There's a lot of friction at the current scale, and the waves themselves are not very powerful. "In a sense, the experiment we just completed is almost, I would say, the worst-case scenario," Siegel said.
What's more, Siegel and his colleagues are about to publish numerical full-scale simulation results that demonstrate how this will work. Since the model-scale simulations and experimental results match up, they are confident the full-scale experiment will match the full-scale simulations as well.
Siegel now splits his time between the Air Force Academy and a startup dedicated to the wave energy technology. Visit the company website to learn more: Atargis Energy Inc.
More stories on wave energy:
- $28 billion in wave energy projects proposed
- Scientists tap motion in the ocean for energy
- Oregon eyes wave buoys to generate power
John Roach is a contributing writer for msnbc.com. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by hitting the "like" button on the Cosmic Log Facebook page or following msnbc.com's science editor, Alan Boyle, on Twitter (@b0yle).
Leave a Comment:
Hmmm... If it flattens out the wave, that is really going to annoy the surfers.
True...but in certain locations where erosion is a concren, this could be a great thing, not to mention the energy that can be sent to the grid. Aim high Air Force.
Fortunately, since this is government funded, we can be pretty well assured that the big energy conglomerates aren't going to be able to buy up the patent and troll it for 30 years.
The downside is that these same conglomerates' interest groups and lobbyists along with the NIMBYs and enviro-whackadoos will be sure that this never gets implemented IRL and we'll be stuck with coal/oil power generation for another decade at least!
/cynical much?
/I know I know
Regarding waves, this will be very much wanted in Venice, Italy and Louisiana for sure!
(I'm all for pursuing this technology)
What are the ramifications of NOT having waves like we do naturally? Same with wind - if we take energy from these natural processes, that means that something that was happening before is no longer happening.
there are WAY too many waves in the ocean to be able to take them all, AND new ones are always being made!
Not having waves means that you don't have beach erosion. On the inner islands of the Philippines, I observed beaches where there were only ripples in normal weather conditions. These beaches were sheltered from waves by surrounding islands. The beaches were muddy from volcanic mud, unlike the beaches that have bigger waves where the water is clear because all the mud has been washed away. A low wave beach is very quiet and peaceful without the incessant sound of waves breaking on the beach.
its a good question worth looking into and answering, by the experts and done simultaneous to further studies and advancements torwards this goal. Don't slow down because of stumbling blocks in the path.
Hopefully the goal will be molded in a way that protects and preserves the environment as well as benefits our dwindling energy reserves.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/coral-islands-bigger-despite-oceans-rise-1991017.html
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2010-06-03-coral_N.htm
Something like this could also be very useful to simultaneously make oil rigs safer and self-powered.
There are also science-fictiony schemes about self-sustaining floating algae farms to house surplus population, and this would help with that as well.
I'm an engineer myself and this sounds great, and i hope they can get a full scale going. It would be very stupid on humanities part not to pursue something like this, hell the energy is there, why not harness it. unless the oil guys get in the way again. I'm all for it and I wish them luck
You are right. This could have some negative ramifications. Lets stay with coal burning power plants.
It sounds great but we've had so many new ideas go bust.
Remember fuel from Corn?
Wind farms?
So many others that seemed to hold such promise only to prove impractical.
I hope it works and can reduce our carbon footprint before it's too late.
we have corn fuel its called ethanol
we have wind farms they are noisy and kill birds
what i want to see is an efficient catalyst to break down H20 into hydrogen and oxygen then the oil companies and the middle east can go shovel sand.
Wave energy installations are already well under way around the world, with less efficient mechanisms. But it gets very little attention - maybe because of the influence of the oil guys. With this apparatus, small island nations could easily become energy independent and larger nations, like the USA could provide energy to coastal regions which are the most densely populated, thus serving most of the population. The energy density in ocean waves is much greater than the energy density in winds aloft which is harvested by windmills.
Here is what I'm thinking:
Aren't waves generated by wind forces over the water? If so, wouldn't a normal wind turbine over the water be more efficient seeing the loss in energy due to friction in the water?
What you can develop to get energy from a wave, you can also get energy from an ocean current. Your reasoning is correct, but you would not need the wind turbines that create a noise when you can put something into the ocean and have a quiet and efficient energy producer.
The wind that created the waves may be thousands of miles away. Why not have both.
Do they have wind farms on the ocean?
As a surfer Im not thrilled to hear about wave canceling tech. The question of metal errosion comes into play. Own a boat? You know what I mean...
Some how i am not believing this but what ever.
Noisy wind farms? What the heck is a noisy wind farm? And as for killing birds, only the stupid ones try to fly between the blades.
Reminds me of the gooney birds in midway there protected there sorta like a seagull only bigger and yeah there stupid they are everywhere over there.
One of my shipmates accidentally ran over one with a bicycle .
what a joke. just like "zero" emission hydrogen fuel cell cars. hello, they emit water vapor. and wave generators cancel waves. when you multiply the effect times tens of billions....the effects will inevitably devestate something, somewhere, someone....remember, there's always and equal and opposing reaction. we need to build nuclear power plants on the moon and beam the energy down, scotty...meanwhile, beam me the f*** out of here.
Should'nt this be a job for the Navy? Admiral Nelson and The Seaview had this technology mastered years ago.
Cutting back slightly on Wind Speed by onshore and offshore Wind Farms has some impact on the environment, however flattening out wave patterns as this wave device suggests would have significant negative impact on aquatic life.
What would be best overall would be to gut ALL military spending and seriously curtail the enormous US Military Complex, closing nearly all overseas bases and dealing with the gigantic environmental waste dumps and impacts by the US Military bases on American soil many of which have seriously poisoned ground water and added a great many toxic chemicals and metals to their surrounding areas.
PULL the plug on the US Military and Weapons Complex!
You are a d*ps**T. Do you think then that the entire world will then walk hand in hand towards the big rainbow of peace and love? Stop drinking the koolaid.
I realize we are stuck where we are, but I'm sick of being world police. It does us more harm than good from a foreign relations standpoint, and it wastes tons of money. We could easily have a military capable of defending the continental US with all the toys we currently enjoy if we wanted. Most of the drain comes from all our overseas bases and the current wars in middle east. Get out of the middle east I say, and let them do our jobs for us. They've been killing each other since civilization started over there. All we do by being there is unite them against us.
everything has some impact, still this is a better idea, dollar for dollar than a fool hardy approach of beaming down solar energy from space, and yes the wave mechanics of windmills can be heard 100's of miles from the source, solar collectors can reflect back almost as much as the collect, in opposition to the ground they cover up....it is always a tradeoff....california can and will expore this tech.....bonds for space based generators are just another gimmick to fleece californians, yet again, by the energy industry.....and I am a space advocate...
More liberal propaganda, a good Republican will scoff at this and know that we have plenty of coal and oil and should not wast time and money on pipe dreams.
yeah, lets continue to level our precious Appalacian mountains, and poison those peoples water supplies for mor coal. Good idea moron.
This is interesting technology, I just do not understand why we are not building nuclear power plants. Yes there are risks, but the environmental impact of a coal mine and coal fired power plant are far worse I would think. Japan uses nuclear power almost exclusively, and yet they have never had a 3 mile island type of incident, unless someone can prove me wrong. I really think that there is a "right way" to do nuclear energy, we just cant get past our hang ups.
Lunchbox, are you really kidding??? Just because no one else has had an accident doesn't mean it can't happen. Do you know what will happen if there is a nuclear accident? Say the French have an accident in the Mediterranean - are you aware that if that happens, all the fish, plant life and the water will become irradiated for a half-life of 100,000 years????? It will also spread to the other oceans via the currents, contaminating them. Is contaminating our planet almost forever worth the nuclear? The wind technology that is here, as well as that which is being invented/developed, will be non-polluting. There are some that will not be put in places where there are a lot of people, ships or migratory paths. Which means that they would not be near the shore so the surfers would still have their waves and there would still be wind. lWhy don't all of you who poo-poo the efforts to try to save this planet pull your heads out? This cimate thing isn't just about us, it's about future generations. Think about someone besides yourselves for a change.
So your telling me that with the combined genius of the entire freaking world we cant figure out a way to have Nuclear power on a large scale safely?? I am well aware of the repercussions of a nuclear accident. I simply refuse to accept that there is not a way to do it safely. I was not "poo poo"ing anyone's efforts, I was simply asking why no one has put more effort into providing a process by which Nuclear power can be delivered efficiently and safely. I think we need to explore all options of power generation, however discounting Nuclear simply because there are risks is ridiculous.
Nuclear power is by far the best power generating technology we have right now. Unfortunately, the general public gets up in arms anytime they hear the word nuclear. The technology and computers we have developed now makes three mile island disasters extremely low chance. And there are risks in every energy generating technology. People who are in love with "clean" ways to get energy might as well advocate stop using electricity. The only thing wrong with nuclear power is the nuclear waste it generates. Hopefully, new technology can be developed to claim more energy from the nuclear waste or find cheaper ways to launch it into space.
There is no reason to not study this wave energy technology though. Find out if it works, how cheap and efficient it is and how it can affect marine life.
I'll bet the Navy is jealous.......